Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Wythenshawe: To maintain momentum today UKIP needs a good s

245

Comments

  • And in conclusion:

    There is a substantive point here. If the dashing of Scottish expectations were perpetually blamed on continuing UK intransigence within the currency union, relations between the nations of these islands would deteriorate, putting intolerable pressure on the currency union.

    If you follow Treasury advice and this week rule out a currency union in the event of Scottish independence, you can expect the Scottish Government to threaten not to take on its share of the United Kingdom’s debt. I do not believe this is a credible threat. First, the sooner an independent Scotland established economic credibility, the better it would be for its economic performance. An extensive wrangle about its share of the debt would increase uncertainty and hence its funding costs. Secondly, the debt is one of a number of issues which would have to be settled post independence, where the new Scottish state would require the cooperation of the international community including the continuing UK.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498

    Scott_P said:

    @faisalislam: This is a very very punchy letter on currency union from the Treasury chief mandarin Nick Macpherson. Rules out currency union...

    Which part of No are the Nats struggling to comprehend?

    Here's the text:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/279455/Sir_Nicholas_Macpherson_-_Scotland_and_a_currency_union.pdf

    I would advise strongly against a currency union as currently advocated, if Scotland were to vote for independence. Why?

    First, the Scottish Government is still leaving the option open of moving to a different currency option in the longer term. Successful currency unions are based on the near universal belief that they are irreversible. Imagine what would have happened to Greece two years ago if they had said they were contemplating reverting to the Drachma.

    Secondly, Scotland’s banking sector is far too big in relation to its national income, which means that there is a very real risk that the continuing UK would end up bearing most of the liquidity and solvency risk which it creates.


    So as I said , look a squirrel. He gives his opinion. I could write the opposite and send it , would that mean it is guaranteed YES. Nobody has yet ruled out a currency union , just weasely words saying it will be difficult.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,343
    malcolmg said:

    Scott_P said:

    @faisalislam: This is a very very punchy letter on currency union from the Treasury chief mandarin Nick Macpherson. Rules out currency union...

    Which part of No are the Nats struggling to comprehend?

    As expected no link and I bet that nowhere in that drivel will it say NO. Plenty of lies no doubt and dodgy numbers. Show us the letter and point to the NO.
    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/2014/feb/13/george-osbornes-speech-on-scottish-independence-politics-live-blog

    LInk is in there - I presume: have stopped dead in Mr Osborne's text, at his claim that the Scots "financial sector assets" (his wording) are 12-13 x GDP - and his implying a direct linking with the banking bailouts. Can anyone clarify this? Firstly, it presumably includes such things as shares and bonds held by investment companies, insurance companies, etc., rather than banks per se. Secondly, there is no such thing as a Scottish bank for regulatory purposes - yet - they are all UK banks, and in the event of indy they would be covered by the respective governments of their locations (e.g. the Halifax bit of HBOS would be dealt with by EWNI, and so on). Which would make Osborne's next sentences distinctly misleading. Or have I got it wrong?
  • Mick_Pork said:

    "Wythenshawe: To maintain momentum today UKIP needs a good second place with a vote share well above 20 percent"

    Not really. The news is wall to wall on the floods and storms as expected and it's the EU elections that matter most for them. That said kipper VI still isn't showing much of an upswing for May despite the massive floods which you would expect to be good for a protest party.

    Look at the dates of the by-elections: Nov 2012 for Rotherham (became newsworthy because of the adoption row) and Feb 2013 for Eastleigh (newsworthy for oh so many obvious reasons).

    I would make the case that the by-elections were crucial for UKIP building momentum for the local elections. If they notch up what can be reasonably regarded as a strong result in Wythenshawe then it will help.

    I agree with what you say about the floods, though. I can't move for people making jokes about the number of gay marriages there must be to lead to such a deluge. Given the record levels of rainfall we must surely be expecting Cameron and Clegg to soon announce their nuptials...

  • isamisam Posts: 41,118

    Can I ask the shrinking number of bettors on here how they'd price up the chances of there being a currency union if Scotland does vote for independence? Just like to gauge their faith in 'can't recommend means no..definitely, definitely, definitely.'

    Couldn't price it up as have no idea / haven't thought about it

    What do you prefer? Be best to have your own currency wouldn't it?
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498
    antifrank said:

    Chris Giles:

    Brutal message from HMT perm sec to @George_Osborne advising against currency union pic.twitter.com/qqaffmkE5d

    Treasury calls SNP bluff pic.twitter.com/SWRb7EWvid

    LOL, you boys really have no clue. So we have gone from him going to clearly commit to NO currency union to a whimpering "advises against it". LOL.
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    TGOHF said:

    "The messenger is toxic" says Pork - which one ?

    The obvious one. The one who delivered an omnishambles budget while the PB tories on here cheered him on because they just don't understand much of a liability he is.

    Here's the proof.

    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/96/UK_opinion_polling_2010-2015.png

  • "I would advise strongly against a currency union as currently advocated, if Scotland were to vote for independence."

    The key sentence. The day after a Yes vote, the Scottish government would stop advocating what it is currently advocating.
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530

    Can I ask the shrinking number of bettors on here how they'd price up the chances of there being a currency union if Scotland does vote for independence? Just like to gauge their faith in 'can't recommend means no..definitely, definitely, definitely.'

    *tears of laughter etc.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZwuTo7zKM8
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514
    TGOHF said:

    "The messenger is toxic" says Pork - which one ?

    GO
    Balls
    Alexander
    Carney
    The Treasury
    The civil service
    The media
    The financial community
    The business community
    Jim Sillars ?

    Everyone bar wings over Somerset ?

    It's pathetic, the greater the body of evidence the more they stick their head in the sand.

    Let's face it Salmond has called the currency argument wrong. His original strategy of the Euro was blown out of the water by the Euro crisis so he was immediately on the back foot. Instead of having the gumption to issue his own currency and thus take a hit at the polls and control the argument he went for easy sell but no control and now he's paying the consequences. Currently there's a bit of a hole in the SNP economic argument and it's mostly self inflicted.
  • Ishmael_XIshmael_X Posts: 3,664
    malcolmg said:

    Scott_P said:

    @faisalislam: This is a very very punchy letter on currency union from the Treasury chief mandarin Nick Macpherson. Rules out currency union...

    Which part of No are the Nats struggling to comprehend?

    As expected no link and I bet that nowhere in that drivel will it say NO. Plenty of lies no doubt and dodgy numbers. Show us the letter and point to the NO.
    Where is Scotland's pride in all this? You are beginning to look like someone who resigns their job on a point of principle but then whines to the accounts department to ask them to keep paying their salary. It is a binary choice: Scotland either fecks off, or it doesn't. Make your mind up.

  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Mick_Pork said:

    TGOHF said:

    "The messenger is toxic" says Pork - which one ?

    The obvious one. The one who delivered an omnishambles budget while the PB tories on here cheered him on because they just don't understand much of a liability he is.

    Here's the proof.

    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/96/UK_opinion_polling_2010-2015.png

    GO's is the first shot - but the rest are coming.

    Carney set the game afoot - the hounds were given the scent - if the SNP hadn't been so lazy/inept they would have got straight to work on a decent argument rather than foot stamping.

    Plenty of PB Tories pointed this out Pork - again you failed to listen.

  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,343
    antifrank said:

    George Osborne has laid out his arguments carefully and soberly, drawing on the Treasury's analysis. The YES campaign need to have more of a response than "BULLY" or "It's a bluff".

    As I have been noting for some weeks - and it seems others are now starting to appreciate - the unionist politicians don't have much leeway on this, because the English public are hostile to a currency union with a separate sovereign state, drawing on their observations of the Euro. In the event of a Yes vote, the terms of the settlement negotiations would be one of the main topics for the next election.

    But as I have already pointed out (presumably when you were away), this is simply not the case. The English - or to be more precise the EWNI - public are not hostile, but in fact positively in favour of currency union with the Scots, to the tune of 71% (including 2/3 of Tory voters) with 12% opposed and the rest DKs. Admittedly that was before the current press eructation but early December is not that long ago.

    http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/independent-scotland-should-keep-pound-ruk-poll-1-3249717

  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498
    Carnyx said:

    malcolmg said:

    Scott_P said:

    @faisalislam: This is a very very punchy letter on currency union from the Treasury chief mandarin Nick Macpherson. Rules out currency union...

    Which part of No are the Nats struggling to comprehend?

    As expected no link and I bet that nowhere in that drivel will it say NO. Plenty of lies no doubt and dodgy numbers. Show us the letter and point to the NO.
    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/2014/feb/13/george-osbornes-speech-on-scottish-independence-politics-live-blog

    LInk is in there - I presume: have stopped dead in Mr Osborne's text, at his claim that the Scots "financial sector assets" (his wording) are 12-13 x GDP - and his implying a direct linking with the banking bailouts. Can anyone clarify this? Firstly, it presumably includes such things as shares and bonds held by investment companies, insurance companies, etc., rather than banks per se. Secondly, there is no such thing as a Scottish bank for regulatory purposes - yet - they are all UK banks, and in the event of indy they would be covered by the respective governments of their locations (e.g. the Halifax bit of HBOS would be dealt with by EWNI, and so on). Which would make Osborne's next sentences distinctly misleading. Or have I got it wrong?
    NO you heard the usual lies, just regurgitated as we heard him commit that there would never ever be a currency union , assuming he hopes we will think "he advises against it" will convince us it si really a strong NO.
  • JonathanDJonathanD Posts: 2,400
    edited February 2014
    Ishmael_X said:

    malcolmg said:

    Scott_P said:

    @faisalislam: This is a very very punchy letter on currency union from the Treasury chief mandarin Nick Macpherson. Rules out currency union...

    Which part of No are the Nats struggling to comprehend?

    As expected no link and I bet that nowhere in that drivel will it say NO. Plenty of lies no doubt and dodgy numbers. Show us the letter and point to the NO.
    Where is Scotland's pride in all this?

    The SNP is not Scotland. There have never been a majority of Scots in favour of independence.
  • LennonLennon Posts: 1,782
    Any chance of those of us who don't really care about Scotland having our own thread? These repeated arguments are tedious in the extreme to wade through, and personally I don't see them convincing anyone (on either side).
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    edited February 2014
    TGOHF said:

    Mick_Pork said:

    TGOHF said:

    "The messenger is toxic" says Pork - which one ?

    The obvious one. The one who delivered an omnishambles budget while the PB tories on here cheered him on because they just don't understand much of a liability he is.

    Here's the proof.

    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/96/UK_opinion_polling_2010-2015.png

    GO's is the first shot - but the rest are coming.
    You mean wee Danny and Balls? Oh no! LOL If SLAB want to be seen as Osborne's cheerleaders that's entirely up to them. The lib dems already are in scotland with the all too predictable results at the ballot box. Complete meltdown.

  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498

    "I would advise strongly against a currency union as currently advocated, if Scotland were to vote for independence."

    The key sentence. The day after a Yes vote, the Scottish government would stop advocating what it is currently advocating.

    As previously stated , it was always going to be weasely lies and just usual bollocks. These yellow bellies could never stand up and say NO.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,410
    This colossal broadside against the Nats over the currency - I wonder if it might create a bunker mentality. Potentially good for the SNP.

    Mind you I'm a contrarian by nature, but the average Scottish voter is a dreadfully fearful sort, clinging to nurse with their pathetic SLAB voting at Westminster elections to keep the 3rd place 'Tories' out.

    If I was voting these events would push me more towards the Yes camp but maybe that's just me.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Lennon said:

    Any chance of those of us who don't really care about Scotland having our own thread? These repeated arguments are tedious in the extreme to wade through, and personally I don't see them convincing anyone (on either side).


    If Scotland votes yes - according to malc and Pork our lying politicos are all going to sign us up to be the backstop for foreign government and banks - quite alarming no ?


  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498
    Ishmael_X said:

    malcolmg said:

    Scott_P said:

    @faisalislam: This is a very very punchy letter on currency union from the Treasury chief mandarin Nick Macpherson. Rules out currency union...

    Which part of No are the Nats struggling to comprehend?

    As expected no link and I bet that nowhere in that drivel will it say NO. Plenty of lies no doubt and dodgy numbers. Show us the letter and point to the NO.
    Where is Scotland's pride in all this? You are beginning to look like someone who resigns their job on a point of principle but then whines to the accounts department to ask them to keep paying their salary. It is a binary choice: Scotland either fecks off, or it doesn't. Make your mind up.

    Back under your rock with the other yellow bellies, I note you do not address the point . My mind is well made up , I have heard enough lies, however I do need to wait till September to voice my opinion. Unlike George I have a pair and it will be YES.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,410
    On Wythenshawe, UKIP were never going to win it.

    25% would be a fair result for them, anything over 30 would be astonishingly good. Low 20s or teens/not getting 2nd a poor performance
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514
    Carnyx said:

    antifrank said:

    George Osborne has laid out his arguments carefully and soberly, drawing on the Treasury's analysis. The YES campaign need to have more of a response than "BULLY" or "It's a bluff".

    As I have been noting for some weeks - and it seems others are now starting to appreciate - the unionist politicians don't have much leeway on this, because the English public are hostile to a currency union with a separate sovereign state, drawing on their observations of the Euro. In the event of a Yes vote, the terms of the settlement negotiations would be one of the main topics for the next election.

    But as I have already pointed out (presumably when you were away), this is simply not the case. The English - or to be more precise the EWNI - public are not hostile, but in fact positively in favour of currency union with the Scots, to the tune of 71% (including 2/3 of Tory voters) with 12% opposed and the rest DKs. Admittedly that was before the current press eructation but early December is not that long ago.

    http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/independent-scotland-should-keep-pound-ruk-poll-1-3249717

    I'd say it's pointless waving a poll on EWNI public attitudes when most of them haven't even been exposed to the real issues. Ask them post Indy would you like to be responsible for Scotland's debts and I suspect you'll get a different answer.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498
    Carnyx said:

    antifrank said:

    George Osborne has laid out his arguments carefully and soberly, drawing on the Treasury's analysis. The YES campaign need to have more of a response than "BULLY" or "It's a bluff".

    As I have been noting for some weeks - and it seems others are now starting to appreciate - the unionist politicians don't have much leeway on this, because the English public are hostile to a currency union with a separate sovereign state, drawing on their observations of the Euro. In the event of a Yes vote, the terms of the settlement negotiations would be one of the main topics for the next election.

    But as I have already pointed out (presumably when you were away), this is simply not the case. The English - or to be more precise the EWNI - public are not hostile, but in fact positively in favour of currency union with the Scots, to the tune of 71% (including 2/3 of Tory voters) with 12% opposed and the rest DKs. Admittedly that was before the current press eructation but early December is not that long ago.

    http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/independent-scotland-should-keep-pound-ruk-poll-1-3249717

    Carnyx, you should know by now that the truth is not something the Tories in general and the ones on here in particular take any heed of, any lie will do if it suits their point of view.
  • Mr. Pulpstar, indeed, it could have that effect. However, the vote is some distance away, which might reduce the prospect of a bunker mentality.
  • @Carnyx - You seem a reasonable person. Don't you think the SNP does now need to set out its reasons for believing why Carney and the Treasury are wrong? Or, alternatively, don't they need to clarify that they will agree to all terms set out by the rUK for a currency union?

    If you read the Macpherson letter, it only rules out such a union on the basis of what the Scottish government is saying and planning currently. That is very significant in my view. And, as Osborne says, Salmond is an economist - he understands these things and he understands that what Nicola Sturgeon said yesterday would be utterly ruinous for Scotland if actually implemented.
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    edited February 2014
    Lennon said:

    Any chance of those of us who don't really care about Scotland having our own thread? These repeated arguments are tedious in the extreme to wade through, and personally I don't see them convincing anyone (on either side).

    Currency is an issue the scottish public rated 8th in those issues most important to them for the Independence referendum. The fact is the tories and their lib dem hangers on are utterly blind to that fact and that the No campaign has nothing to offer the scottish public other than the same scaremongering that Osborne has been doing since 2012.

    The PB tories and their hangers on will continue to rant about this for a few days as the floods crisis dominates the news and as a by-election is being fought. Let them get it out of their system. I remember the same thing in 2012 and 2013 so it's not as if it's anything new.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498
    Lennon said:

    Any chance of those of us who don't really care about Scotland having our own thread? These repeated arguments are tedious in the extreme to wade through, and personally I don't see them convincing anyone (on either side).

    whine whinge whine , poor me , try adding some value or post on something that interests you.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,155
    edited February 2014
    isam said:

    Can I ask the shrinking number of bettors on here how they'd price up the chances of there being a currency union if Scotland does vote for independence? Just like to gauge their faith in 'can't recommend means no..definitely, definitely, definitely.'

    Couldn't price it up as have no idea / haven't thought about it

    What do you prefer? Be best to have your own currency wouldn't it?
    Well, implicit in my question was that it was for people that had thought about it and on the evidence of their numerous posts, have a very definite view about it. There seems a sad lack on a political betting site of people willing to back their views with a bet, which is the gold standard for me that they have the courage of their convictions and faith in their own judgment.

    Own currency eventually, yes. Personally not bothered whether it's using the pound pegged to rUK or temporary currency union for the short term. I can understand the view that rUK may not be enthusiastic about a c.u. without long term commitment, but the bottom line is that Unionists aren't currently offering a c.u. on a long term basis.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,410

    Mr. Pulpstar, indeed, it could have that effect. However, the vote is some distance away, which might reduce the prospect of a bunker mentality.

    If you're going with that analysis any effect either way would dissipate.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498

    Carnyx said:

    antifrank said:

    George Osborne has laid out his arguments carefully and soberly, drawing on the Treasury's analysis. The YES campaign need to have more of a response than "BULLY" or "It's a bluff".

    As I have been noting for some weeks - and it seems others are now starting to appreciate - the unionist politicians don't have much leeway on this, because the English public are hostile to a currency union with a separate sovereign state, drawing on their observations of the Euro. In the event of a Yes vote, the terms of the settlement negotiations would be one of the main topics for the next election.

    But as I have already pointed out (presumably when you were away), this is simply not the case. The English - or to be more precise the EWNI - public are not hostile, but in fact positively in favour of currency union with the Scots, to the tune of 71% (including 2/3 of Tory voters) with 12% opposed and the rest DKs. Admittedly that was before the current press eructation but early December is not that long ago.

    http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/independent-scotland-should-keep-pound-ruk-poll-1-3249717

    I'd say it's pointless waving a poll on EWNI public attitudes when most of them haven't even been exposed to the real issues. Ask them post Indy would you like to be responsible for Scotland's debts and I suspect you'll get a different answer.
    Alan, more likely we will be baling out EWNI. They will be more than happy to continue getting money from us.
  • Pulpstar said:

    This colossal broadside against the Nats over the currency - I wonder if it might create a bunker mentality. Potentially good for the SNP.

    Mind you I'm a contrarian by nature, but the average Scottish voter is a dreadfully fearful sort, clinging to nurse with their pathetic SLAB voting at Westminster elections to keep the 3rd place 'Tories' out.

    If I was voting these events would push me more towards the Yes camp but maybe that's just me.

    Why would Scots wish to live in a country with people such as yourself who so clearly hold them in total and utter contempt? Sickening.

  • Ishmael_XIshmael_X Posts: 3,664
    edited February 2014
    The Niesr view:

    "New currency
    The other option is for Scotland to issue its own currency.

    Indeed, there are many examples of countries of similar size and level of income (for example, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, Denmark) which all have their own currency.

    The transition from using sterling to introducing a new currency might be long and difficult, but it is possible.

    What's more, at the end of the transition, an independent Scotland would have all the instruments for economic policy of a modern state.

    As the Fiscal Commission made clear: "In the long run, the creation of a new Scottish currency would represent a significant increase in economic sovereignty, with interest rate and exchange rate policy being two new policy tools and adjustment mechanisms to support the Scottish economy."

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-26161046

    What's not to like in that lot? Who is being yellow-bellied in trying to cling to sterling's apron-strings?
  • Mr. G, although I find the question interesting (if a little sad) I can aprpeciate how tiresome it can become. On a day with such major speeches Scottish stuff will dominate, but worry ye not, Mr. Lennon, it'll fade away.

    And it could be worse. it could be AV.

    Mr. Pulpstar, beg to differ. The severe doubt over currency union is now there and will remain. The initial emotional response of 'bullying' [ahem] will have faded.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514
    malcolmg said:

    Ishmael_X said:

    malcolmg said:

    Scott_P said:

    @faisalislam: This is a very very punchy letter on currency union from the Treasury chief mandarin Nick Macpherson. Rules out currency union...

    Which part of No are the Nats struggling to comprehend?

    As expected no link and I bet that nowhere in that drivel will it say NO. Plenty of lies no doubt and dodgy numbers. Show us the letter and point to the NO.
    Where is Scotland's pride in all this? You are beginning to look like someone who resigns their job on a point of principle but then whines to the accounts department to ask them to keep paying their salary. It is a binary choice: Scotland either fecks off, or it doesn't. Make your mind up.

    Back under your rock with the other yellow bellies, I note you do not address the point . My mind is well made up , I have heard enough lies, however I do need to wait till September to voice my opinion. Unlike George I have a pair and it will be YES.
    malc following the advice of your testicles is usually the road to ruin for most middle aged men ;-)
  • JonathanDJonathanD Posts: 2,400

    isam said:

    Can I ask the shrinking number of bettors on here how they'd price up the chances of there being a currency union if Scotland does vote for independence? Just like to gauge their faith in 'can't recommend means no..definitely, definitely, definitely.'

    Couldn't price it up as have no idea / haven't thought about it

    What do you prefer? Be best to have your own currency wouldn't it?
    but the bottom line is that Unionists aren't currently offering a c.u. on a long term basis.

    A currency union with a long term commitment is what we have now, so that is exactly what the unionists are offering.
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    edited February 2014

    Don't you think the SNP does now need to set out its reasons for believing why Carney and the Treasury are wrong?

    Easy to tell that it's not just the PB tories who have their head in the sand over this. The SNP and Yes campaign have argued their case repeatedly on scottish news and current affairs. It doesn't matter that hardly any of those shrieking about Osbrowne's speech haven't seen that or want to pretend it hasn't happened. It has happened and it will continue to happen. Carney and the Treasury did not rule out a currency union. Advice and warnings are negotiating positions.

  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514
    malcolmg said:

    Carnyx said:

    antifrank said:

    George Osborne has laid out his arguments carefully and soberly, drawing on the Treasury's analysis. The YES campaign need to have more of a response than "BULLY" or "It's a bluff".

    As I have been noting for some weeks - and it seems others are now starting to appreciate - the unionist politicians don't have much leeway on this, because the English public are hostile to a currency union with a separate sovereign state, drawing on their observations of the Euro. In the event of a Yes vote, the terms of the settlement negotiations would be one of the main topics for the next election.

    But as I have already pointed out (presumably when you were away), this is simply not the case. The English - or to be more precise the EWNI - public are not hostile, but in fact positively in favour of currency union with the Scots, to the tune of 71% (including 2/3 of Tory voters) with 12% opposed and the rest DKs. Admittedly that was before the current press eructation but early December is not that long ago.

    http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/independent-scotland-should-keep-pound-ruk-poll-1-3249717

    I'd say it's pointless waving a poll on EWNI public attitudes when most of them haven't even been exposed to the real issues. Ask them post Indy would you like to be responsible for Scotland's debts and I suspect you'll get a different answer.
    Alan, more likely we will be baling out EWNI. They will be more than happy to continue getting money from us.
    but I thought you were doing that already ? Sort of makes the Indyref a bit pointless. The idea should be you stop doing it.
  • Great that Sporting Index have woken up from their Rip Van Winkle state. It's so long since I last logged on that I'd forgotten my password, but on doing so I see the positions I recommended back in the days when Labour supporters were despairing of Ed Miliband are very nicely in profit.

    Sadly, I don't see aby obvious value in this by-election. I wondered about Shadsy's turnout market, but I think he's probably priced it about right.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118

    isam said:

    Can I ask the shrinking number of bettors on here how they'd price up the chances of there being a currency union if Scotland does vote for independence? Just like to gauge their faith in 'can't recommend means no..definitely, definitely, definitely.'

    Couldn't price it up as have no idea / haven't thought about it

    What do you prefer? Be best to have your own currency wouldn't it?
    Well, implicit in my question was that it was for people that had thought about it and on the evidence of their numerous posts, have a very definite view about it. There seems a sad lack on a political betting site of people willing to back their views with a bet, which is the gold standard for me that they have the courage of their convictions and faith in their own judgment.

    Own currency eventually, yes. Personally not bothered whether it's using the pound pegged to rUK or temporary currency union for the short term. I can understand the view that rUK may not be enthusiastic about a c.u. without long term commitment, but the bottom line is that Unionists aren't currently offering a c.u. on a long term basis.
    Agree with you re backing up strongly held opinions with bets. It's amazing how many people refuse to engage, and the lengths they go to in order to wriggle out of betting.

  • Mick_Pork said:

    Don't you think the SNP does now need to set out its reasons for believing why Carney and the Treasury are wrong?

    Easy to tell that it's not just the PB tories who have their head in the sand over this. The SNP and Yes campaign have argued their case repeatedly on scottish news and current affairs. It doesn't matter that hardly any of those shrieking about Osbrowne's speech haven't seen that or want to pretend it hasn't happened. It has happened and it will continue to happen. Carney and the Treasury did not rule out a currency union. Advice and warnings are negotiating positions.

    The SNP have argued their case.

    Their case doesn't make any sense.
  • Pulpstar said:

    Mr. Pulpstar, indeed, it could have that effect. However, the vote is some distance away, which might reduce the prospect of a bunker mentality.

    If you're going with that analysis any effect either way would dissipate.
    Yep, whatever the Unionist motives are (spread fud, raise the imortance of currency as an issue) not sure what the timing is about. If the EssEnnPee HAVE to come up with a Plan B, why give then 7 months to do it?



  • Mick_Pork said:

    Don't you think the SNP does now need to set out its reasons for believing why Carney and the Treasury are wrong?

    Easy to tell that it's not just the PB tories who have their head in the sand over this. The SNP and Yes campaign have argued their case repeatedly on scottish news and current affairs. It doesn't matter that hardly any of those shrieking about Osbrowne's speech haven't seen that or want to pretend it hasn't happened. It has happened and it will continue to happen. Carney and the Treasury did not rule out a currency union. Advice and warnings are negotiating positions.

    What negotiating positions will Scotland have? To negotiate, the other side needs to believe that you are willing to walk away at some stage. If you can't walk away, then you are being dictated to. What are the SNP's red lines?



  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514

    Pulpstar said:

    Mr. Pulpstar, indeed, it could have that effect. However, the vote is some distance away, which might reduce the prospect of a bunker mentality.

    If you're going with that analysis any effect either way would dissipate.
    Yep, whatever the Unionist motives are (spread fud, raise the imortance of currency as an issue) not sure what the timing is about. If the EssEnnPee HAVE to come up with a Plan B, why give then 7 months to do it?



    I suppose it's the counterpart of if we want Indy asap why have a three year election campaign followed by a 2 year negotiation ?

    5 years less oil for the investment fund, how does that work ?
  • JonathanD said:

    isam said:

    Can I ask the shrinking number of bettors on here how they'd price up the chances of there being a currency union if Scotland does vote for independence? Just like to gauge their faith in 'can't recommend means no..definitely, definitely, definitely.'

    Couldn't price it up as have no idea / haven't thought about it

    What do you prefer? Be best to have your own currency wouldn't it?
    but the bottom line is that Unionists aren't currently offering a c.u. on a long term basis.

    A currency union with a long term commitment is what we have now, so that is exactly what the unionists are offering.
    A currency union with no sovereignty or one, to quote Carney, that cedes some sovereignty? 2 very different things.

  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,937
    I see the SNP have sent a full team out today for the Whistling-In-The-Dark Olympics....
  • PolruanPolruan Posts: 2,083



    @pulpo Mind you I'm a contrarian by nature, but the average Scottish voter is a dreadfully fearful sort, clinging to nurse with their pathetic SLAB voting at Westminster elections to keep the 3rd place 'Tories' out.

    If I was voting these events would push me more towards the Yes camp but maybe that's just me.



    Why would Scots wish to live in a country with people such as yourself who so clearly hold them in total and utter contempt? Sickening.

    Morning everyone.

    Following yesterday's outrage about "nasty selfish southeasterners" (or some such characterisation) it's good to see that these generalisations run across the political spectrum of posters. Could we perhaps agree a full set of stigmatising cliches to cover each region of the UK to aid us all in assessing the impact of different policy proposals? If nothing else it's got to be more interesting than yet another thread about currency union.
  • Mr. Divvie, if there's no right answer (euro, Scottish pound, dollarisation or just saying the UK parties are all big liars) then giving the SNP a long time makes sense. They'll spend months trying to evade obvious, straightforward questions and look less trustworthy each time they can't give an answer.

    Of course, if they have a credible answer that'll be greatly helpful to their cause. I suspect events around the world (eurozone crisis, financial crisis etc) does not aid them, though.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    On a brighter note - come September we can forget about Indy referendums for another 35-40 years minimum.

  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    Michael Heaver (@Michael_Heaver)
    13/02/2014 10:27
    Pretty surreal that The Sun and others apparently now classing potential UKIP second places in Westminster by-elections as 'humiliation'
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    Mick_Pork said:

    Don't you think the SNP does now need to set out its reasons for believing why Carney and the Treasury are wrong?

    Easy to tell that it's not just the PB tories who have their head in the sand over this. The SNP and Yes campaign have argued their case repeatedly on scottish news and current affairs. It doesn't matter that hardly any of those shrieking about Osbrowne's speech haven't seen that or want to pretend it hasn't happened. It has happened and it will continue to happen. Carney and the Treasury did not rule out a currency union. Advice and warnings are negotiating positions.

    The SNP have argued their case.

    Their case doesn't make any sense.
    The 300 page white paper was a feint ? Wait for the starting gun - any day now..
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,343

    Carnyx said:

    antifrank said:

    George Osborne has laid out his arguments carefully and soberly, drawing on the Treasury's analysis. The YES campaign need to have more of a response than "BULLY" or "It's a bluff".

    As I have been noting for some weeks - and it seems others are now starting to appreciate - the unionist politicians don't have much leeway on this, because the English public are hostile to a currency union with a separate sovereign state, drawing on their observations of the Euro. In the event of a Yes vote, the terms of the settlement negotiations would be one of the main topics for the next election.

    But as I have already pointed out (presumably when you were away), this is simply not the case. The English - or to be more precise the EWNI - public are not hostile, but in fact positively in favour of currency union with the Scots, to the tune of 71% (including 2/3 of Tory voters) with 12% opposed and the rest DKs. Admittedly that was before the current press eructation but early December is not that long ago.

    http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/independent-scotland-should-keep-pound-ruk-poll-1-3249717

    I'd say it's pointless waving a poll on EWNI public attitudes when most of them haven't even been exposed to the real issues. Ask them post Indy would you like to be responsible for Scotland's debts and I suspect you'll get a different answer.
    Er, you did say "the English public ARE hostile", but yes, that was then and the future is the future, though whether the real issues have been exposed or obscured today is another question.

  • malcolmg said:

    antifrank said:

    Chris Giles:

    Brutal message from HMT perm sec to @George_Osborne advising against currency union pic.twitter.com/qqaffmkE5d

    Treasury calls SNP bluff pic.twitter.com/SWRb7EWvid

    LOL, you boys really have no clue. So we have gone from him going to clearly commit to NO currency union to a whimpering "advises against it". LOL.
    Civil servants advise: ministers decide. And ministers (and potential future ministers) have given their decision.

    There will be no institutional currency union between an independent Scotland and the remainder of the UK.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,937
    edited February 2014
    malcolmg said:

    TGOHF said:

    Mick_Pork said:

    Osbrowne now dribbling on about "reckless threats" without an ounce of self-awareness.

    He could almost be a PB tory or PB Romney.


    *chortle*

    Carney supplied the bullets, Eck shouted shoot me - too easy for GO today - will then pass the gun to Balls, Alexander etc..

    LOL, you think the three wise monkeys are any match for Salmond. You are deluded.
    Your mis-placed confidence in Wee Eck reminds me of those African witch-doctors who sprinkle their warriors with magic water to make their enemy's bullets bounce off.

    They get to go to a lot of funerals....

  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530

    Mick_Pork said:

    Don't you think the SNP does now need to set out its reasons for believing why Carney and the Treasury are wrong?

    Easy to tell that it's not just the PB tories who have their head in the sand over this. The SNP and Yes campaign have argued their case repeatedly on scottish news and current affairs. It doesn't matter that hardly any of those shrieking about Osbrowne's speech haven't seen that or want to pretend it hasn't happened. It has happened and it will continue to happen. Carney and the Treasury did not rule out a currency union. Advice and warnings are negotiating positions.

    Their case doesn't make any sense.
    PB tories and right-wingers not liking that case certainly doesn't mean the scottish public will agree with them any more than PB tories and right-wingers supporting Osbrowne means the scottish public will be persuaded by him.

    Don't you get it?

    This blog's comments is an amusing right-wing dominated bubble which bears little to no relation to westminster politics never mind scottish politics.

    If you think yet another Osbrowne scare story is what's been dominating and going to continue to dominate the news then perhaps you and the PB tories need to get out of your bunker.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,343

    Pulpstar said:

    Mr. Pulpstar, indeed, it could have that effect. However, the vote is some distance away, which might reduce the prospect of a bunker mentality.

    If you're going with that analysis any effect either way would dissipate.
    Yep, whatever the Unionist motives are (spread fud, raise the imortance of currency as an issue) not sure what the timing is about. If the EssEnnPee HAVE to come up with a Plan B, why give then 7 months to do it?



    Exactly, which is why I am so puzzled by it all. Can't be to hide the floods, so why now?
    isam said:

    isam said:

    Can I ask the shrinking number of bettors on here how they'd price up the chances of there being a currency union if Scotland does vote for independence? Just like to gauge their faith in 'can't recommend means no..definitely, definitely, definitely.'

    Couldn't price it up as have no idea / haven't thought about it

    What do you prefer? Be best to have your own currency wouldn't it?
    Well, implicit in my question was that it was for people that had thought about it and on the evidence of their numerous posts, have a very definite view about it. There seems a sad lack on a political betting site of people willing to back their views with a bet, which is the gold standard for me that they have the courage of their convictions and faith in their own judgment.

    Own currency eventually, yes. Personally not bothered whether it's using the pound pegged to rUK or temporary currency union for the short term. I can understand the view that rUK may not be enthusiastic about a c.u. without long term commitment, but the bottom line is that Unionists aren't currently offering a c.u. on a long term basis.
    Agree with you re backing up strongly held opinions with bets. It's amazing how many people refuse to engage, and the lengths they go to in order to wriggle out of betting.

    There are legitimate reasons for not making a bet with another poster, and they include (a) not wishing to reveal personal info, and (b) no idea how reliable they are one way or another (though I'd be surprised if default was common on PB). I've certainly put a bet on indy myself, though without showing you the slip can't prove it ...

  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    Polruan said:



    @pulpo Mind you I'm a contrarian by nature, but the average Scottish voter is a dreadfully fearful sort, clinging to nurse with their pathetic SLAB voting at Westminster elections to keep the 3rd place 'Tories' out.

    If I was voting these events would push me more towards the Yes camp but maybe that's just me.



    Why would Scots wish to live in a country with people such as yourself who so clearly hold them in total and utter contempt? Sickening.

    Morning everyone.

    Following yesterday's outrage about "nasty selfish southeasterners" (or some such characterisation) it's good to see that these generalisations run across the political spectrum of posters. Could we perhaps agree a full set of stigmatising cliches to cover each region of the UK to aid us all in assessing the impact of different policy proposals? If nothing else it's got to be more interesting than yet another thread about currency union.
    Obviously some are in jest, but the regional stereotyping on here is astonishing considering how easily people are prepared to mount their high horse on matters.
  • john_zimsjohn_zims Posts: 3,399
    @Mick_Pork

    'Currency is an issue the scottish public rated 8th in those issues most important to them for the Independence referendum'

    So no big deal & the SNP can switch to plan B which is.........?
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    Christopher Cassidy (@CllrCassidy)
    13/02/2014 10:30
    Just been called a 'f*****g c**t' by someone proudly saying they are voting @UKLabour. Sounds about right! Haha
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    edited February 2014

    Mick_Pork said:

    Don't you think the SNP does now need to set out its reasons for believing why Carney and the Treasury are wrong?

    Easy to tell that it's not just the PB tories who have their head in the sand over this. The SNP and Yes campaign have argued their case repeatedly on scottish news and current affairs. It doesn't matter that hardly any of those shrieking about Osbrowne's speech haven't seen that or want to pretend it hasn't happened. It has happened and it will continue to happen. Carney and the Treasury did not rule out a currency union. Advice and warnings are negotiating positions.

    What negotiating positions will Scotland have?
    Hmm.. how would the Yes campaign and the SNP be negotiating from a position of strength if the scottish public backs independence in a democratic referendum? Yes, that is quite the puzzle. Perhaps the sole scottish tory MP Mundell (who is still outnumbered by pandas) would know?

  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Tommy Sheridan ‏@citizentommy 1h
    The British Establishment will today unite2 try & bully & intimidate Scots2 vote no. It is an act of desperation & worry.
    DONT BE FEART #YES

    The paucity of the argument from YES all round is patronising to the electorate.

  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,155
    edited February 2014
    TGOHF said:

    Mick_Pork said:

    Don't you think the SNP does now need to set out its reasons for believing why Carney and the Treasury are wrong?

    Easy to tell that it's not just the PB tories who have their head in the sand over this. The SNP and Yes campaign have argued their case repeatedly on scottish news and current affairs. It doesn't matter that hardly any of those shrieking about Osbrowne's speech haven't seen that or want to pretend it hasn't happened. It has happened and it will continue to happen. Carney and the Treasury did not rule out a currency union. Advice and warnings are negotiating positions.

    The SNP have argued their case.

    Their case doesn't make any sense.
    The 300 page white paper was a feint ? Wait for the starting gun - any day now..
    The White Paper is actually over 600 pages. You maybe skipped a few pages, or perhaps you possess The People's traditional relaxed attitude to numbers.
  • Greetings, my fellow Scots (English scum, prepare to be ground underfoot!).

    Already the Sassenach fool Osborne, visiting Edinburgh briefly to spout his lies before scuttling back to the Satanic realms of England, has fallen into my perfectly placed trap.

    By seeking to deny us the pound, the Angles have proven their vindictive selfishness. But they fail to realise just how canny the SNP are, for we have long planned for this eventuality.

    Should the Jutes refuse to share the pound with us we have an alternative currency in place: the spoon.

    Already multiple denominations (tea, dessert, soup and table) have been distributed to each and every household, ready to be utilised at a moment's notice. Scottish banks will have the capacity to print more spoons in advanced paper form as soon as independence occurs.

    Not only that, the metal-based nature of the spoon lends it a natural resilience on the turbulent foreign exchange markets, and the currency is already widely in use in England, facilitating easier cross-border trade with our best pals in the world/loathed ancient enemies.

    Osborne! You are defeated! Run back to London, you frit, for Salmond has defeated you with a weapon you never saw coming! Tremble before the spoon of Scotland!
  • MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699

    Mick_Pork said:

    Don't you think the SNP does now need to set out its reasons for believing why Carney and the Treasury are wrong?

    Easy to tell that it's not just the PB tories who have their head in the sand over this. The SNP and Yes campaign have argued their case repeatedly on scottish news and current affairs. It doesn't matter that hardly any of those shrieking about Osbrowne's speech haven't seen that or want to pretend it hasn't happened. It has happened and it will continue to happen. Carney and the Treasury did not rule out a currency union. Advice and warnings are negotiating positions.

    The SNP have argued their case.

    Their case doesn't make any sense.
    That is why the polls show Yes is toast .
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Bella Caledonia ‏@bellacaledonia 3m
    The heir to the 17th century baronetcy of Ballentaylor today came to Scotland’s capital to threaten people

    Is that it ?
  • Greetings, my fellow Scots (English scum, prepare to be ground underfoot!).

    Already the Sassenach fool Osborne, visiting Edinburgh briefly to spout his lies before scuttling back to the Satanic realms of England, has fallen into my perfectly placed trap.

    By seeking to deny us the pound, the Angles have proven their vindictive selfishness. But they fail to realise just how canny the SNP are, for we have long planned for this eventuality.

    Should the Jutes refuse to share the pound with us we have an alternative currency in place: the spoon.

    Already multiple denominations (tea, dessert, soup and table) have been distributed to each and every household, ready to be utilised at a moment's notice. Scottish banks will have the capacity to print more spoons in advanced paper form as soon as independence occurs.

    Not only that, the metal-based nature of the spoon lends it a natural resilience on the turbulent foreign exchange markets, and the currency is already widely in use in England, facilitating easier cross-border trade with our best pals in the world/loathed ancient enemies.

    Osborne! You are defeated! Run back to London, you frit, for Salmond has defeated you with a weapon you never saw coming! Tremble before the spoon of Scotland!

    Don't give up the day job.
  • Mick_Pork said:

    Mick_Pork said:

    Don't you think the SNP does now need to set out its reasons for believing why Carney and the Treasury are wrong?

    Easy to tell that it's not just the PB tories who have their head in the sand over this. The SNP and Yes campaign have argued their case repeatedly on scottish news and current affairs. It doesn't matter that hardly any of those shrieking about Osbrowne's speech haven't seen that or want to pretend it hasn't happened. It has happened and it will continue to happen. Carney and the Treasury did not rule out a currency union. Advice and warnings are negotiating positions.

    What negotiating positions will Scotland have?
    Hmm.. how would the Yes campaign and the SNP be negotiating from a position of strength if the scottish public backs independence in a democratic referendum? Yes, that is quite the puzzle. Perhaps the sole scottish tory MP Mundell (who is still outnumbered by pandas) would know?

    I'm afraid that is not a very good answer. The negotiation would not be about independence, it would be about the currency union and how independent Scotland would, in practice, be; and whether what the SNP are now saying will happen is actually what they believe will happen. Like you, I have no doubt at all that there will be a currency union. However, I suspect that we have very different views on the form that it will take. We are never going to agree on that, so let's just wait to see what transpires. If you get your way, we won't have that long to wait.

  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498
    Ishmael_X said:

    The Niesr view:

    "New currency
    The other option is for Scotland to issue its own currency.

    Indeed, there are many examples of countries of similar size and level of income (for example, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, Denmark) which all have their own currency.

    The transition from using sterling to introducing a new currency might be long and difficult, but it is possible.

    What's more, at the end of the transition, an independent Scotland would have all the instruments for economic policy of a modern state.

    As the Fiscal Commission made clear: "In the long run, the creation of a new Scottish currency would represent a significant increase in economic sovereignty, with interest rate and exchange rate policy being two new policy tools and adjustment mechanisms to support the Scottish economy."

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-26161046

    What's not to like in that lot? Who is being yellow-bellied in trying to cling to sterling's apron-strings?

    Initially it is to everybodys benefit that we retain sterling , that reality will mean that is what will happen. Longer term it should be our own currency , which may still be sterling but the Scottish variant. All the posturing on here about what the chinless wonders will do is pathetic, their tone will change when it is YES and they will come to the table with their tails between their legs.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498
    john_zims said:

    @Mick_Pork

    'Currency is an issue the scottish public rated 8th in those issues most important to them for the Independence referendum'

    So no big deal & the SNP can switch to plan B which is.........?

    Only a fool would not know that but as it will not be required why bother about it. SNP have a plan that they are sticking to , the unionists are flailing around changing by the day. Once it si YES then we will see what reality is.
  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    Mick_Pork said:

    Mick_Pork said:

    Don't you think the SNP does now need to set out its reasons for believing why Carney and the Treasury are wrong?

    Easy to tell that it's not just the PB tories who have their head in the sand over this. The SNP and Yes campaign have argued their case repeatedly on scottish news and current affairs. It doesn't matter that hardly any of those shrieking about Osbrowne's speech haven't seen that or want to pretend it hasn't happened. It has happened and it will continue to happen. Carney and the Treasury did not rule out a currency union. Advice and warnings are negotiating positions.


    This blog's comments is an amusing right-wing dominated bubble which bears little to no relation to westminster politics never mind scottish politics.

    And yet you waste so much time posting here.

  • Carnyx said:


    There are legitimate reasons for not making a bet with another poster, and they include (a) not wishing to reveal personal info, and (b) no idea how reliable they are one way or another (though I'd be surprised if default was common on PB). I've certainly put a bet on indy myself, though without showing you the slip can't prove it ...

    There is a recognised protocol for betting on PB. PeterthePunter, a PB elder statesman and unfortunately not on here much now, is the recorder of bets, holds personal details and is usually accepted as the final arbiter. There have been some welchers and whiners, but afaik, relatively few.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    malcolmg said:

    Ishmael_X said:

    The Niesr view:

    "New currency
    The other option is for Scotland to issue its own currency.

    Indeed, there are many examples of countries of similar size and level of income (for example, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, Denmark) which all have their own currency.

    The transition from using sterling to introducing a new currency might be long and difficult, but it is possible.

    What's more, at the end of the transition, an independent Scotland would have all the instruments for economic policy of a modern state.

    As the Fiscal Commission made clear: "In the long run, the creation of a new Scottish currency would represent a significant increase in economic sovereignty, with interest rate and exchange rate policy being two new policy tools and adjustment mechanisms to support the Scottish economy."

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-26161046

    What's not to like in that lot? Who is being yellow-bellied in trying to cling to sterling's apron-strings?

    Initially it is to everybodys benefit that we retain sterling , that reality will mean that is what will happen. Longer term it should be our own currency , .
    So not only do you expect cUK to sign up to a high risk high cost currency union - but one that is doomed to be broken up ?

    That sounds stable and sensible - not a chance cUk voters will put up with that.
  • isam said:

    Christopher Cassidy (@CllrCassidy)
    13/02/2014 10:30
    Just been called a 'f*****g c**t' by someone proudly saying they are voting @UKLabour. Sounds about right! Haha

    Wonder what Graham Jones MP has to say about that
  • Mr. G, it'll be difficult for a change to occur from the UK's side on currency because of the proximity of the General Election. Immediately and massively pissing off the electorate when they're about to decide whether to back you or sack you is not clever, and certainly isn't going to happen.
  • TGOHF said:

    On a brighter note - come September we can forget about Indy referendums for another 35-40 years minimum.

    I already have that thread written, give or take a few details.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498

    malcolmg said:

    antifrank said:

    Chris Giles:

    Brutal message from HMT perm sec to @George_Osborne advising against currency union pic.twitter.com/qqaffmkE5d

    Treasury calls SNP bluff pic.twitter.com/SWRb7EWvid

    LOL, you boys really have no clue. So we have gone from him going to clearly commit to NO currency union to a whimpering "advises against it". LOL.
    Civil servants advise: ministers decide. And ministers (and potential future ministers) have given their decision.

    There will be no institutional currency union between an independent Scotland and the remainder of the UK.
    Can you show me that decision , I could not see any. Some weasely words but no decision, please enlighten me. I mean something real of course which you will be unable to find.
  • malcolmg said:

    antifrank said:

    Chris Giles:

    Brutal message from HMT perm sec to @George_Osborne advising against currency union pic.twitter.com/qqaffmkE5d

    Treasury calls SNP bluff pic.twitter.com/SWRb7EWvid

    LOL, you boys really have no clue. So we have gone from him going to clearly commit to NO currency union to a whimpering "advises against it". LOL.
    Civil servants advise: ministers decide. And ministers (and potential future ministers) have given their decision.

    There will be no institutional currency union between an independent Scotland and the remainder of the UK.
    Referendums are national, cross-party lying conpetitions. They're even worse than general elections because there's nothing the voters can do afterwards if they realize they've been conned. Statements by politicians about what they'd do after a referendum have exactly zero predictive power for what they'd actually do after the referendum.
  • Gummer is the same as Yeo, he never does anything unless it's in his own interest, but then again I am sure you know that.

    And your sentiment just shows how out of touch you are.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498
    edited February 2014
    TGOHF said:

    Mick_Pork said:

    Don't you think the SNP does now need to set out its reasons for believing why Carney and the Treasury are wrong?

    Easy to tell that it's not just the PB tories who have their head in the sand over this. The SNP and Yes campaign have argued their case repeatedly on scottish news and current affairs. It doesn't matter that hardly any of those shrieking about Osbrowne's speech haven't seen that or want to pretend it hasn't happened. It has happened and it will continue to happen. Carney and the Treasury did not rule out a currency union. Advice and warnings are negotiating positions.

    The SNP have argued their case.

    Their case doesn't make any sense.
    The 300 page white paper was a feint ? Wait for the starting gun - any day now..
    Looks like unionist counting there, whatever you were reading it was certainly not the White paper.
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    edited February 2014
    The Mash concurs with yesterday's view that Tories (esp. Southern ones) are driven by spite.

    http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/politics/politics-headlines/spite-is-main-reason-people-support-conservatives-2014021383555

    “We vote with others in mind. Conservatives think everyone else is out to shaft them so try and shaft them first.

    “Labour voters are idealists who want to believe they’re doing good without going to any effort, so they vote for anyone with an attractive set of lies.

    “Lib Dem voters just want to be noticed even if the attention they get is negative, much like a small boy urinating in his pants.

    “And voting UKIP is the political equivalent of asking the police to arrest you before you hurt someone.”
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498

    Mr. Divvie, if there's no right answer (euro, Scottish pound, dollarisation or just saying the UK parties are all big liars) then giving the SNP a long time makes sense. They'll spend months trying to evade obvious, straightforward questions and look less trustworthy each time they can't give an answer.

    Of course, if they have a credible answer that'll be greatly helpful to their cause. I suspect events around the world (eurozone crisis, financial crisis etc) does not aid them, though.

    MD, I assume you never read anything on the topic. They have clearly stated their position , it is a currency union and despite all the unionist blustering they know it will be a different reality when the unionists have lost. They are not changing and the unionists will not say NO.
  • GrandioseGrandiose Posts: 2,323
    malcolmg said:

    Ishmael_X said:

    The Niesr view:

    "New currency
    The other option is for Scotland to issue its own currency.

    Indeed, there are many examples of countries of similar size and level of income (for example, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, Denmark) which all have their own currency.

    The transition from using sterling to introducing a new currency might be long and difficult, but it is possible.

    What's more, at the end of the transition, an independent Scotland would have all the instruments for economic policy of a modern state.

    As the Fiscal Commission made clear: "In the long run, the creation of a new Scottish currency would represent a significant increase in economic sovereignty, with interest rate and exchange rate policy being two new policy tools and adjustment mechanisms to support the Scottish economy."

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-26161046

    What's not to like in that lot? Who is being yellow-bellied in trying to cling to sterling's apron-strings?

    Initially it is to everybodys benefit that we retain sterling , that reality will mean that is what will happen. Longer term it should be our own currency , which may still be sterling but the Scottish variant. All the posturing on here about what the chinless wonders will do is pathetic, their tone will change when it is YES and they will come to the table with their tails between their legs.
    (Not a direct reply.) It's Alex Salmond's position that he wants to keep the pound. He's not proposed a new Scottish currency, even if that would be feasible.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/10603469/Independent-Scotland-could-keep-pound-suggests-Alex-Salmond.html
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    edited February 2014

    Mick_Pork said:

    Mick_Pork said:

    Don't you think the SNP does now need to set out its reasons for believing why Carney and the Treasury are wrong?

    Easy to tell that it's not just the PB tories who have their head in the sand over this. The SNP and Yes campaign have argued their case repeatedly on scottish news and current affairs. It doesn't matter that hardly any of those shrieking about Osbrowne's speech haven't seen that or want to pretend it hasn't happened. It has happened and it will continue to happen. Carney and the Treasury did not rule out a currency union. Advice and warnings are negotiating positions.

    What negotiating positions will Scotland have?
    Hmm.. how would the Yes campaign and the SNP be negotiating from a position of strength if the scottish public backs independence in a democratic referendum? Yes, that is quite the puzzle. Perhaps the sole scottish tory MP Mundell (who is still outnumbered by pandas) would know?

    I'm afraid that is not a very good answer.
    I'm afraid I'll just have to live with the foremost PB Romney not liking that answer and not understanding that would be the inescapable core fact from which all negotiating will be done. That's democracy for you.

    You would think since the lib dems have had to endure Calamity Clegg as the weak and ineffectual junior coalition partner, as well as having Clegg as the toxic frontman for the Yes to AV vote, then they might understand the dynamics of power and a referendum more.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498

    I see the SNP have sent a full team out today for the Whistling-In-The-Dark Olympics....

    I think you will find it is just the same posters who are always here, pointing out the same things as the unionists post the same lies and insults they always do.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,937
    Anorak said:

    The Mash concurs with yesterday's view that Tories (esp. Southern ones) are driven by spite.

    http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/politics/politics-headlines/spite-is-main-reason-people-support-conservatives-2014021383555

    “We vote with others in mind. Conservatives think everyone else is out to shaft them so try and shaft them first.

    “Labour voters are idealists who want to believe they’re doing good without going to any effort, so they vote for anyone with an attractive set of lies.

    “Lib Dem voters just want to be noticed even if the attention they get is negative, much like a small boy urinating in his pants.

    “And voting UKIP is the political equivalent of asking the police to arrest you before you hurt someone.”

    Worthy of a thread on its own!
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,469

    Gummer is the same as Yeo, he never does anything unless it's in his own interest, but then again I am sure you know that.

    And your sentiment just shows how out of touch you are.
    Not with me, he isn't. Whilst the way foreign aid is dolled out is far from perfect (especially some of the recipients), I'm generally in favour of it. This is especially true when it is directly targeted at poverty and education.

    True, it's not perfect, and there are problems. But I'm not sure that I'd like to be part of a country that does not try to help others less fortunate than ourselves.

    Others obviously differ.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498

    Greetings, my fellow Scots (English scum, prepare to be ground underfoot!).

    Already the Sassenach fool Osborne, visiting Edinburgh briefly to spout his lies before scuttling back to the Satanic realms of England, has fallen into my perfectly placed trap.

    By seeking to deny us the pound, the Angles have proven their vindictive selfishness. But they fail to realise just how canny the SNP are, for we have long planned for this eventuality.

    Should the Jutes refuse to share the pound with us we have an alternative currency in place: the spoon.

    Already multiple denominations (tea, dessert, soup and table) have been distributed to each and every household, ready to be utilised at a moment's notice. Scottish banks will have the capacity to print more spoons in advanced paper form as soon as independence occurs.

    Not only that, the metal-based nature of the spoon lends it a natural resilience on the turbulent foreign exchange markets, and the currency is already widely in use in England, facilitating easier cross-border trade with our best pals in the world/loathed ancient enemies.

    Osborne! You are defeated! Run back to London, you frit, for Salmond has defeated you with a weapon you never saw coming! Tremble before the spoon of Scotland!

    Don't give up the day job.
    Unlucky for him that is the day job.
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 6,366
    Malcolmg,

    I wish you well with your referendum.

    I've not been following the ins and outs but it's obvious that a lot of people will vote with their heart rather than their heads. So the lengthy discussions on currency, economics or technical issues will be ignored. I suppose it all depends on whether the nation is a Rob Roy or a canny Scot.

    Incidentally, could you refrain from bringing Lincolnshire people in your arguments. "Yellow Belly" has more than one meaning.
  • The interesting thing about the Treasuy, Osborne and Alexander comments on the Scottish currency issue is not the fact that they rule out a formal currency union - that is so obviously a non-starter that it's hardly news that it's ruled out - but what they say about Scotland using the pound without a currency union. I'm surprised at the strength of the statements they've made about that not being viable either.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498

    Mick_Pork said:

    Mick_Pork said:

    Don't you think the SNP does now need to set out its reasons for believing why Carney and the Treasury are wrong?

    Easy to tell that it's not just the PB tories who have their head in the sand over this. The SNP and Yes campaign have argued their case repeatedly on scottish news and current affairs. It doesn't matter that hardly any of those shrieking about Osbrowne's speech haven't seen that or want to pretend it hasn't happened. It has happened and it will continue to happen. Carney and the Treasury did not rule out a currency union. Advice and warnings are negotiating positions.


    This blog's comments is an amusing right-wing dominated bubble which bears little to no relation to westminster politics never mind scottish politics.

    And yet you waste so much time posting here.

    You know it is desperate when "The Watcher " gets brought out of the crypt.
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530

    malcolmg said:

    antifrank said:

    Chris Giles:

    Brutal message from HMT perm sec to @George_Osborne advising against currency union pic.twitter.com/qqaffmkE5d

    Treasury calls SNP bluff pic.twitter.com/SWRb7EWvid

    LOL, you boys really have no clue. So we have gone from him going to clearly commit to NO currency union to a whimpering "advises against it". LOL.
    Civil servants advise: ministers decide. And ministers (and potential future ministers) have given their decision.

    There will be no institutional currency union between an independent Scotland and the remainder of the UK.
    Referendums are national, cross-party lying conpetitions. They're even worse than general elections because there's nothing the voters can do afterwards if they realize they've been conned. Statements by politicians about what they'd do after a referendum have exactly zero predictive power for what they'd actually do after the referendum.
    Much like a coalition then.

    :)
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498

    Mr. G, it'll be difficult for a change to occur from the UK's side on currency because of the proximity of the General Election. Immediately and massively pissing off the electorate when they're about to decide whether to back you or sack you is not clever, and certainly isn't going to happen.

    MD , who knows , there will be plenty of turbulence when YES wins and perhaps George and Dave will not be able to hold to their bluff. Many factors will be in play.
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530

    but what they say about Scotland using the pound without a currency union. I'm surprised at the strength of the statements they've made about that not being viable either.

    Yes, after Osbrowne has been trying to pour scorn on the idea since 2012 it's quite a shocker.
  • Mick_Pork said:

    Mick_Pork said:

    Mick_Pork said:

    Don't you think the SNP does now need to set out its reasons for believing why Carney and the Treasury are wrong?

    Easy to tell that it's not just the PB tories who have their head in the sand over this. The SNP and Yes campaign have argued their case repeatedly on scottish news and current affairs. It doesn't matter that hardly any of those shrieking about Osbrowne's speech haven't seen that or want to pretend it hasn't happened. It has happened and it will continue to happen. Carney and the Treasury did not rule out a currency union. Advice and warnings are negotiating positions.

    What negotiating positions will Scotland have?
    Hmm.. how would the Yes campaign and the SNP be negotiating from a position of strength if the scottish public backs independence in a democratic referendum? Yes, that is quite the puzzle. Perhaps the sole scottish tory MP Mundell (who is still outnumbered by pandas) would know?

    I'm afraid that is not a very good answer.
    I'm afraid I'll just have to live with the foremost PB Romney not liking that answer and not understanding that would be the inescapable core fact from which all negotiating will be done. That's democracy for you.

    You would think since the lib dems have had to endure Calamity Clegg as the weak and ineffectual junior coalition partner, as well as having Clegg as the toxic frontman for the Yes to AV vote, then they might understand the dynamics of power and a referendum more.

    OK Mick, whatever. I understand that you do not wish to engage with the argument, so I'll leave it there. We'll continue to agree on plenty more than we disagree on. But there are some things that I suppose are just too raw for rational discussion!

  • Anorak said:

    The Mash concurs with yesterday's view that Tories (esp. Southern ones) are driven by spite.

    http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/politics/politics-headlines/spite-is-main-reason-people-support-conservatives-2014021383555

    “We vote with others in mind. Conservatives think everyone else is out to shaft them so try and shaft them first.

    “Labour voters are idealists who want to believe they’re doing good without going to any effort, so they vote for anyone with an attractive set of lies.

    “Lib Dem voters just want to be noticed even if the attention they get is negative, much like a small boy urinating in his pants.

    “And voting UKIP is the political equivalent of asking the police to arrest you before you hurt someone.”

    Worthy of a thread on its own!
    Well I'm editing PB next week.....

    So far I've written a thread on the possibility of a new electoral voting system for the 2015 General Election (without a referendum)

    Any ideas and suggestions for threads are welcome.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,173
    Its fun listening to all of the bile from the gnats today - 'yellow bellies' 'liars' etc - ti just begs the question why on earth would they want any kind of union with the rUK post independence.? Its a real conundrum - do they really want to leave or not?
  • Mick_Pork said:

    malcolmg said:

    antifrank said:

    Chris Giles:

    Brutal message from HMT perm sec to @George_Osborne advising against currency union pic.twitter.com/qqaffmkE5d

    Treasury calls SNP bluff pic.twitter.com/SWRb7EWvid

    LOL, you boys really have no clue. So we have gone from him going to clearly commit to NO currency union to a whimpering "advises against it". LOL.
    Civil servants advise: ministers decide. And ministers (and potential future ministers) have given their decision.

    There will be no institutional currency union between an independent Scotland and the remainder of the UK.
    Referendums are national, cross-party lying conpetitions. They're even worse than general elections because there's nothing the voters can do afterwards if they realize they've been conned. Statements by politicians about what they'd do after a referendum have exactly zero predictive power for what they'd actually do after the referendum.
    Much like a coalition then.

    :)
    Referendums are much worse than coalitions. With coalitions you get to blur who's responsible for things you said before the election not coming true after the election, but the voters still get to punish you at the polls for failing to deliver what you said. (See the LibDem poll share.) With referendums you get to ignore it completely. There is absolutely no incentive to tell the truth.
  • Gummer is the same as Yeo, he never does anything unless it's in his own interest, but then again I am sure you know that.

    And your sentiment just shows how out of touch you are.
    Not with me, he isn't. Whilst the way foreign aid is dolled out is far from perfect (especially some of the recipients), I'm generally in favour of it. This is especially true when it is directly targeted at poverty and education.

    True, it's not perfect, and there are problems. But I'm not sure that I'd like to be part of a country that does not try to help others less fortunate than ourselves.

    Others obviously differ.
    I didn't say I was against it, including the £11bn amount. I just think it should be used properly, for example helping Syrian refugees instead of sending vast amounts to prosperous countries.i also think it should be used for basic malaria jabs in Africa, but I also see nothing wrong with diverting money to things like the current crisis here.
This discussion has been closed.