Sure, if it's YES there'll be chaos. Financial services will flee south and there'll be terrible and immediate budget / cashflow / banking dramas. Currency, borrowing, deficits, EU membership - all look to become 'interesting' overnight. There might even be some profound 'caveat emptor' / 'WTF have we done to ourselves' gnashing and wailing for a few years.
Add to that the flight of capital following an independence vote - and then the flight of the tax-paying class following their capital out.
If you are currently a 45% tax payer in Scotland, you can expect a world of pain - as you and the 100,000 others are required to plug the financial gap. Anyone who stays must really love Scotland....
I do and I will be staying like most if not all others. We are not all greedy blood suckers up here, it is not all about money.
I'm sure that being Scottish in an independent Scotland will be a wonderful club to belong to. But let's see how many want to stay when the membership fees involve a tax rate of 60%. 70%. Maybe even 80% for those bastard bankers....
Remember Marquee Mark's Maxim: money flees taxation. That is as true of the small number of top rate tax payers in Scotland as it is of those international oil companies who will just as easily relocate to the armpits of Africa - if the tax rates are better.... La Belle France under Hollande should be a stark reminder to the SNP of the mobility of money.
It will be an interesting day when Salmon has to go on TV for his emergency announcement that "because all the rich folk have fecked off, with immediate effect general taxation rates have to start at 40% for all..."
Such will be the price of being Scottish. Well worth paying, I'm sure all Scots will agree - especially those 49% who voted against independence...
Actually we've all been jolly rude about YES because the currency plans are incoherent. And indeed they are. An independent Scotland would intially suffer alot.
But...we've been together for 300 years and this decision is a bit more historic. There is, of course, no reason why ultimately Scotland cannot be independent and successful. So perhaps the polls are wrong and the Scots are thinking longer term - and fancy running their own show.
Sure, if it's YES there'll be chaos. Financial services will flee south and there'll be terrible and immediate budget / cashflow / banking dramas. Currency, borrowing, deficits, EU membership - all look to become 'interesting' overnight. There might even be some profound 'caveat emptor' / 'WTF have we done to ourselves' gnashing and wailing for a few years.
But...Scotland would become independent (and really independent if it chooses to have its own currency and stay out of the EU). Financial indpendence might force financial common sense and a return to the Scotland of Adam Smith. The journey through lefty bankruptopia and into 'sound money' would only last for as long as the Scots take to realise a country can only borrow what it can repay.
So...hmmmm....perhaps Malc is right. Take the hit, suffer the short term profound readjustment of attitudes and expectations - but emerge free and sovereign on the other side.
That seems to me to be the only basis for making a choice: do you think the benefits of being one partner in a stronger unit outweigh the benefits of the ability to select precisely the option that you want to.
That will not go down in history alongside "Give me Liberty or give me death", "Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité" or "Quit India"!
You mean , that is what we English heard , as we were not really listening to what Scotland said as we are smug pompous arses and just laughed it off and said the benefits junkies will vote NO.
No, Salmond's 'don't scare the horses" strategy will be pored over for years to come - as either how to lose a referendum, or how to squeak it and face an uncomfortable aftermath.....
And I notice you are resorting to "more Scottish than thou" - a clear sign of nerves...
Good God how stupid are you , worst I ever get is 100% certain. You just do not want to admit you are "English Tory".
Scottish children had always been punished for using Scots idioms and locutions in school.
Standard English was thumped into you. But by the 1980s, publishers wanted literature to reflect the demotic speech of ordinary folk.
"They realised there was a market for work in which we talked about ourselves in our own terms," says Liz Lochhead, one of Scotland's most celebrated poets and playwrights.
"And then with the first failed referendum [on devolution in 1979] there really was, afterwards, a sort of sense of depression, which then expressed itself in a sense of let's get on with it, and... a revival of Scottish identity."
Mmm, interesting, thanks, especially the comment re Scottish border crossing vs static English novels which is certainly intriguing. .
I also think its a tad simplistic - Dickens work has multiple "border" crossings between the country and city, and Hardie explores the impact of town life on the country dweller.
That said, there is a clear and long tradition of emigration in Scotland - multiple aunts and uncles went abroad and returned to visit, visibly better off than us.
I was delighted in later life to discover that my childhood pronunciation of "hoose" was in fact the country wide one, until the great vowel shift transformed it into "howse"....
Sure, if it's YES there'll be chaos. Financial services will flee south and there'll be terrible and immediate budget / cashflow / banking dramas. Currency, borrowing, deficits, EU membership - all look to become 'interesting' overnight. There might even be some profound 'caveat emptor' / 'WTF have we done to ourselves' gnashing and wailing for a few years.
Add to that the flight of capital following an independence vote - and then the flight of the tax-paying class following their capital out.
If you are currently a 45% tax payer in Scotland, you can expect a world of pain - as you and the 100,000 others are required to plug the financial gap. Anyone who stays must really love Scotland....
I do and I will be staying like most if not all others. We are not all greedy blood suckers up here, it is not all about money.
I'm sure that being Scottish in an independent Scotland will be a wonderful club to belong to. But let's see how many want to stay when the membership fees involve a tax rate of 60%. 70%. Maybe even 80% for those bastard bankers....
Remember Marquee Mark's Maxim: money flees taxation. That is as true of the small number of top rate tax payers in Scotland as it is of those international oil companies who will just as easily relocate to the armpits of Africa - if the tax rates are better.... La Belle France under Hollande should be a stark reminder to the SNP of the mobility of money.
It will be an interesting day when Salmon has to go on TV for his emergency announcement that "because all the rich folk have fecked off, with immediate effect general taxation rates have to start at 40% for all..."
Such will be the price of being Scottish. Well worth paying, I'm sure all Scots will agree - especially those 49% who voted against independence...
Sad English Tory trougher has fantasy about Scotland failing...............LOL, you forgot to say Zimbabwe. Why have those oil companies not relocated to Africa so far smartie pants given the tax in UK is massively higher already. Not too bright you Tories are you , explains why UK is in the crap.
Actually we've all been jolly rude about YES because the currency plans are incoherent. And indeed they are. An independent Scotland would intially suffer alot.
But...we've been together for 300 years and this decision is a bit more historic. There is, of course, no reason why ultimately Scotland cannot be independent and successful. So perhaps the polls are wrong and the Scots are thinking longer term - and fancy running their own show.
Sure, if it's YES there'll be chaos. Financial services will flee south and there'll be terrible and immediate budget / cashflow / banking dramas. Currency, borrowing, deficits, EU membership - all look to become 'interesting' overnight. There might even be some profound 'caveat emptor' / 'WTF have we done to ourselves' gnashing and wailing for a few years.
But...Scotland would become independent (and really independent if it chooses to have its own currency and stay out of the EU). Financial indpendence might force financial common sense and a return to the Scotland of Adam Smith. The journey through lefty bankruptopia and into 'sound money' would only last for as long as the Scots take to realise a country can only borrow what it can repay.
So...hmmmm....perhaps Malc is right. Take the hit, suffer the short term profound readjustment of attitudes and expectations - but emerge free and sovereign on the other side.
That seems to me to be the only basis for making a choice: do you think the benefits of being one partner in a stronger unit outweigh the benefits of the ability to select precisely the option that you want to.
That will not go down in history alongside "Give me Liberty or give me death", "Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité" or "Quit India"!
You mean , that is what we English heard , as we were not really listening to what Scotland said as we are smug pompous arses and just laughed it off and said the benefits junkies will vote NO.
No, Salmond's 'don't scare the horses" strategy will be pored over for years to come - as either how to lose a referendum, or how to squeak it and face an uncomfortable aftermath.....
And I notice you are resorting to "more Scottish than thou" - a clear sign of nerves...
Good God how stupid are you , worst I ever get is 100% certain. You just do not want to admit you are "English Tory".
Playing the race card eh? At least the SNP don't do that explicitly - they just say "Tory" - but we know what they mean.......
Sure, if it's YES there'll be chaos. Financial services will flee south and there'll be terrible and immediate budget / cashflow / banking dramas. Currency, borrowing, deficits, EU membership - all look to become 'interesting' overnight. There might even be some profound 'caveat emptor' / 'WTF have we done to ourselves' gnashing and wailing for a few years.
Add to that the flight of capital following an independence vote - and then the flight of the tax-paying class following their capital out.
If you are currently a 45% tax payer in Scotland, you can expect a world of pain - as you and the 100,000 others are required to plug the financial gap. Anyone who stays must really love Scotland....
I do and I will be staying like most if not all others. We are not all greedy blood suckers up here, it is not all about money.
Funny. You've already posted here that you'd buy a property south of the border. (And money does concern you, hence the recent questions regarding pensions).
Mr. G, the UK's economic difficulties are largely caused by Scottish financial institutions and Chancellors. That's why any refusal by Scotland to take its fair share of the debt will absolutely infuriate the British (British, in that scenario, not including Scotland).
I do worry any break-up would be really quite hostile. Hard to see a separation being other than acrimonious.
Todays argument by the YES camp is that if Cameron wins next time and holds his EU referendum and it ends with us leaving it is so dangerous to Scottish business that it should override everything.
I have to say it's a very powerful argument and one that would weigh very heavily if I had the vote. I would consider it a disaster if the rest of the UK left the EU and it would be a top priority to prevent it happening
Scotland leaving the UK would increase the chance of an OUT vote. (For the UK)
Sure, if it's YES there'll be chaos. Financial services will flee south and there'll be terrible and immediate budget / cashflow / banking dramas. Currency, borrowing, deficits, EU membership - all look to become 'interesting' overnight. There might even be some profound 'caveat emptor' / 'WTF have we done to ourselves' gnashing and wailing for a few years.
Add to that the flight of capital following an independence vote - and then the flight of the tax-paying class following their capital out.
If you are currently a 45% tax payer in Scotland, you can expect a world of pain - as you and the 100,000 others are required to plug the financial gap. Anyone who stays must really love Scotland....
I do and I will be staying like most if not all others. We are not all greedy blood suckers up here, it is not all about money.
Funny. You've already posted here that you'd buy a property south of the border. (And money does concern you, hence the recent questions regarding pensions).
Thick and stupid as ever. I said I had the capacity to do it if I wished, ergo the bullshit you fannies spout is just that. Just because you are on JSA does not make it any better. Scotland will do just fine and we will accept refugees unlike the greedy other side promising barbed wire and retribution.
Sure, if it's YES there'll be chaos. Financial services will flee south and there'll be terrible and immediate budget / cashflow / banking dramas. Currency, borrowing, deficits, EU membership - all look to become 'interesting' overnight. There might even be some profound 'caveat emptor' / 'WTF have we done to ourselves' gnashing and wailing for a few years.
Add to that the flight of capital following an independence vote - and then the flight of the tax-paying class following their capital out.
If you are currently a 45% tax payer in Scotland, you can expect a world of pain - as you and the 100,000 others are required to plug the financial gap. Anyone who stays must really love Scotland....
I do and I will be staying like most if not all others. We are not all greedy blood suckers up here, it is not all about money.
I'm sure that being Scottish in an independent Scotland will be a wonderful club to belong to. But let's see how many want to stay when the membership fees involve a tax rate of 60%. 70%. Maybe even 80% for those bastard bankers....
Remember Marquee Mark's Maxim: money flees taxation. That is as true of the small number of top rate tax payers in Scotland as it is of those international oil companies who will just as easily relocate to the armpits of Africa - if the tax rates are better.... La Belle France under Hollande should be a stark reminder to the SNP of the mobility of money.
It will be an interesting day when Salmon has to go on TV for his emergency announcement that "because all the rich folk have fecked off, with immediate effect general taxation rates have to start at 40% for all..."
Such will be the price of being Scottish. Well worth paying, I'm sure all Scots will agree - especially those 49% who voted against independence...
LOL, you forgot to say Zimbabwe.
Salmond is hardly the enduring politician that Mugabe has proved to be....
Mr. G, the UK's economic difficulties are largely caused by Scottish financial institutions and Chancellors. That's why any refusal by Scotland to take its fair share of the debt will absolutely infuriate the British (British, in that scenario, not including Scotland).
I do worry any break-up would be really quite hostile. Hard to see a separation being other than acrimonious.
MD , we do not have Scottish institutions , they are all ran and regulated from London by UK regulations. The cringing English claiming it was all Scotland's fault is pretty sad. We have had two crap ( one really as Darling is English ) chancellors recently , how many crap English ones did we have before that.
PS : there is no separation we are merely cancelling the current political union
Interesting snippet tucked away in the small print (of the paper edition) of the Glasgow Herald - the only Scottish newspaper to increase its circulation is the Sunday Herald, and that is because it has abandoned its pro-union stance.
Note to newspaper owners: if you want to sell more papers in Scotland, there is one very straightforward route to go, back Yes.
SUN , has been very Scottish for the last 3 days , maybe Rupert has seen the numbers. He usually gets in quick when it starts to become very obvious.
Indeed. Even the Daily Record, which used to print SLab press releases unedited, has been remarkably even-handed some days. A bit patchy, but they have seen the writing on the wall. An awful lot of their journos will be very well aware of what is happening in the private polling that is constantly being conducted.
That is certainly an important potential indicator of the situation. Another interesting thing which nobody on this site has (so far as I know) noted or explained is why the flow of defectors is all one way - from No to Yes, in particular in the Labour Party and associated unions.
It's possible that this is simply trivial leakage toward the wider political equilibrium (of 40/60-60/40 as you think fit) and that Party members' thinking is solidly Unionist. It may also simply reflect the practical point that party members will not wish to abandon the time invested in getting up the hierarchy, and the actual and potential rewards of this.
Certainly most of the publicised defectors or quasi-defectors of high rank (local council, provost, MP, MSP, etc.) are retired, i.e. no further advancement to look forward to. Henry McLeish for instance.
However, we have recently seen one sitting local councillor go for Yes:
As with the papers, too early to say - but it is worth watching, and what I do notice, and wonder about, is that there is no great flow the other way - I would certainly have expected Better Together to make a meal of any defectors in the opposite direction.
On topic, I have a feeling this may refer to the post debate ICM . If not, it's a bit of an odd way to announce a new indy poll.
'City backs Yes, says new poll
A POLL has shown a majority of support for a yes vote in Glasgow An ICM Poll shows 51% for Yes with 49% for No, bucking the national trend. The poll also found seven out of 10 Glaswegians thought Alex Salmond was the winner in this week's TV debate. It found 71% of people said the First Minister was the clear winner with 29% for Alistair Darling. IT also found 62% believed Mr Salmond to have the best arguments compared to 38% for the Better Together leader.'
Thought this may be of interest - if you subscribe to the Red Box email from The Times, they'll you some rather nice short analysis and polling blurb. Here's a bit from today's
Exclusive: Public reject all-women shortlists
The purpose of all-women shortlists is to make a party look more representative of the population and therefore to present a more attractive offer to voters. But what if voters disapprove of the process? Might more be lost than gained?
An exclusive YouGov poll for Red Box reveals that the public firmly opposes all-women shortlists (writes Stephan Shakespeare). What is striking is that they are rejected by all groups: males by 63 per cent to 27 per cent, females by 51 per cent to 30, the young by 49 per cent to 26 and the old by 65 per cent to 28.
Politically, Conservatives oppose the idea by 70 per cent to 28, Liberal Democrats by 61 per cent to 30, and even Labour voters by 46 per cent to 40.
Every region, every social class, every party says "no thanks". YouGov
Mr. G, even if you were right (which I strongly disagree with), whether it infuriates the British is what counts, not the view from Scotland. If Yes wins one of Scotland's first acts might be to seriously piss off its biggest trading partner. And that's without considering the moral and financial implications of pretending debt's an optional extra as opposed to a moral and financial duty.
The 2015 General Election, south of the border, might become a pissing contest to see who can be toughest on the Scots.
Edited extra bit: Miss Plato, heartened and mildly surprised by that polling. Doubt it'll change Labour policy, but hopefully it'll put the Conservatives off aping the discriminatory practice.
all the threats to stop trade , no sharing the pound , barbed wire borders , etc etc. It is very sad to see such negativity fro England. Crowing that the English will cut our funding if we vote NO, how we are subsidised , scroungers , etc , etc. The newspapers are full of it.
Matthew Goodwin (@GoodwinMJ) 28/08/2014 09:46 Net migration rises to 243,000: the highest level since 2011 (& immigration is no.1 issue for voters) ow.ly/AOaoA via @MigObs
Mr. G, even if you were right (which I strongly disagree with), whether it infuriates the British is what counts, not the view from Scotland. If Yes wins one of Scotland's first acts might be to seriously piss off its biggest trading partner. And that's without considering the moral and financial implications of pretending debt's an optional extra as opposed to a moral and financial duty.
The 2015 General Election, south of the border, might become a pissing contest to see who can be toughest on the Scots.
Edited extra bit: Miss Plato, heartened and mildly surprised by that polling. Doubt it'll change Labour policy, but hopefully it'll put the Conservatives off aping the discriminatory practice.
So all that happy family stuff that you all witter on about is just hot air. Just because we want to run our own affairs you will immediately hate us and take all steps to hurt us. Very nice.
On topic, I have a feeling this may refer to the post debate ICM . If not, it's a bit of an odd way to announce a new indy poll.
'City backs Yes, says new poll
A POLL has shown a majority of support for a yes vote in Glasgow An ICM Poll shows 51% for Yes with 49% for No, bucking the national trend. The poll also found seven out of 10 Glaswegians thought Alex Salmond was the winner in this week's TV debate. It found 71% of people said the First Minister was the clear winner with 29% for Alistair Darling. IT also found 62% believed Mr Salmond to have the best arguments compared to 38% for the Better Together leader.'
Scottish children had always been punished for using Scots idioms and locutions in school.
Standard English was thumped into you. But by the 1980s, publishers wanted literature to reflect the demotic speech of ordinary folk.
"They realised there was a market for work in which we talked about ourselves in our own terms," says Liz Lochhead, one of Scotland's most celebrated poets and playwrights.
"And then with the first failed referendum [on devolution in 1979] there really was, afterwards, a sort of sense of depression, which then expressed itself in a sense of let's get on with it, and... a revival of Scottish identity."
Be careful with that -- there is a risk of stumbling into another topic on this thread: reduced social mobility as all the best jobs go to the posh Scots kids.
Ironically, in the 1980s Salmond himself distinguished the SNP's economic case for independence from the more culture-led Welsh Nats.
Mr. G, not sharing the pound in a currency union is not a threat of retribution. Why do you think British taxpayers should agree to be lender of last resort to financial institutions in a foreign country?
Recent history has shown currency unions to not necessarily be a good idea.
I don't believe there have been trade threats.
Spending per head is higher in Scotland than elsewhere. I believe it's also a net contributor, so that's swings and roundabouts.
The immigration news is ironic. Our economy's doing miles better at the minute than anywhere in Europe, and it's ruined a (very stupidly phrased) pledge by Cameron.
all the threats to stop trade , no sharing the pound , barbed wire borders , etc etc. It is very sad to see such negativity fro England. Crowing that the English will cut our funding if we vote NO, how we are subsidised , scroungers , etc , etc. The newspapers are full of it.
Unlike the threat to renege on the debt, eh Malky?
A man who went into a rarely used spare room in his mother's home was shocked to discover that 5,000 wasps had made a giant nest in the bed.
The nest, 3ft wide x 1.5ft deep, was still expanding and the insects had chewed through the mattress and pillows to build it.
When pest controller John Birkett was called to the scene he realised it had been growing for several months. His client, who lives alone in the five-bedroom house in Winchester, Hampshire, had not been in the spare bedroom for months.
Surely there must be something we can do that will discourage this waste of housing?
Mr. G, even if you were right (which I strongly disagree with), whether it infuriates the British is what counts, not the view from Scotland. If Yes wins one of Scotland's first acts might be to seriously piss off its biggest trading partner. And that's without considering the moral and financial implications of pretending debt's an optional extra as opposed to a moral and financial duty.
The 2015 General Election, south of the border, might become a pissing contest to see who can be toughest on the Scots.
Edited extra bit: Miss Plato, heartened and mildly surprised by that polling. Doubt it'll change Labour policy, but hopefully it'll put the Conservatives off aping the discriminatory practice.
Er, the EWNIish couldn't be exclusively 'British', would they, after indy? More importantly paying a due share of the debt IS and has always been plan A - withholding it is only if London expropriates the due Scottish share of assets/apparatus etc. including, very importantly, the chunk of the debt as held by the Bank of England [sic].
Just pointing out that (as at 0955) the BBC has illustrated increasing net immimgration numbers story with photo of people heading towards Gatwick South Terminal DEPARTURES.
Mr. G, not sharing the pound in a currency union is not a threat of retribution. Why do you think British taxpayers should agree to be lender of last resort to financial institutions in a foreign country?
Recent history has shown currency unions to not necessarily be a good idea.
I don't believe there have been trade threats.
Spending per head is higher in Scotland than elsewhere. I believe it's also a net contributor, so that's swings and roundabouts.
The immigration news is ironic. Our economy's doing miles better at the minute than anywhere in Europe, and it's ruined a (very stupidly phrased) pledge by Cameron.
MD, not the CU , they have said we cannot use it all , blatant lies. The CU will be a negotiation but the lying that we cannot use the pound at all is pathetic.
Mr. G, the UK's economic difficulties are largely caused by Scottish financial institutions and Chancellors. That's why any refusal by Scotland to take its fair share of the debt will absolutely infuriate the British (British, in that scenario, not including Scotland).
I do worry any break-up would be really quite hostile. Hard to see a separation being other than acrimonious.
PS : there is no separation we are merely cancelling the current political union
If the other party sees it as a separation, it's a separation. Starting with separate currency.
Matthew Goodwin (@GoodwinMJ) 28/08/2014 09:46 Net migration rises to 243,000: the highest level since 2011 (& immigration is no.1 issue for voters) ow.ly/AOaoA via @MigObs
Bloody hell. That's huge. It adds up to well over 1 million+ new immigrants settling into Britain each and every parliamentary term.
I keep reading about all these 'measures' the government are taking to control immigration, and complaints from employers and universities about them. Some Conservatives MPs are even campaigning to have the restrictions lifted.
So what on earth are they? What sort of effect are they having? How much higher would immigration be without them? Are they just shaving off the odd ten thousand here and there?
I'm starting to wonder if it's even possible to control migration properly. Even if we did leave the EU. Deeply depressing: the numbers are totally and utterly unsustainable.
all the threats to stop trade , no sharing the pound , barbed wire borders , etc etc. It is very sad to see such negativity fro England. Crowing that the English will cut our funding if we vote NO, how we are subsidised , scroungers , etc , etc. The newspapers are full of it.
Unlike the threat to renege on the debt, eh Malky?
Lying once again, how unionist. I think what your tiny mind is grasping for is, "sharing liabilities also means sharing assets". If you keep all the assets then you also have to keep the liabilities. Maybe worth getting an adult to explain it to you.
Mr. G, not sharing the pound in a currency union is not a threat of retribution. Why do you think British taxpayers should agree to be lender of last resort to financial institutions in a foreign country?
Recent history has shown currency unions to not necessarily be a good idea.
I don't believe there have been trade threats.
Spending per head is higher in Scotland than elsewhere. I believe it's also a net contributor, so that's swings and roundabouts.
The immigration news is ironic. Our economy's doing miles better at the minute than anywhere in Europe, and it's ruined a (very stupidly phrased) pledge by Cameron.
MD, not the CU , they have said we cannot use it all , blatant lies. The CU will be a negotiation but the lying that we cannot use the pound at all is pathetic.
Use the pound in the same way an Iraqi market trader can use the dollar, but there would be no lender of last resort.
all the threats to stop trade , no sharing the pound , barbed wire borders , etc etc. It is very sad to see such negativity fro England. Crowing that the English will cut our funding if we vote NO, how we are subsidised , scroungers , etc , etc. The newspapers are full of it.
Unlike the threat to renege on the debt, eh Malky?
Lying once again, how unionist. I think what your tiny mind is grasping for is, "sharing liabilities also means sharing assets". If you keep all the assets then you also have to keep the liabilities. Maybe worth getting an adult to explain it to you.
A man who went into a rarely used spare room in his mother's home was shocked to discover that 5,000 wasps had made a giant nest in the bed.
The nest, 3ft wide x 1.5ft deep, was still expanding and the insects had chewed through the mattress and pillows to build it.
When pest controller John Birkett was called to the scene he realised it had been growing for several months. His client, who lives alone in the five-bedroom house in Winchester, Hampshire, had not been in the spare bedroom for months.
Surely there must be something we can do that will discourage this waste of housing?
Why shouldn't a private individual be permitted to allocate capital inefficiently if they want to?
Patrick, you realise that your "readjustment" will kill a lot of people, don't you? The old and/or dim can't do it.
Erm....I don't really know to be honest. In a nation of 62 million I suspect that a journey from unsustainable deficit funded welfarism to a less generous balanced budget welfare state would indeed imply tougher circumstances for some and that implies shorter lifespans or some other route to earlier mortality. So probably the answer is - yes. Although my own clear view is that a free at point of use but privately delivered NHS could be both cheaper and better.
What I know for sure is the end point of an unsustainable 'can't go on so won't go on' approach to deficits and debt. Take a quick look at Argentina, Venezuela, Greece or any number of lefty bankruptopias. How many dead Greeks are there because their hospitals have no medicine? Tell me what has happened to Greek suicide rates since their socialist paradise ran out of other people's money. How's the Venezuelan NHS bearing up?
So for me choice appears to be a small but manageable risk of increased mortality in a journey back to reason vs an absolute dead certain spike in misery and death if we push on to the only place 'borrow forever' will lead. Which is the moral choice?
Mr. G, even if you were right (which I strongly disagree with), whether it infuriates the British is what counts, not the view from Scotland. If Yes wins one of Scotland's first acts might be to seriously piss off its biggest trading partner. And that's without considering the moral and financial implications of pretending debt's an optional extra as opposed to a moral and financial duty.
The 2015 General Election, south of the border, might become a pissing contest to see who can be toughest on the Scots.
Edited extra bit: Miss Plato, heartened and mildly surprised by that polling. Doubt it'll change Labour policy, but hopefully it'll put the Conservatives off aping the discriminatory practice.
Er, the EWNIish couldn't be exclusively 'British', would they, after indy?
of course not! The Scots can be British too - as many (particularly the young) already feel.....
all the threats to stop trade , no sharing the pound , barbed wire borders , etc etc. It is very sad to see such negativity fro England. Crowing that the English will cut our funding if we vote NO, how we are subsidised , scroungers , etc , etc. The newspapers are full of it.
Unlike the threat to renege on the debt, eh Malky?
Lying once again, how unionist. I think what your tiny mind is grasping for is, "sharing liabilities also means sharing assets". If you keep all the assets then you also have to keep the liabilities. Maybe worth getting an adult to explain it to you.
Just pointing out that (as at 0955) the BBC has illustrated increasing net immimgration numbers story with photo of people heading towards Gatwick South Terminal DEPARTURES.
Mr. Carnyx, whoa there, crazy horse. Expropriating British institutions? If you leave the union you leave the union. You don't get access to British institutions any more. That's what independence means. We wouldn't be denying Scots their dues, we'd be rejecting the insane notion British taxpayers should be lender of last resort to a foreign country (one which just voted to leave and which has a proportionally enormous financial sector).
Moreover, this position has been made crystal clear to the Scots ahead of the vote.
Mr. G, I don't want to hurt Scotland. If Scotland votes Yes I hope negotiations can be amicable and the break-up calm. I fear it won't be because of the peculiar view taken by Salmond et al. that you should be able to leave a country whilst cherrypicking institutions to remain part of, and that if you don't get everything you want, regardless of how mad the claim, you can simply just not to pay your dues.
Yes, Scotland could use the pound without a currency union. I'm sure Leeds, Norwich and, most of all, London would welcome the financial firms fleeing south across the border to be in a country with a lender of last resort.
Patrick, you realise that your "readjustment" will kill a lot of people, don't you? The old and/or dim can't do it.
Erm....I don't really know to be honest. In a nation of 62 million I suspect that a journey from unsustainable deficit funded welfarism to a less generous balanced budget welfare state would indeed imply tougher circumstances for some and that implies shorter lifespans or some other route to earlier mortality. So probably the answer is - yes. Although my own clear view is that a free at point of use but privately delivered NHS could be both cheaper and better.
What I know for sure is the end point of an unsustainable 'can't go on so won't go on' approach to deficits and debt. Take a quick look at Argentina, Venezuela, Greece or any number of lefty bankruptopias. How many dead Greeks are there because their hospitals have no medicine? Tell me what has happened to Greek suicide rates since their socialist paradise ran out of other people's money. How's the Venezuelan NHS bearing up?
So for me choice appears to be a small but manageable risk of increased mortality in a journey back to reason vs an absolute dead certain spike in misery and death if we push on to the only place 'borrow forever' will lead. Which is the moral choice?
I was just expressing concern about his interest in death and suggesting that he should talk to someone about it! (This is about the third or fourth comment along those lines he's made in the last couple of weeks).
Mr. G, the UK's economic difficulties are largely caused by Scottish financial institutions and Chancellors. That's why any refusal by Scotland to take its fair share of the debt will absolutely infuriate the British (British, in that scenario, not including Scotland).
I do worry any break-up would be really quite hostile. Hard to see a separation being other than acrimonious.
PS : there is no separation we are merely cancelling the current political union
If the other party sees it as a separation, it's a separation. Starting with separate currency.
Tory fan cannot accept anything other than Tory viewpoint
A man who went into a rarely used spare room in his mother's home was shocked to discover that 5,000 wasps had made a giant nest in the bed.
The nest, 3ft wide x 1.5ft deep, was still expanding and the insects had chewed through the mattress and pillows to build it.
When pest controller John Birkett was called to the scene he realised it had been growing for several months. His client, who lives alone in the five-bedroom house in Winchester, Hampshire, had not been in the spare bedroom for months.
Surely there must be something we can do that will discourage this waste of housing?
Why shouldn't a private individual be permitted to allocate capital inefficiently if they want to?
Agreed, but part of the inefficient behaviour is caused by government-induced distortions like taxing you on capital gains on most assets, but exempting your home. The house you live in should be taxed like any other asset.
A man who went into a rarely used spare room in his mother's home was shocked to discover that 5,000 wasps had made a giant nest in the bed.
The nest, 3ft wide x 1.5ft deep, was still expanding and the insects had chewed through the mattress and pillows to build it.
When pest controller John Birkett was called to the scene he realised it had been growing for several months. His client, who lives alone in the five-bedroom house in Winchester, Hampshire, had not been in the spare bedroom for months.
Surely there must be something we can do that will discourage this waste of housing?
Her house, her choice.
It's hardly worse than those who live in publicly owned homes with more space than they need; you know, the ones who rant and howl about the bedroom 'tax'.
Mr. Carnyx, whoa there, crazy horse. Expropriating British institutions? If you leave the union you leave the union. You don't get access to British institutions any more. That's what independence means. We wouldn't be denying Scots their dues, we'd be rejecting the insane notion British taxpayers should be lender of last resort to a foreign country (one which just voted to leave and which has a proportionally enormous financial sector).
Moreover, this position has been made crystal clear to the Scots ahead of the vote.
Mr. G, I don't want to hurt Scotland. If Scotland votes Yes I hope negotiations can be amicable and the break-up calm. I fear it won't be because of the peculiar view taken by Salmond et al. that you should be able to leave a country whilst cherrypicking institutions to remain part of, and that if you don't get everything you want, regardless of how mad the claim, you can simply just not to pay your dues.
Yes, Scotland could use the pound without a currency union. I'm sure Leeds, Norwich and, most of all, London would welcome the financial firms fleeing south across the border to be in a country with a lender of last resort.
Mr. Royale, I quite agree.
MD another stupid dream. Try using your intelligence instead of spouting political dogma from unionists. There will be no reason why anybody should flee and just as much chance that better conditions in Scotland will cause companies to flee England. Why do you think it will be all one way. PS: We own a part of all those institutions whether you like it or not and in one form or another will need to be given our fair share.
A man who went into a rarely used spare room in his mother's home was shocked to discover that 5,000 wasps had made a giant nest in the bed.
The nest, 3ft wide x 1.5ft deep, was still expanding and the insects had chewed through the mattress and pillows to build it.
When pest controller John Birkett was called to the scene he realised it had been growing for several months. His client, who lives alone in the five-bedroom house in Winchester, Hampshire, had not been in the spare bedroom for months.
Surely there must be something we can do that will discourage this waste of housing?
I lived in a student house many decades ago and we had a vacant room. A spider moved in and laid about 1000 eggs - which hatched and spun a web that engulfed the entire bedroom. It was the creepiest thing I've ever seen. No one else would tackle it as there were tiny spiders everywhere - I applied the hoover to them and golly, what persistent little blighters they were. I don't think we ever let that room out - we all just pretended the door wasn't there.
Mr. G, I was referring only to financial firms, and just because someone takes a different view to yourself does not mean they're not being intelligent.
Sequence as follows: Yes wins Currency union does not occur RBS and Lloyds move south at once, as largely owned by British taxpayers Financial firms wary of not having a safety net (lender of last resort) move south Financial firms with majority English/Welsh/Northern Irish depositors move south to avoid flight of deposits to British-based firms
If a currency union occurred, then the last point would still hold, and RBS/Lloyds as well, but a lender of last resort would see many firms remain in Scotland.
Edited extra bit: you can't have 8% of a currency. You can have it, have it with a currency union, or not have it. If you vote to leave a country you don't get to complain you can't have the same currency and central bank. Scotland's entitled to a share of assets and liabilities, not to ongoing access to British institutions.
That is certainly an important potential indicator of the situation. Another interesting thing which nobody on this site has (so far as I know) noted or explained is why the flow of defectors is all one way - from No to Yes, in particular in the Labour Party and associated unions.
It's possible that this is simply trivial leakage toward the wider political equilibrium (of 40/60-60/40 as you think fit) and that Party members' thinking is solidly Unionist. It may also simply reflect the practical point that party members will not wish to abandon the time invested in getting up the hierarchy, and the actual and potential rewards of this.
Certainly most of the publicised defectors or quasi-defectors of high rank (local council, provost, MP, MSP, etc.) are retired, i.e. no further advancement to look forward to. Henry McLeish for instance.
However, we have recently seen one sitting local councillor go for Yes:
As with the papers, too early to say - but it is worth watching, and what I do notice, and wonder about, is that there is no great flow the other way - I would certainly have expected Better Together to make a meal of any defectors in the opposite direction.
And another one.
'Former Labour minister endorses Labour for Independence.'
SLAB is similar to ISIS in its attitude to apostasy. I still think if we get a poll with Yes ahead in the next 3 weeks we may get a serving MP/MSP 'coming out'.
Net migration into the UK totalled 243,000 in the year up to March, up from 175,000 in the previous 12 months, official figures show.
So much for Cameron's promise immigration. Another promise broken: how many is that? And suckered Tories think he'll carry out his promise re EU referendum, if re-elected.
Mr. G, the UK's economic difficulties are largely caused by Scottish financial institutions and Chancellors. That's why any refusal by Scotland to take its fair share of the debt will absolutely infuriate the British (British, in that scenario, not including Scotland).
I do worry any break-up would be really quite hostile. Hard to see a separation being other than acrimonious.
PS : there is no separation we are merely cancelling the current political union
If the other party sees it as a separation, it's a separation. Starting with separate currency.
Tory fan cannot accept anything other than Tory viewpoint
So is all (or much) of rUK Tory? Last time they were polled they were 3:1 against a currency union.....
No for our entertainment, explain how the Scottish Finance Industry is going to work without a lender of last resort....
Mr. G, even if you were right (which I strongly disagree with), whether it infuriates the British is what counts, not the view from Scotland. If Yes wins one of Scotland's first acts might be to seriously piss off its biggest trading partner. And that's without considering the moral and financial implications of pretending debt's an optional extra as opposed to a moral and financial duty.
The 2015 General Election, south of the border, might become a pissing contest to see who can be toughest on the Scots.
Edited extra bit: Miss Plato, heartened and mildly surprised by that polling. Doubt it'll change Labour policy, but hopefully it'll put the Conservatives off aping the discriminatory practice.
So all that happy family stuff that you all witter on about is just hot air. Just because we want to run our own affairs you will immediately hate us and take all steps to hurt us. Very nice.
So far in this tedious thread you have used the phrases "cringing English" and "smug, pompous English arses".
And yet you simultaneously claim that
1, the case for independence has nothing to do with anti-Englishness, and
2, after a YES vote by Scots, the "cringing, smug, pompous English arses" will be really keen to help Scots, and be nice to Scotland, agreeing to a currency union, etc
It's an interesting combination of thoughts - for any pb psychiatrists.
Thread just got tedious when pompous tedious me me arse joined.
A man who went into a rarely used spare room in his mother's home was shocked to discover that 5,000 wasps had made a giant nest in the bed.
The nest, 3ft wide x 1.5ft deep, was still expanding and the insects had chewed through the mattress and pillows to build it.
When pest controller John Birkett was called to the scene he realised it had been growing for several months. His client, who lives alone in the five-bedroom house in Winchester, Hampshire, had not been in the spare bedroom for months.
Surely there must be something we can do that will discourage this waste of housing?
Why shouldn't a private individual be permitted to allocate capital inefficiently if they want to?
Agreed, but part of the inefficient behaviour is caused by government-induced distortions like taxing you on capital gains on most assets, but exempting your home. The house you live in should be taxed like any other asset.
I'd tend to look at an annual property tax rather than capital gains - the problem with capital gains is that it means that if you sell having owned for a long period it is extremely difficult to afford a comparable or larger property.
I keep reading about all these 'measures' the government are taking to control immigration, and complaints from employers and universities about them. Some Conservatives MPs are even campaigning to have the restrictions lifted.
So what on earth are they? What sort of effect are they having? How much higher would immigration be without them? Are they just shaving off the odd ten thousand here and there?
I'm starting to wonder if it's even possible to control migration properly. Even if we did leave the EU. Deeply depressing: the numbers are totally and utterly unsustainable.
The Tory "measures" addressed tabloid fantasies about what motivates people to migrate to the UK.
They had zero to do with reality.
The real motivations therefore are very much still in place (work oportunities mainly, but ease of travel thanks to freedom of movement also a major factor with rank tabloid obsessions like benefits very much on the margins if thought about at all).
Mr. G, even if you were right (which I strongly disagree with), whether it infuriates the British is what counts, not the view from Scotland. If Yes wins one of Scotland's first acts might be to seriously piss off its biggest trading partner. And that's without considering the moral and financial implications of pretending debt's an optional extra as opposed to a moral and financial duty.
The 2015 General Election, south of the border, might become a pissing contest to see who can be toughest on the Scots.
Edited extra bit: Miss Plato, heartened and mildly surprised by that polling. Doubt it'll change Labour policy, but hopefully it'll put the Conservatives off aping the discriminatory practice.
So all that happy family stuff that you all witter on about is just hot air. Just because we want to run our own affairs you will immediately hate us and take all steps to hurt us. Very nice.
So far in this tedious thread you have used the phrases "cringing English" and "smug, pompous English arses".
And yet you simultaneously claim that
1, the case for independence has nothing to do with anti-Englishness, and
2, after a YES vote by Scots, the "cringing, smug, pompous English arses" will be really keen to help Scots, and be nice to Scotland, agreeing to a currency union, etc
It's an interesting combination of thoughts - for any pb psychiatrists.
Thread just got tedious when pompous tedious me me arse joined.
A man who went into a rarely used spare room in his mother's home was shocked to discover that 5,000 wasps had made a giant nest in the bed.
The nest, 3ft wide x 1.5ft deep, was still expanding and the insects had chewed through the mattress and pillows to build it.
When pest controller John Birkett was called to the scene he realised it had been growing for several months. His client, who lives alone in the five-bedroom house in Winchester, Hampshire, had not been in the spare bedroom for months.
Surely there must be something we can do that will discourage this waste of housing?
An Englishman's home is his castle, his to do with as he pleases.
Perhaps it's got to the point where people really couldn't care less whether Scotland slings their hook or not?
Well, there are certainly hundreds, nay thousands, of posts & tweets out there from folk saying they couldn't care less, often containing a combination of words including scroungers, Jock, bastards, c**ts, junkies, freeeedom, braveheart & deep fried mars bars.
A man who went into a rarely used spare room in his mother's home was shocked to discover that 5,000 wasps had made a giant nest in the bed.
The nest, 3ft wide x 1.5ft deep, was still expanding and the insects had chewed through the mattress and pillows to build it.
When pest controller John Birkett was called to the scene he realised it had been growing for several months. His client, who lives alone in the five-bedroom house in Winchester, Hampshire, had not been in the spare bedroom for months.
Surely there must be something we can do that will discourage this waste of housing?
I lived in a student house many decades ago and we had a vacant room. A spider moved in and laid about 1000 eggs - which hatched and spun a web that engulfed the entire bedroom. It was the creepiest thing I've ever seen. No one else would tackle it as there were tiny spiders everywhere - I applied the hoover to them and golly, what persistent little blighters they were. I don't think we ever let that room out - we all just pretended the door wasn't there.
Presume you emptied the hoover as well. Today the refuse collectors would have refused to empty your bin as being of the wrong content.
This sounds like a good basis for a horror movie script as the spiders who you do not manage to hoover up grow exponentially and try to eat their way through the door/make webs strong enough to pull the door open.
I wonder whether the refusal by the PCC in South Yorkshire to resign will see the proposed recall mechanism for Westminster MPs widened to cover all elected positions?
Mr. G, the UK's economic difficulties are largely caused by Scottish financial institutions and Chancellors. That's why any refusal by Scotland to take its fair share of the debt will absolutely infuriate the British (British, in that scenario, not including Scotland).
I do worry any break-up would be really quite hostile. Hard to see a separation being other than acrimonious.
PS : there is no separation we are merely cancelling the current political union
If the other party sees it as a separation, it's a separation. Starting with separate currency.
Tory fan cannot accept anything other than Tory viewpoint
So is all (or much) of rUK Tory? Last time they were polled they were 3:1 against a currency union.....
No for our entertainment, explain how the Scottish Finance Industry is going to work without a lender of last resort....
Tartan clad unicorns will emerge from the Glens laden with baskets of long lost Darien gold.
Mr. G, I was referring only to financial firms, and just because someone takes a different view to yourself does not mean they're not being intelligent.
Sequence as follows: Yes wins Currency union does not occur RBS and Lloyds move south at once, as largely owned by British taxpayers Financial firms wary of not having a safety net (lender of last resort) move south Financial firms with majority English/Welsh/Northern Irish depositors move south to avoid flight of deposits to British-based firms
If a currency union occurred, then the last point would still hold, and RBS/Lloyds as well, but a lender of last resort would see many firms remain in Scotland.
Edited extra bit: you can't have 8% of a currency. You can have it, have it with a currency union, or not have it. If you vote to leave a country you don't get to complain you can't have the same currency and central bank. Scotland's entitled to a share of assets and liabilities, not to ongoing access to British institutions.
MD, Lloyds and RBS are already down south , do you think Nat West disappeared or Halifax. They are already UK banks and will see little to no change after independence, they may shuffle a few brass plates and mix of brands in either country. They are not going to pull out and lose business. I am with a Spanish bank online under UK regulation , it makes no difference whatsoever what country their headquarters are in. It is a stupid stupid red herring put out by imbeciles.
Matthew Goodwin (@GoodwinMJ) 28/08/2014 09:46 Net migration rises to 243,000: the highest level since 2011 (& immigration is no.1 issue for voters) ow.ly/AOaoA via @MigObs
Bloody hell. That's huge. It adds up to well over 1 million+ new immigrants settling into Britain each and every parliamentary term.
I keep reading about all these 'measures' the government are taking to control immigration, and complaints from employers and universities about them. Some Conservatives MPs are even campaigning to have the restrictions lifted.
So what on earth are they? What sort of effect are they having? How much higher would immigration be without them? Are they just shaving off the odd ten thousand here and there?
I'm starting to wonder if it's even possible to control migration properly. Even if we did leave the EU. Deeply depressing: the numbers are totally and utterly unsustainable.
The wealthier East Asian countries show where there is a will there is a way.
Beginning to see things fall apart. Housing with beds in sheds, school places , beggars etc. Deeply disturbed as to what the future holds.
A man who went into a rarely used spare room in his mother's home was shocked to discover that 5,000 wasps had made a giant nest in the bed.
The nest, 3ft wide x 1.5ft deep, was still expanding and the insects had chewed through the mattress and pillows to build it.
When pest controller John Birkett was called to the scene he realised it had been growing for several months. His client, who lives alone in the five-bedroom house in Winchester, Hampshire, had not been in the spare bedroom for months.
Surely there must be something we can do that will discourage this waste of housing?
An Englishman's home is his castle, his to do with as he pleases.
Private property rights.
I'd generally agree with that principle but given the housing shortage in the UK there's something to be said for the government's innovative "Fill Excessive Spare Bedrooms With Wasps" scheme.
Mr. G, even if you were right (which I strongly disagree with), whether it infuriates the British is what counts, not the view from Scotland. If Yes wins one of Scotland's first acts might be to seriously piss off its biggest trading partner. And that's without considering the moral and financial implications of pretending debt's an optional extra as opposed to a moral and financial duty.
The 2015 General Election, south of the border, might become a pissing contest to see who can be toughest on the Scots.
Edited extra bit: Miss Plato, heartened and mildly surprised by that polling. Doubt it'll change Labour policy, but hopefully it'll put the Conservatives off aping the discriminatory practice.
So all that happy family stuff that you all witter on about is just hot air. Just because we want to run our own affairs you will immediately hate us and take all steps to hurt us. Very nice.
So far in this tedious thread you have used the phrases "cringing English" and "smug, pompous English arses".
And yet you simultaneously claim that
1, the case for independence has nothing to do with anti-Englishness, and
2, after a YES vote by Scots, the "cringing, smug, pompous English arses" will be really keen to help Scots, and be nice to Scotland, agreeing to a currency union, etc
It's an interesting combination of thoughts - for any pb psychiatrists.
Thread just got tedious when pompous tedious me me arse joined.
tedious is as tedious does
Agree - appear to be in a circular argument - just going round and round in ever decreasing circles.
Here's a question: In which currency would Scottish mortgages be repayable?
Say you borrowed 150k for a house in delightful Auchtermuchtie. Then a YES comes along. Followed by a 'use the pound anyway'. No drama. But the temporary practical arrangement heads towards the serious option where Scotland has its own money, its own central bank, its own lender of last resort - and the Groat is born (but pegged to the Pound). Probably still no drama. But the peg would come under pressure - fixed exchange regimes don't work (ask Norman Lamont). Then the Groat floats.
So what currency is Mrs McTavish now being asked to service her mortgage in with the Bank of Kikcaldy?
Who gets to take the loss or gain of exchange difference if the mortgage is 'Groatised' during the peg period? The bank or Mrs McTavish?
Malc - you also don't seem to understand what an asset is. An institution is not an asset.
Patrick it is all political speak , we all know what is what. Assets and institutions are joint owned and need to be shared , we can dance round the handbags using political words to try and obfuscate this point. I am not going to be pedantic about verbage. I am sure you do really know what I mean.
A man who went into a rarely used spare room in his mother's home was shocked to discover that 5,000 wasps had made a giant nest in the bed.
The nest, 3ft wide x 1.5ft deep, was still expanding and the insects had chewed through the mattress and pillows to build it.
When pest controller John Birkett was called to the scene he realised it had been growing for several months. His client, who lives alone in the five-bedroom house in Winchester, Hampshire, had not been in the spare bedroom for months.
Surely there must be something we can do that will discourage this waste of housing?
Why shouldn't a private individual be permitted to allocate capital inefficiently if they want to?
Agreed, but part of the inefficient behaviour is caused by government-induced distortions like taxing you on capital gains on most assets, but exempting your home. The house you live in should be taxed like any other asset.
I'd tend to look at an annual property tax rather than capital gains - the problem with capital gains is that it means that if you sell having owned for a long period it is extremely difficult to afford a comparable or larger property.
But the current tax regime makes no sense.
A property tax would be wildly unpopular, and rightly so. Being free to own one's own home is what this country is all about. Sinister proposal.
Big trouble for Cameron on immigration-2010."If we don't deliver our side of the bargain,vote us out in 5 years time". He's just made an offer we can't refuse.
A man who went into a rarely used spare room in his mother's home was shocked to discover that 5,000 wasps had made a giant nest in the bed.
The nest, 3ft wide x 1.5ft deep, was still expanding and the insects had chewed through the mattress and pillows to build it.
When pest controller John Birkett was called to the scene he realised it had been growing for several months. His client, who lives alone in the five-bedroom house in Winchester, Hampshire, had not been in the spare bedroom for months.
Surely there must be something we can do that will discourage this waste of housing?
An Englishman's home is his castle, his to do with as he pleases.
Private property rights.
I'd generally agree with that principle but given the housing shortage in the UK there's something to be said for the government's innovative "Fill Excessive Spare Bedrooms With Wasps" scheme.
We have an immigration problem not a housing problem. About a million illegals in this country, deporting them would be a start.
Mr. G, the UK's economic difficulties are largely caused by Scottish financial institutions and Chancellors. That's why any refusal by Scotland to take its fair share of the debt will absolutely infuriate the British (British, in that scenario, not including Scotland).
I do worry any break-up would be really quite hostile. Hard to see a separation being other than acrimonious.
PS : there is no separation we are merely cancelling the current political union
If the other party sees it as a separation, it's a separation. Starting with separate currency.
Tory fan cannot accept anything other than Tory viewpoint
So is all (or much) of rUK Tory? Last time they were polled they were 3:1 against a currency union.....
No for our entertainment, explain how the Scottish Finance Industry is going to work without a lender of last resort....
Tartan clad unicorns will emerge from the Glens laden with baskets of long lost Darien gold.
There we have the level of knowledge of Scotland and the referendum discussion in England, you prove my point.
Mr. G, the UK's economic difficulties are largely caused by Scottish financial institutions and Chancellors. That's why any refusal by Scotland to take its fair share of the debt will absolutely infuriate the British (British, in that scenario, not including Scotland).
I do worry any break-up would be really quite hostile. Hard to see a separation being other than acrimonious.
PS : there is no separation we are merely cancelling the current political union
If the other party sees it as a separation, it's a separation. Starting with separate currency.
Its pretty much pointless tying to reason with him. I must say it worries me if its genuine and this sort of attitude might be prevalent elsewhere in the elecotrate.
I keep reading about all these 'measures' the government are taking to control immigration, and complaints from employers and universities about them. Some Conservatives MPs are even campaigning to have the restrictions lifted.
So what on earth are they? What sort of effect are they having? How much higher would immigration be without them? Are they just shaving off the odd ten thousand here and there?
I'm starting to wonder if it's even possible to control migration properly. Even if we did leave the EU. Deeply depressing: the numbers are totally and utterly unsustainable.
The Tory "measures" addressed tabloid fantasies about what motivates people to migrate to the UK.
They had zero to do with reality.
The real motivations therefore are very much still in place (work oportunities mainly, but ease of travel thanks to freedom of movement also a major factor with rank tabloid obsessions like benefits very much on the margins if thought about at all).
I wouldn't say the number 1 issue of concern to voters (with around three quarters wanting to see an absolute reduction in numbers) is a rank tabloid obsession that's very much on the margins.
I would agree with you that there are plenty of Tories who pay lip service to controlling immigration, as an electoral necessity, but with neither the conviction or the energy to do anything much about it. Of course, it's easy to play off that into a spin-line that it benefits them as wealthy middle-class/upper middle-class professionals, thereby reinforcing further the "Tories benefit only the rich" narrative.
Mr. G, I was referring only to financial firms, and just because someone takes a different view to yourself does not mean they're not being intelligent.
Sequence as follows: Yes wins Currency union does not occur RBS and Lloyds move south at once, as largely owned by British taxpayers Financial firms wary of not having a safety net (lender of last resort) move south Financial firms with majority English/Welsh/Northern Irish depositors move south to avoid flight of deposits to British-based firms
If a currency union occurred, then the last point would still hold, and RBS/Lloyds as well, but a lender of last resort would see many firms remain in Scotland.
Edited extra bit: you can't have 8% of a currency. You can have it, have it with a currency union, or not have it. If you vote to leave a country you don't get to complain you can't have the same currency and central bank. Scotland's entitled to a share of assets and liabilities, not to ongoing access to British institutions.
MD, Lloyds and RBS are already down south , do you think Nat West disappeared or Halifax. They are already UK banks and will see little to no change after independence, they may shuffle a few brass plates and mix of brands in either country. They are not going to pull out and lose business. I am with a Spanish bank online under UK regulation , it makes no difference whatsoever what country their headquarters are in. It is a stupid stupid red herring put out by imbeciles.
The difference will be about 5,000 well paid jobs in Edinburgh, plus the knock on impact on housing and the service sector. That just from RBS and Lloyds; others will add more.
Clearly not devastating in the context of Scotland, but very significant for Edinburgh and one of many challenges that a new iScot will face.
(the 8% of GDP that people cite is misleading because it includes the local branch operations for RBS and BoS which will, of course, need to remain in some form or other)
Here's a question: In which currency would Scottish mortgages be repayable?
Say you borrowed 150k for a house in delightful Auchtermuchtie. Then a YES comes along. Followed by a 'use the pound anyway'. No drama. But the temporary practical arrangement heads towards the serious option where Scotland has its own money, its own central bank, its own lender of last resort - and the Groat is born (but pegged to the Pound). Probably still no drama. But the peg would come under pressure - fixed exchange regimes don't work (ask Norman Lamont). Then the Groat floats.
So what currency is Mrs McTavish now being asked to service her mortgage in with the Bank of Kikcaldy?
Who gets to take the loss or gain of exchange difference if the mortgage is 'Groatised' during the peg period? The bank or Mrs McTavish?
Patrick I would presume that it would remain as it is and would be payable in pounds sterling. Be a bit like the Euro mortgages that were popular for a while, great as long as parity remains but if the currencies diverse it would be an issue. Presume people would at some point need to choose which way to go and is likely to mean new products on the market in both countries ( by the same UK banks ) under various brands. One of many interesting questions and opportunities that will arise and which will be likely to enrich both countries.
Here's a question: In which currency would Scottish mortgages be repayable?
Say you borrowed 150k for a house in delightful Auchtermuchtie. Then a YES comes along. Followed by a 'use the pound anyway'. No drama. But the temporary practical arrangement heads towards the serious option where Scotland has its own money, its own central bank, its own lender of last resort - and the Groat is born (but pegged to the Pound). Probably still no drama. But the peg would come under pressure - fixed exchange regimes don't work (ask Norman Lamont). Then the Groat floats.
So what currency is Mrs McTavish now being asked to service her mortgage in with the Bank of Kikcaldy?
Who gets to take the loss or gain of exchange difference if the mortgage is 'Groatised' during the peg period? The bank or Mrs McTavish?
It's clear that the main motivator of YES support is emotive. It's also clear that the bulwark of NO support is an appeal to pragmatic, everyday economic common sense.
As someone who is equally emotional about the UK, our flag and the common bonds across our island, I have been disappointed in the absence of a positive emotional appeal to British identity in the latter, whilst also being surprised at the sheer aggression and lack of sobriety in the former.
A man who went into a rarely used spare room in his mother's home was shocked to discover that 5,000 wasps had made a giant nest in the bed.
The nest, 3ft wide x 1.5ft deep, was still expanding and the insects had chewed through the mattress and pillows to build it.
When pest controller John Birkett was called to the scene he realised it had been growing for several months. His client, who lives alone in the five-bedroom house in Winchester, Hampshire, had not been in the spare bedroom for months.
Surely there must be something we can do that will discourage this waste of housing?
Why shouldn't a private individual be permitted to allocate capital inefficiently if they want to?
Agreed, but part of the inefficient behaviour is caused by government-induced distortions like taxing you on capital gains on most assets, but exempting your home. The house you live in should be taxed like any other asset.
I'd tend to look at an annual property tax rather than capital gains - the problem with capital gains is that it means that if you sell having owned for a long period it is extremely difficult to afford a comparable or larger property.
But the current tax regime makes no sense.
A property tax would be wildly unpopular, and rightly so. Being free to own one's own home is what this country is all about. Sinister proposal.
Undertaxation of residential assets leads to misallocation of capital and encourages high property prices.
I'd rather charge a flat rate property tax - say 0.5% - and then use the money raised to get rid of much more damaging taxes (including slab stamp duty, employer NICs. etc).
The immigration news is ironic. Our economy's doing miles better at the minute than anywhere in Europe, and it's ruined a (very stupidly phrased) pledge by Cameron.
Why stupidly phrased?
In my view it was very clever to make a pledge on net migration, as it gives him more levers that he can control, which is important when he can't do very much at all to reduce immigration from the EU.
He could have met his pledge by increasing emigration, but he has completely failed to make it budge.
Am I correct that I heard that Keith Vaz is going to recall the Rotherham councillors to re-examine their evidence in the light of the publication of the report?
Mr. G, I was referring only to financial firms, and just because someone takes a different view to yourself does not mean they're not being intelligent.
Sequence as follows: Yes wins Currency union does not occur RBS and Lloyds move south at once, as largely owned by British taxpayers Financial firms wary of not having a safety net (lender of last resort) move south Financial firms with majority English/Welsh/Northern Irish depositors move south to avoid flight of deposits to British-based firms
If a currency union occurred, then the last point would still hold, and RBS/Lloyds as well, but a lender of last resort would see many firms remain in Scotland.
Edited extra bit: you can't have 8% of a currency. You can have it, have it with a currency union, or not have it. If you vote to leave a country you don't get to complain you can't have the same currency and central bank. Scotland's entitled to a share of assets and liabilities, not to ongoing access to British institutions.
MD, Lloyds and RBS are already down south , do you think Nat West disappeared or Halifax. They are already UK banks and will see little to no change after independence, they may shuffle a few brass plates and mix of brands in either country. They are not going to pull out and lose business. I am with a Spanish bank online under UK regulation , it makes no difference whatsoever what country their headquarters are in. It is a stupid stupid red herring put out by imbeciles.
The difference will be about 5,000 well paid jobs in Edinburgh, plus the knock on impact on housing and the service sector. That just from RBS and Lloyds; others will add more.
Clearly not devastating in the context of Scotland, but very significant for Edinburgh and one of many challenges that a new iScot will face.
(the 8% of GDP that people cite is misleading because it includes the local branch operations for RBS and BoS which will, of course, need to remain in some form or other)
Matthew Goodwin (@GoodwinMJ) 28/08/2014 09:46 Net migration rises to 243,000: the highest level since 2011 (& immigration is no.1 issue for voters) ow.ly/AOaoA via @MigObs
Bloody hell. That's huge. It adds up to well over 1 million+ new immigrants settling into Britain each and every parliamentary term.
I keep reading about all these 'measures' the government are taking to control immigration, and complaints from employers and universities about them. Some Conservatives MPs are even campaigning to have the restrictions lifted.
So what on earth are they? What sort of effect are they having? How much higher would immigration be without them? Are they just shaving off the odd ten thousand here and there?
I'm starting to wonder if it's even possible to control migration properly. Even if we did leave the EU. Deeply depressing: the numbers are totally and utterly unsustainable.
The wealthier East Asian countries show where there is a will there is a way.
Beginning to see things fall apart. Housing with beds in sheds, school places , beggars etc. Deeply disturbed as to what the future holds.
Indeed. The UK has world-class universities that will (and should) always attract large numbers of overseas students who wish to learn in the mother of all English speaking countries. In addition, London will always have a large and transient set of workers as part of its status as the global hub city.
I fail to see why either of those can't also be reconciled with having proper firm border controls. It shouldn't be difficult to ensure that those who do come here on temporary visas are (indeed) temporary.
Mr. G, I was referring only to financial firms, and just because someone takes a different view to yourself does not mean they're not being intelligent.
Sequence as follows: Yes wins Currency union does not occur RBS and Lloyds move south at once, as largely owned by British taxpayers Financial firms wary of not having a safety net (lender of last resort) move south Financial firms with majority English/Welsh/Northern Irish depositors move south to avoid flight of deposits to British-based firms
If a currency union occurred, then the last point would still hold, and RBS/Lloyds as well, but a lender of last resort would see many firms remain in Scotland.
Edited extra bit: you can't have 8% of a currency. You can have it, have it with a currency union, or not have it. If you vote to leave a country you don't get to complain you can't have the same currency and central bank. Scotland's entitled to a share of assets and liabilities, not to ongoing access to British institutions.
MD, Lloyds and RBS are already down south , do you think Nat West disappeared or Halifax. They are already UK banks and will see little to no change after independence, they may shuffle a few brass plates and mix of brands in either country. They are not going to pull out and lose business. I am with a Spanish bank online under UK regulation , it makes no difference whatsoever what country their headquarters are in. It is a stupid stupid red herring put out by imbeciles.
The difference will be about 5,000 well paid jobs in Edinburgh, plus the knock on impact on housing and the service sector. That just from RBS and Lloyds; others will add more.
Clearly not devastating in the context of Scotland, but very significant for Edinburgh and one of many challenges that a new iScot will face.
(the 8% of GDP that people cite is misleading because it includes the local branch operations for RBS and BoS which will, of course, need to remain in some form or other)
Charles, utter rubbish , stop trying to kid that they will move jobs and cost themselves a fortune. All the important jobs are already in London , at most a handful would move. They could not get 5000 experienced people down south and would not be able to spend the amount it would take to house and pay them. Pathetic scaremongering Tory crap as usual.
PS: a lot of our GDP is currently registered in London as you will well know, it will take a big jump when it and the oil gets registered in Edinburgh instead.
Mr. Me, surely the reverse is true? We can (or should be able to...) control who enters, but we can hardly prevent those wishing to emigrate from doing so.
A man who went into a rarely used spare room in his mother's home was shocked to discover that 5,000 wasps had made a giant nest in the bed.
The nest, 3ft wide x 1.5ft deep, was still expanding and the insects had chewed through the mattress and pillows to build it.
When pest controller John Birkett was called to the scene he realised it had been growing for several months. His client, who lives alone in the five-bedroom house in Winchester, Hampshire, had not been in the spare bedroom for months.
Surely there must be something we can do that will discourage this waste of housing?
I lived in a student house many decades ago and we had a vacant room. A spider moved in and laid about 1000 eggs - which hatched and spun a web that engulfed the entire bedroom. It was the creepiest thing I've ever seen. No one else would tackle it as there were tiny spiders everywhere - I applied the hoover to them and golly, what persistent little blighters they were. I don't think we ever let that room out - we all just pretended the door wasn't there.
Presume you emptied the hoover as well. Today the refuse collectors would have refused to empty your bin as being of the wrong content.
This sounds like a good basis for a horror movie script as the spiders who you do not manage to hoover up grow exponentially and try to eat their way through the door/make webs strong enough to pull the door open.
Thankfully, it was before the Age of Dyson, so the paper bag went in the bin with a big squirt of ant powder/wasp killer. I assume that did the trick as it wasn't Arachnopocalypse on bin day!
Speaking of creepy things - ever had your house fumigated? We had ours done back in the 90s for woodworm and the next morning there were about 10000 dead woodlice on the bare floors. I'm not keen on woodlice but never scared of them. Give me 10000 in the house - ARGH!!!! All crunchy underfoot on the way to get the hoover too - urgh... gets shivers just thinking about it.
A man who went into a rarely used spare room in his mother's home was shocked to discover that 5,000 wasps had made a giant nest in the bed.
The nest, 3ft wide x 1.5ft deep, was still expanding and the insects had chewed through the mattress and pillows to build it.
When pest controller John Birkett was called to the scene he realised it had been growing for several months. His client, who lives alone in the five-bedroom house in Winchester, Hampshire, had not been in the spare bedroom for months.
Surely there must be something we can do that will discourage this waste of housing?
Why shouldn't a private individual be permitted to allocate capital inefficiently if they want to?
Agreed, but part of the inefficient behaviour is caused by government-induced distortions like taxing you on capital gains on most assets, but exempting your home. The house you live in should be taxed like any other asset.
I'd tend to look at an annual property tax rather than capital gains - the problem with capital gains is that it means that if you sell having owned for a long period it is extremely difficult to afford a comparable or larger property.
But the current tax regime makes no sense.
A property tax would be wildly unpopular, and rightly so. Being free to own one's own home is what this country is all about. Sinister proposal.
Undertaxation of residential assets leads to misallocation of capital and encourages high property prices.
I'd rather charge a flat rate property tax - say 0.5% - and then use the money raised to get rid of much more damaging taxes (including slab stamp duty, employer NICs. etc).
Does it? People want to own their own homes and wish to then stay in them.
You sound like a Bolshevik complaining about grain hoarding by the Kulaks.
Comments
Remember Marquee Mark's Maxim: money flees taxation. That is as true of the small number of top rate tax payers in Scotland as it is of those international oil companies who will just as easily relocate to the armpits of Africa - if the tax rates are better.... La Belle France under Hollande should be a stark reminder to the SNP of the mobility of money.
It will be an interesting day when Salmon has to go on TV for his emergency announcement that "because all the rich folk have fecked off, with immediate effect general taxation rates have to start at 40% for all..."
Such will be the price of being Scottish. Well worth paying, I'm sure all Scots will agree - especially those 49% who voted against independence...
That said, there is a clear and long tradition of emigration in Scotland - multiple aunts and uncles went abroad and returned to visit, visibly better off than us.
I was delighted in later life to discover that my childhood pronunciation of "hoose" was in fact the country wide one, until the great vowel shift transformed it into "howse"....
If anyone wants to back it at 2/9 please get in touch
I do worry any break-up would be really quite hostile. Hard to see a separation being other than acrimonious.
Alex Salmond = Nigel Farage's best friend ?
PS : there is no separation we are merely cancelling the current political union
"Compare these two
Hope versus despair"
Quite nice but they could have used this that I shot in the early 90's and saved themselves some money
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIIFcBfnSJE&feature=youtu.be
It's possible that this is simply trivial leakage toward the wider political equilibrium (of 40/60-60/40 as you think fit) and that Party members' thinking is solidly Unionist. It may also simply reflect the practical point that party members will not wish to abandon the time invested in getting up the hierarchy, and the actual and potential rewards of this.
Certainly most of the publicised defectors or quasi-defectors of high rank (local council, provost, MP, MSP, etc.) are retired, i.e. no further advancement to look forward to. Henry McLeish for instance.
However, we have recently seen one sitting local councillor go for Yes:
http://www.greenocktelegraph.co.uk/news/greenock/articles/2014/08/25/507943-inverclyde-councillor-to-defy-labour-party-line-and-vote-yes-/
As with the papers, too early to say - but it is worth watching, and what I do notice, and wonder about, is that there is no great flow the other way - I would certainly have expected Better Together to make a meal of any defectors in the opposite direction.
'City backs Yes, says new poll
A POLL has shown a majority of support for a yes vote in Glasgow
An ICM Poll shows 51% for Yes with 49% for No, bucking the national trend.
The poll also found seven out of 10 Glaswegians thought Alex Salmond was the winner in this week's TV debate.
It found 71% of people said the First Minister was the clear winner with 29% for Alistair Darling.
IT also found 62% believed Mr Salmond to have the best arguments compared to 38% for the Better Together leader.'
http://tinyurl.com/kbjnm47
The 2015 General Election, south of the border, might become a pissing contest to see who can be toughest on the Scots.
Edited extra bit: Miss Plato, heartened and mildly surprised by that polling. Doubt it'll change Labour policy, but hopefully it'll put the Conservatives off aping the discriminatory practice.
It is very sad to see such negativity fro England. Crowing that the English will cut our funding if we vote NO, how we are subsidised , scroungers , etc , etc. The newspapers are full of it.
28/08/2014 09:46
Net migration rises to 243,000: the highest level since 2011 (& immigration is no.1 issue for voters) ow.ly/AOaoA via @MigObs
@BBCBreaking·14 mins
Net migration to Britain totalled 243,000 in year to March, up from 175,000 in the previous year http://bbc.in/1rBLY8h
@DuncanWeldon·5m
Large pickup in EU migration to UK. Given relative economic & labour market performance - hardly surprising.
Ironically, in the 1980s Salmond himself distinguished the SNP's economic case for independence from the more culture-led Welsh Nats.
Recent history has shown currency unions to not necessarily be a good idea.
I don't believe there have been trade threats.
Spending per head is higher in Scotland than elsewhere. I believe it's also a net contributor, so that's swings and roundabouts.
The immigration news is ironic. Our economy's doing miles better at the minute than anywhere in Europe, and it's ruined a (very stupidly phrased) pledge by Cameron.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28964323
I keep reading about all these 'measures' the government are taking to control immigration, and complaints from employers and universities about them. Some Conservatives MPs are even campaigning to have the restrictions lifted.
So what on earth are they? What sort of effect are they having? How much higher would immigration be without them? Are they just shaving off the odd ten thousand here and there?
I'm starting to wonder if it's even possible to control migration properly. Even if we did leave the EU. Deeply depressing: the numbers are totally and utterly unsustainable.
Maybe worth getting an adult to explain it to you.
Hardly a major worry, Dave has promised it will be less than 100,000 next year.
Cast Iron Cammie strikes again.
Patrick, you realise that your "readjustment" will kill a lot of people, don't you? The old and/or dim can't do it.
Erm....I don't really know to be honest. In a nation of 62 million I suspect that a journey from unsustainable deficit funded welfarism to a less generous balanced budget welfare state would indeed imply tougher circumstances for some and that implies shorter lifespans or some other route to earlier mortality. So probably the answer is - yes. Although my own clear view is that a free at point of use but privately delivered NHS could be both cheaper and better.
What I know for sure is the end point of an unsustainable 'can't go on so won't go on' approach to deficits and debt. Take a quick look at Argentina, Venezuela, Greece or any number of lefty bankruptopias. How many dead Greeks are there because their hospitals have no medicine? Tell me what has happened to Greek suicide rates since their socialist paradise ran out of other people's money. How's the Venezuelan NHS bearing up?
So for me choice appears to be a small but manageable risk of increased mortality in a journey back to reason vs an absolute dead certain spike in misery and death if we push on to the only place 'borrow forever' will lead. Which is the moral choice?
Perhaps it's got to the point where people really couldn't care less whether Scotland slings their hook or not?
;-)
Moreover, this position has been made crystal clear to the Scots ahead of the vote.
Mr. G, I don't want to hurt Scotland. If Scotland votes Yes I hope negotiations can be amicable and the break-up calm. I fear it won't be because of the peculiar view taken by Salmond et al. that you should be able to leave a country whilst cherrypicking institutions to remain part of, and that if you don't get everything you want, regardless of how mad the claim, you can simply just not to pay your dues.
Yes, Scotland could use the pound without a currency union. I'm sure Leeds, Norwich and, most of all, London would welcome the financial firms fleeing south across the border to be in a country with a lender of last resort.
Mr. Royale, I quite agree.
I was just expressing concern about his interest in death and suggesting that he should talk to someone about it! (This is about the third or fourth comment along those lines he's made in the last couple of weeks).
It's hardly worse than those who live in publicly owned homes with more space than they need; you know, the ones who rant and howl about the bedroom 'tax'.
PS: We own a part of all those institutions whether you like it or not and in one form or another will need to be given our fair share.
Bit of jiggery pokery means I'm on no at 2/5... Might just green up for a tenner!
Sequence as follows:
Yes wins
Currency union does not occur
RBS and Lloyds move south at once, as largely owned by British taxpayers
Financial firms wary of not having a safety net (lender of last resort) move south
Financial firms with majority English/Welsh/Northern Irish depositors move south to avoid flight of deposits to British-based firms
If a currency union occurred, then the last point would still hold, and RBS/Lloyds as well, but a lender of last resort would see many firms remain in Scotland.
Edited extra bit: you can't have 8% of a currency. You can have it, have it with a currency union, or not have it. If you vote to leave a country you don't get to complain you can't have the same currency and central bank. Scotland's entitled to a share of assets and liabilities, not to ongoing access to British institutions.
'Former Labour minister endorses Labour for Independence.'
http://tinyurl.com/nlt4vux
SLAB is similar to ISIS in its attitude to apostasy. I still think if we get a poll with Yes ahead in the next 3 weeks we may get a serving MP/MSP 'coming out'.
The nest, 3ft wide x 1.5ft deep, was still expanding and the insects had chewed through the mattress and pillows to build it."
Why didn't the owner notice an increased buzzing from the room?
Or some of the squillions of wasps flying in and out?
Net migration into the UK totalled 243,000 in the year up to March, up from 175,000 in the previous 12 months, official figures show.
So much for Cameron's promise immigration. Another promise broken: how many is that?
And suckered Tories think he'll carry out his promise re EU referendum, if re-elected.
No for our entertainment, explain how the Scottish Finance Industry is going to work without a lender of last resort....
But the current tax regime makes no sense.
They had zero to do with reality.
The real motivations therefore are very much still in place (work oportunities mainly, but ease of travel thanks to freedom of movement also a major factor with rank tabloid obsessions like benefits very much on the margins if thought about at all).
tedious is as tedious does
Private property rights.
This sounds like a good basis for a horror movie script as the spiders who you do not manage to hoover up grow exponentially and try to eat their way through the door/make webs strong enough to pull the door open.
Beginning to see things fall apart. Housing with beds in sheds, school places , beggars etc. Deeply disturbed as to what the future holds.
Say you borrowed 150k for a house in delightful Auchtermuchtie. Then a YES comes along. Followed by a 'use the pound anyway'. No drama. But the temporary practical arrangement heads towards the serious option where Scotland has its own money, its own central bank, its own lender of last resort - and the Groat is born (but pegged to the Pound). Probably still no drama. But the peg would come under pressure - fixed exchange regimes don't work (ask Norman Lamont). Then the Groat floats.
So what currency is Mrs McTavish now being asked to service her mortgage in with the Bank of Kikcaldy?
Who gets to take the loss or gain of exchange difference if the mortgage is 'Groatised' during the peg period? The bank or Mrs McTavish?
I hope it doesn't come to that, though.
He's just made an offer we can't refuse.
PS and interesting , very impressed that you have had books published, a fine achievement indeed.
I would agree with you that there are plenty of Tories who pay lip service to controlling immigration, as an electoral necessity, but with neither the conviction or the energy to do anything much about it. Of course, it's easy to play off that into a spin-line that it benefits them as wealthy middle-class/upper middle-class professionals, thereby reinforcing further the "Tories benefit only the rich" narrative.
And so UKIP's rise will continue.
Hoping it won't be too much longer until the next one's out. Currently proofreading [which is hellish].
Clearly not devastating in the context of Scotland, but very significant for Edinburgh and one of many challenges that a new iScot will face.
(the 8% of GDP that people cite is misleading because it includes the local branch operations for RBS and BoS which will, of course, need to remain in some form or other)
Presume people would at some point need to choose which way to go and is likely to mean new products on the market in both countries ( by the same UK banks ) under various brands.
One of many interesting questions and opportunities that will arise and which will be likely to enrich both countries.
As someone who is equally emotional about the UK, our flag and the common bonds across our island, I have been disappointed in the absence of a positive emotional appeal to British identity in the latter, whilst also being surprised at the sheer aggression and lack of sobriety in the former.
Both campaigns have disappointed IMHO.
I'd rather charge a flat rate property tax - say 0.5% - and then use the money raised to get rid of much more damaging taxes (including slab stamp duty, employer NICs. etc).
In my view it was very clever to make a pledge on net migration, as it gives him more levers that he can control, which is important when he can't do very much at all to reduce immigration from the EU.
He could have met his pledge by increasing emigration, but he has completely failed to make it budge.
I fail to see why either of those can't also be reconciled with having proper firm border controls. It shouldn't be difficult to ensure that those who do come here on temporary visas are (indeed) temporary.
Pathetic scaremongering Tory crap as usual.
PS: a lot of our GDP is currently registered in London as you will well know, it will take a big jump when it and the oil gets registered in Edinburgh instead.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-28963310
I'm sure they crossed the border by accident as well.
Speaking of creepy things - ever had your house fumigated? We had ours done back in the 90s for woodworm and the next morning there were about 10000 dead woodlice on the bare floors. I'm not keen on woodlice but never scared of them. Give me 10000 in the house - ARGH!!!! All crunchy underfoot on the way to get the hoover too - urgh... gets shivers just thinking about it.
You sound like a Bolshevik complaining about grain hoarding by the Kulaks.