Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Referendum Day Minus 8: Another tantalising wait for what l

12346»

Comments

  • Options
    PeterC said:

    John Major was widely mocked as PM and certainly had a torrid time of it. But his judgements were largely sound, ERM excepted: Maastricht, single currency, borders, economy, and especially devolution. Not a bad PM at all IMO. Fundamentally honest and decent; thousands of time better than Blair/Brown, who are the real architects of the impending constitutional calamity.


    John Major was a good Prime Minister. He was let down by a disunited Conservative party.

    His only misjudgement was shagging Edwina Curry. At least he kept it out of public view at the time.
  • Options
    SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322

    Danish liberal Margrethe Vestager will be in charge of the powerful competition portfolio that gives the EU a big say in the expansion or merger plans of the world's biggest companies, while former Slovenian prime minister Alenka Bratusek will oversee the EU's plan to create an energy union.

    Sweden's Cecilia Malmstrom will have the task of negotiating the world's biggest trade agreement between the United States and Europe.


    I don't know anything about these individuals, but it's encouraging that competition & the US trade deal will both be the responsibility of commissions from non-Eurozone, business-friendly countries.

    Indeed. On the other hand, the French got economic affairs.
  • Options

    Socrates said:

    Lennon said:

    Lennon said:

    Heywood and Middleton by-election set for October 9th (same date as Clacton)

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29143285

    Clearly Labour trying to reduce the UKIP potential for a 2nd gain by splitting resources and not having the momentum of having just gained there first MP

    Interestingly they've only just made it in time. Under the new 21 to 27 day timetable, this is the latest possible day that the writ could have been moved to still have the by-election on the 9th October. By my reckoning Nominations will need to be at 4pm on Day 4 (today being Day 0) which I calculate as 16th September (ie Tuesday of next week) - so parties will need to get their act together and select pretty fast.
    Cowards.
    Quite smart actually - they know the bun fight in Clacton will blow any local embarrassment of the front pages.....


    Really?

    If the Indy Ref goes badly, I could see the Tories losing their deposit in Clacton.
  • Options
    TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    edited September 2014
    Just caught up with Daily Politics over lunch. Neil gobsmacked with the line from Labour's Emma Reynolds..
    Neil: What % of tax raising powers will new devolution deliver?
    Reynolds: "The details have yet to be worked out..."
    Neil words to the effect "So you cannot tell voters what a No vote will deliver".
  • Options
    JohnOJohnO Posts: 4,215
    Socrates said:

    So it's worth bearing in mind there are now seven vice-presidents, referred to as "super commissioners" by the BBC:

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-29139503

    And we got none of them. So Lord Hill's position can't be claimed to be bigger than ninth. This is supposedly a victory for the UK. It's a middle of the pack position, so par for the course for the UK in the EU.

    Even for you, this is pretty desperate stuff. You're making a bit of a fool of yourself. I grant you compassionate leave to take the day off...
  • Options

    Carlotta

    Once again you miss the point completely

    The point that Standard Life is part of "Better Together" and not a business trying to protect its customers and shareholders?

    Yes, that has passed me by.

    That was your point?

  • Options

    The Betfair "Yes" market is shortening just a tad ..... currently 3.2 to back, 3.25 to lay.

    Nah. It went down to 3.0 to back and 3.1 to lay earlier this morning, then moved out again.
  • Options
    Barker Poll (?!) is Y54 N46

    Looks like a bizarre hybrid of a voodoo poll and a weighted online poll

    Barker.co.uk/scotlandpoll
  • Options
    Socrates said:

    Indeed. On the other hand, the French got economic affairs.

    True, but the WSJ take on this is quite interesting:

    To alleviate German concerns over Mr. Moscovici's appointment as the EU's commissioner for economic and financial affairs, his post will be overseen by Jyrki Katainen, a former Finnish prime minister and fiscal hawk.

    http://online.wsj.com/articles/frances-pierre-moscovici-named-eu-economic-affairs-chief-1410346661

    I must say overall I'm quite pleasantly surprised by Juncker's set of appointments.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,773

    Barker Poll (?!) is Y54 N46

    Looks like a bizarre hybrid of a voodoo poll and a weighted online poll

    Barker.co.uk/scotlandpoll

    Those are the numbers Murdoch flashed as Salmond's polling at the weekend
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,096
    edited September 2014
    Said this last night but I think the spam trap ate it

    Steven Woolfe would be a great ukip candidate in Heywood and Middleton, although he is the GE candidate for Stockport....

    If UKIP can get around that, would a mixed race candidate be a problem given the support for a far right party last time?
  • Options
    David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 6,506
    edited September 2014
    The main issue for the EU Finance Commissioner from the UK's viewpoint is surely making sure that the transaction tax is not applicable in the UK.

    Arrangements about banker's bonuses is a minor issue in the context of things and more up to shareholders than regulators.
  • Options

    Socrates said:

    Lennon said:

    Lennon said:

    Heywood and Middleton by-election set for October 9th (same date as Clacton)

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29143285

    Clearly Labour trying to reduce the UKIP potential for a 2nd gain by splitting resources and not having the momentum of having just gained there first MP

    Interestingly they've only just made it in time. Under the new 21 to 27 day timetable, this is the latest possible day that the writ could have been moved to still have the by-election on the 9th October. By my reckoning Nominations will need to be at 4pm on Day 4 (today being Day 0) which I calculate as 16th September (ie Tuesday of next week) - so parties will need to get their act together and select pretty fast.
    Cowards.
    Quite smart actually - they know the bun fight in Clacton will blow any local embarrassment of the front pages.....


    Really?

    If the Indy Ref goes badly, I could see the Tories losing their deposit in Clacton.
    Possibly - but that surely reinforces the point that Labour are smart to hold their bye election on the same day?

    Or do you think they would have been wiser to hold it on a day when it got the press' undivided attention?
  • Options
    SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322

    The main issue for the EU Finance Commissioner from the UK's viewpoint is surely making sure that the transaction tax is not applicable in the UK.

    Arrangements about banker's bonuses is a minor issue in the context of things and more up to shareholders than regulators.

    The banker's bonuses is actually quite a big issue. Banks have moved to much higher base salaries, which make it more difficult for banks to stay solvent in the midst of a credit crunch.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,245

    The main issue for the EU Finance Commissioner from the UK's viewpoint is surely making sure that the transaction tax is not applicable in the UK.

    Arrangements about banker's bonuses is a minor issue in the context of things and more up to shareholders than regulators.

    It is worth noting that we are the only country in the EU with a financial transaction tax at present - aka stamp duty. Surely the best way around this would be to implement a Europe-wide FTT, only where there is no an existing local tax,
  • Options
    @Carlotta

    The Labour by-election strikes me as a different gether altothing. They could have held that more or less any time they liked and expected to win.

    I think they just want to get it out of the way quickly.
  • Options
    NormNorm Posts: 1,251

    Carlotta

    Once again you miss the point completely - the endless scare stories, whether based in fact or fear, are not helping No. Where is the positive message for the Union? We just look endlessly negative. You see it on here in microcosm everyday - the likes of ScottP retweeting the latest disaster that will befall Scotland if it leaves. It's utterly counterproductive

    Take a look at the Times today where John Major state a positive case for the Union. To be honest I'm not sure why soft lefties like yourself are playing the Nats game for them. A Yes vote will unleash an English Nationalist backlash which can only benefit the likes of UKIP. Me - I'm an unabashed Unionist although I won't exactly be unhappy if 58 non Tory seats in the HoC disappear after independence. You as an English lefty have nothing to gain.
  • Options
    NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    MaxPB said:

    Neil said:

    MaxPB said:

    Neil said:

    MaxPB said:

    Neil said:

    MaxPB said:


    Let's see if the EUP now try and block it.

    That has to be a risk. Particularly as the Tories arent in the EPP.
    EPP+ECR+ALDE should get them over the line, though with Germany getting a laughable role as Digital Economy commissioner there are no guarantees the EPP will vote it through.
    Why would the EPP support a Tory candidate particularly? The Tories gave them a pretty big two fingers.

    I mean the whole list being voted down, but generally if the Germans are happy with it then the EPP will surely vote it through.

    If Parliament decides that it doesnt like one candidate they have shown in the past that they will veto the whole Commission until he or she is withdrawn. Given that Barnier (the immediate predecessor) has just instructed the EBA to look into the practice of British banks trying to get around the bonus cap that Osborne challenged legally... Well, you can see trouble ahead.
    Which is why I said EPP+ECR+ALDE. The EPP surely wouldn't vote down a list of commissioners from their own man. The anti-banker movement on the EUP mainly comes from the Greens and Left,the EPP clearly aren't that bothered given that their man has given Britain financial services.
    I dont particularly expect Hill to be forced out or into another job. I just expect the Parliament to want to make a show of the confirmation hearings (part of their mass delusion that they have any democratic legitimacy) and one can see Hill (given the role he has been nominated for rather than his personal qualities) being a lightening rod for this. The bankers bonus issue is going to be tough for him to answer - does he support the Parliament / Commission's position on this or his own Government's? I'm sure he can come up with some wording between now and then but it wont satisfy loads of MEPs.

  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @cathynewman: My Scottish £20 note got rejected at City Airport on landing from Edinburgh. Might as well have returned from a foreign country #indyref
  • Options
    Carlotta

    No.
  • Options
    NeilNeil Posts: 7,983


    Arrangements about banker's bonuses is a minor issue in the context of things and more up to shareholders than regulators.

    It's one issue that comes to mind right now. The EBA has just been asked to look into it and may well disagree with the PRA's interpretation of guidelines. It's a pretty totemic issue for many MEPs.
  • Options
    SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322

    Socrates said:

    Indeed. On the other hand, the French got economic affairs.

    True, but the WSJ take on this is quite interesting:

    To alleviate German concerns over Mr. Moscovici's appointment as the EU's commissioner for economic and financial affairs, his post will be overseen by Jyrki Katainen, a former Finnish prime minister and fiscal hawk.

    http://online.wsj.com/articles/frances-pierre-moscovici-named-eu-economic-affairs-chief-1410346661

    I must say overall I'm quite pleasantly surprised by Juncker's set of appointments.
    Katainen's job title is "Vice-President for Jobs, Growth, Investment and Competiveness", which sounds like a different thing to monetary affairs, but let us see how strong the oversight is in practice.
  • Options
    OllyTOllyT Posts: 4,925
    Socrates said:

    OllyT said:

    Socrates said:

    OllyT said:

    I instinctively mistrust nationalism - most nationalist movements play on convincing people that all their problems are caused by someone else. UKIP and SNP are both fall into this category, one scapegoats the EU, the other scapegoats the rUK.

    Blaming someone else for your problems then often spills over into hatred and racism.
    Much as I would regret seeing the union split I would relish watching Salmond deliver over the next decade when the prop of blaming someone else for all your problems is removed.

    Ironically, if he wins, I think there is a fair chance Salmond would rapidly become the most hated figure in Scotland.

    Given that most of UKIP's voters' top concern is the level of immigration to the UK, it's perfectly reasonable to blame the EU for uncontrolled immigration, because we can't do anything about that 45% of it. It's not scapegoating when it's accurate.
    Doesn't alter the fact that UKIP's main mantra is that everything is the fault of the EU and if we got out we'd all be living in 1950's England again and milk and honey would flow endlessly
    No, it's not. You just need to look at UKIP supporters on here like myself, Sean Fear and Richard Tyndall. We get into the nuts and bolts of a conversation. Most of the pro-EU supporters just bang on about the coming of the four horsemen of the apocalypse should we leave. Richard Nabavi is the one honourable exception. Also the EU debates - poll results afterwards showed that viewers felt that Farage had the better actual arguments.
    You are misreading my comment. There are undoubtedly genuinely held and rational views on both sides of the EU debate. My point is that in order to win power nationalist parties inevitably resort to whipping up hatred of an "enemy" that is the cause of all their problems. History is littered with examples and it rarely ends well. Have a quick look at the Mail, Express or Telegraph on any particular day and then try to convince me that the aim is not to whip up irrational anti-European hatred.
  • Options
    SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    This "digital single market" role is interesting. It sounds like a non-job, but then it is a vice-presidency.
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Did anyone hear John Major on Today? I missed it, but this comment under his companion article in The Times caught my eye thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/columnists/article4201699.ece
    Alisuin Pickvance 2 hours ago

    John Majors recapitulation of this article on Radio Four this morning was a tour de force. Having listened routinely to the Today programme since the days of Jack de Manio, I have heard little better. An earlier commentator on this article described John Humphrys as a light weight fool, which he is not, but Major brushed him aside as though he were. It is very rare to see Humphrys in this position. Mr Major highlighted the importance of the currency question, but unlike Darling he discussed the issues concerning the rest of the United Kingdom which were not covered well in the second Darling/Salmond debate. Not only do I think that disenfranchised Scotsmen living in UK have not been given opportunity to voice their opinion in the matter, neither have the citizens of rest of the United Kingdom. Scotland is a nation of first-rate academics and business men and as Mr Major states are capable of running their own country effectively but if I were Scots Mr Salmond’s policies would concern me because they seem to be very good on spending money but somewhat vague on raising it. I ask myself if we are stronger together and have an economy underwritten by the bank of England why take the risk of going it alone when there is very little reward, save the satisfaction of Scottish nationonalist sentiment?
  • Options
    LennonLennon Posts: 1,738

    @Carlotta

    The Labour by-election strikes me as a different gether altothing. They could have held that more or less any time they liked and expected to win.

    I think they just want to get it out of the way quickly.

    I just wonder if they had held it a week or 2 after Clacton, and Clacton had been a massive boost for UKIP - if they were worried about a much closer race from a momentum / coattails effect - we all know that UKIP are expected to win Clacton, but for voters in Heywood being able to see that actually voting UKIP can give you a UKIP MP might have been an extra fillip. All irrelevant now anyway, but I think that they have probably done the right thing (no obvious downside), even if it gives the appearance of being 'rushed'
  • Options
    SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    OllyT said:

    Socrates said:

    OllyT said:

    Socrates said:

    OllyT said:

    I instinctively mistrust nationalism - most nationalist movements play on convincing people that all their problems are caused by someone else. UKIP and SNP are both fall into this category, one scapegoats the EU, the other scapegoats the rUK.

    Blaming someone else for your problems then often spills over into hatred and racism.
    Much as I would regret seeing the union split I would relish watching Salmond deliver over the next decade when the prop of blaming someone else for all your problems is removed.

    Ironically, if he wins, I think there is a fair chance Salmond would rapidly become the most hated figure in Scotland.

    Given that most of UKIP's voters' top concern is the level of immigration to the UK, it's perfectly reasonable to blame the EU for uncontrolled immigration, because we can't do anything about that 45% of it. It's not scapegoating when it's accurate.
    Doesn't alter the fact that UKIP's main mantra is that everything is the fault of the EU and if we got out we'd all be living in 1950's England again and milk and honey would flow endlessly
    No, it's not. You just need to look at UKIP supporters on here like myself, Sean Fear and Richard Tyndall. We get into the nuts and bolts of a conversation. Most of the pro-EU supporters just bang on about the coming of the four horsemen of the apocalypse should we leave. Richard Nabavi is the one honourable exception. Also the EU debates - poll results afterwards showed that viewers felt that Farage had the better actual arguments.
    You are misreading my comment. There are undoubtedly genuinely held and rational views on both sides of the EU debate. My point is that in order to win power nationalist parties inevitably resort to whipping up hatred of an "enemy" that is the cause of all their problems. History is littered with examples and it rarely ends well. Have a quick look at the Mail, Express or Telegraph on any particular day and then try to convince me that the aim is not to whip up irrational anti-European hatred.
    That's not nationalism any more than any other ideology. Read the Guardian and the Mirror and then try to convince me that the aim is not to whip up irrational rich people hatred.

  • Options
    SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    rcs1000 said:

    The main issue for the EU Finance Commissioner from the UK's viewpoint is surely making sure that the transaction tax is not applicable in the UK.

    Arrangements about banker's bonuses is a minor issue in the context of things and more up to shareholders than regulators.

    It is worth noting that we are the only country in the EU with a financial transaction tax at present - aka stamp duty. Surely the best way around this would be to implement a Europe-wide FTT, only where there is no an existing local tax,
    We need to get rid of stamp duty and replace it with higher bands of council tax. I don't want to be locked into it by the EU.
  • Options
    Just as well Salmond never uses the language of divisiveness :

    Today what we have got is an example of Team Scotland against Team Westminster.

    http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-29142488
  • Options
    Paul_Mid_BedsPaul_Mid_Beds Posts: 1,409
    edited September 2014


    Also given the widespread reports of intimidatory tactics in the press the last few days I wouldn't be surprised if people who will vote NO will be reluctant to admit this to pollsters.

    This seems the current repetitive bleat on PB, Apart from an egg, a bit of heckling and some aggressive stickering (all returned with interest by Noers), what intimidation do you refer to?
    Will this do?, media from both left and right below

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11079296/Anti-English-racists-terrorising-the-No-campaign-in-Scotland.html

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/aug/29/jim-murphy-scotland-better-together-speaking-tour-suspended-intimidation

    Plenty more if you do a news search of "scotland intimidation" at a well known search engine
  • Options
    JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548

    Carlotta

    Once again you miss the point completely - the endless scare stories, whether based in fact or fear, are not helping No. Where is the positive message for the Union? We just look endlessly negative. You see it on here in microcosm everyday - the likes of ScottP retweeting the latest disaster that will befall Scotland if it leaves. It's utterly counterproductive

    It's remarkable that you've been able to put up with the negativity on here for a whole day and that Skuke Liewalker hasn't already been along to share his wisdom with us.

    I'm curious, how do you know when it's time for a _BobaFlounce_ ?
  • Options
    FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,071
    What would Putin do about Scotland OGH asked a few hours ago. Well I doubt anything like what he did with Crimea. However if things got tough for Scotland in the first few years of independence it should be remembered that Uncle Vlad was one of the first to offer support to Iceland when it went bankrupt.
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    The petrol station near me has put up signs saying they won't accept Scottish notes. A small but significant little message to visiting tourists.

    I've just been chatting to a friend who said that the Saltire lifted above Number 10 fell down in true Omen style - is this true? He was laughing so much that I couldn't tell if he was pulling my leg.
    Scott_P said:

    @cathynewman: My Scottish £20 note got rejected at City Airport on landing from Edinburgh. Might as well have returned from a foreign country #indyref

  • Options
  • Options
    FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,071
    Socrates said:

    OllyT said:

    Socrates said:

    OllyT said:

    Socrates said:

    OllyT said:

    I instinctively mistrust nationalism - most nationalist movements play on convincing people that all their problems are caused by someone else. UKIP and SNP are both fall into this category, one scapegoats the EU, the other scapegoats the rUK.

    Blaming someone else for your problems then often spills over into hatred and racism.
    Much as I would regret seeing the union split I would relish watching Salmond deliver over the next decade when the prop of blaming someone else for all your problems is removed.

    Ironically, if he wins, I think there is a fair chance Salmond would rapidly become the most hated figure in Scotland.

    Given that most of UKIP's voters' top concern is the level of immigration to the UK, it's perfectly reasonable to blame the EU for uncontrolled immigration, because we can't do anything about that 45% of it. It's not scapegoating when it's accurate.
    Doesn't alter the fact that UKIP's main mantra is that everything is the fault of the EU and if we got out we'd all be living in 1950's England again and milk and honey would flow endlessly
    No, it's not. You just need to look at UKIP supporters on here like myself, Sean Fear and Richard Tyndall. We get into the nuts and bolts of a conversation. Most of the pro-EU supporters just bang on about the coming of the four horsemen of the apocalypse should we leave. Richard Nabavi is the one honourable exception. Also the EU debates - poll results afterwards showed that viewers felt that Farage had the better actual arguments.
    You are misreading my comment. There are undoubtedly genuinely held and rational views on both sides of the EU debate. My point is that in order to win power nationalist parties inevitably resort to whipping up hatred of an "enemy" that is the cause of all their problems. History is littered with examples and it rarely ends well. Have a quick look at the Mail, Express or Telegraph on any particular day and then try to convince me that the aim is not to whip up irrational anti-European hatred.
    That's not nationalism any more than any other ideology. Read the Guardian and the Mirror and then try to convince me that the aim is not to whip up irrational rich people hatred.

    Where's the irrational hatred of rich people in the Guardian? Describing the inequalities and in some cases injustices of modern Britain does not equal hatred.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,036
    Heywood and Middleton looks like a rock solid Labour hold to me. Miles away from UKIP's area of strength.

    Market w/o Labour is perhaps the most interesting there.

    UKIP will really have the wind in their sails if they can beat the Conservatives in both Clacton and Heywood.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,667
    Socrates said:

    rcs1000 said:

    The main issue for the EU Finance Commissioner from the UK's viewpoint is surely making sure that the transaction tax is not applicable in the UK.

    Arrangements about banker's bonuses is a minor issue in the context of things and more up to shareholders than regulators.

    It is worth noting that we are the only country in the EU with a financial transaction tax at present - aka stamp duty. Surely the best way around this would be to implement a Europe-wide FTT, only where there is no an existing local tax,
    We need to get rid of stamp duty and replace it with higher bands of council tax. I don't want to be locked into it by the EU.
    He is talking about the 0.5% stamp duty on shares not stamp duty on property.
  • Options
    SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    MaxPB said:

    Socrates said:

    rcs1000 said:

    The main issue for the EU Finance Commissioner from the UK's viewpoint is surely making sure that the transaction tax is not applicable in the UK.

    Arrangements about banker's bonuses is a minor issue in the context of things and more up to shareholders than regulators.

    It is worth noting that we are the only country in the EU with a financial transaction tax at present - aka stamp duty. Surely the best way around this would be to implement a Europe-wide FTT, only where there is no an existing local tax,
    We need to get rid of stamp duty and replace it with higher bands of council tax. I don't want to be locked into it by the EU.
    He is talking about the 0.5% stamp duty on shares not stamp duty on property.
    Ah. How does this differ from an FTT?
  • Options
    PeterCPeterC Posts: 1,274
    Scott_P said:

    @cathynewman: My Scottish £20 note got rejected at City Airport on landing from Edinburgh. Might as well have returned from a foreign country #indyref


    A terrible portent??
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    steve hawkes ‏@steve_hawkes 1m

    Standard Life says given uncertainty about Scotland's future it has contingency plans to transfer business to England "if a need to do so"

    steve hawkes ‏@steve_hawkes 1m

    .."This transfer of our business could potentially include pensions, investments and other long-term savings held by UK customers"

    steve hawkes @steve_hawkes · 54s

    Standard Life ceo David Nish: "We have a long history in Scotland –but our responsibility is to protect the interests of our customers .."

    He couldn't be any clearer, but Malcolm will no doubt label him a 'bluffing turnip' or 'Tory stooge'.

    Links in with this article -

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10656483/Standard-Life-warns-it-could-quit-an-independent-Scotland.html

    They employ 5000 workers, north of the border.
    Yes , and they can put a brass plate up in London whilst 4995 people still work in Edinburgh. Another unionist stooge trying to help his pal.
    No, it's a CEO trying to protect his business and judging that with 90% of his customer base in a foreign country with a different currency and tax regime it would be smart to relocate there.....don't tell me you weren't expecting this?
    He did not say he was transferring 5000 jobs, he said he would protect customers. He can do this without any job moves. Moving the jobs would damage customers due to the enormous costs.
    You are not really very smart are you. Tory scaremongering as ever.
    Where would the re-domiciled business be taxed?

    Where will the myriad companies that are currently taxed in London pay their tax. Doh.
    Are NI and PAYE payments going to keep Scotland afloat?

    I wonder how long the Scottish government can keep paying for university tuition, when that corporation tax remains in the south.
    When historical-reference-and-projections of Scotland's revenues have been given it has been on the basis of the HMRC dis-aggregated accounts which already has the majority of 'Scottish' financial institutions paying their Corp Tax in England not Scotland.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,245
    MaxPB said:

    Socrates said:

    rcs1000 said:

    The main issue for the EU Finance Commissioner from the UK's viewpoint is surely making sure that the transaction tax is not applicable in the UK.

    Arrangements about banker's bonuses is a minor issue in the context of things and more up to shareholders than regulators.

    It is worth noting that we are the only country in the EU with a financial transaction tax at present - aka stamp duty. Surely the best way around this would be to implement a Europe-wide FTT, only where there is no an existing local tax,
    We need to get rid of stamp duty and replace it with higher bands of council tax. I don't want to be locked into it by the EU.
    He is talking about the 0.5% stamp duty on shares not stamp duty on property.
    Indeed I am
  • Options
    It was great to see the Speaker chastise Caroline Lucas at PMQs.
  • Options
    SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322

    Socrates said:

    OllyT said:

    Socrates said:

    OllyT said:

    Socrates said:

    OllyT said:

    I instinctively mistrust nationalism - most nationalist movements play on convincing people that all their problems are caused by someone else. UKIP and SNP are both fall into this category, one scapegoats the EU, the other scapegoats the rUK.

    Blaming someone else for your problems then often spills over into hatred and racism.
    Much as I would regret seeing the union split I would relish watching Salmond deliver over the next decade when the prop of blaming someone else for all your problems is removed.

    Ironically, if he wins, I think there is a fair chance Salmond would rapidly become the most hated figure in Scotland.

    Given that most of UKIP's voters' top concern is the level of immigration to the UK, it's perfectly reasonable to blame the EU for uncontrolled immigration, because we can't do anything about that 45% of it. It's not scapegoating when it's accurate.
    Doesn't alter the fact that UKIP's main mantra is that everything is the fault of the EU and if we got out we'd all be living in 1950's England again and milk and honey would flow endlessly
    No, it's not. You just need to look at UKIP supporters on here like myself, Sean Fear and Richard Tyndall. We get into the nuts and bolts of a conversation. Most of the pro-EU supporters just bang on about the coming of the four horsemen of the apocalypse should we leave. Richard Nabavi is the one honourable exception. Also the EU debates - poll results afterwards showed that viewers felt that Farage had the better actual arguments.
    You are misreading my comment. There are undoubtedly genuinely held and rational views on both sides of the EU debate. My point is that in order to win power nationalist parties inevitably resort to whipping up hatred of an "enemy" that is the cause of all their problems. History is littered with examples and it rarely ends well. Have a quick look at the Mail, Express or Telegraph on any particular day and then try to convince me that the aim is not to whip up irrational anti-European hatred.
    That's not nationalism any more than any other ideology. Read the Guardian and the Mirror and then try to convince me that the aim is not to whip up irrational rich people hatred.

    Where's the irrational hatred of rich people in the Guardian? Describing the inequalities and in some cases injustices of modern Britain does not equal hatred.
    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jul/29/rich-wealth-good-inequality-green-party
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,667
    Socrates said:

    MaxPB said:

    Socrates said:

    rcs1000 said:

    The main issue for the EU Finance Commissioner from the UK's viewpoint is surely making sure that the transaction tax is not applicable in the UK.

    Arrangements about banker's bonuses is a minor issue in the context of things and more up to shareholders than regulators.

    It is worth noting that we are the only country in the EU with a financial transaction tax at present - aka stamp duty. Surely the best way around this would be to implement a Europe-wide FTT, only where there is no an existing local tax,
    We need to get rid of stamp duty and replace it with higher bands of council tax. I don't want to be locked into it by the EU.
    He is talking about the 0.5% stamp duty on shares not stamp duty on property.
    Ah. How does this differ from an FTT?
    Not by a lot, but it is limited to shares. The EU FTT would be applicable to everything as it is currently drafted. If it gets watered down to shares as some in the City believe then it would be a net gain for us as it make share trading more competitive in relative terms.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,245
    Socrates said:

    MaxPB said:

    Socrates said:

    rcs1000 said:

    The main issue for the EU Finance Commissioner from the UK's viewpoint is surely making sure that the transaction tax is not applicable in the UK.

    Arrangements about banker's bonuses is a minor issue in the context of things and more up to shareholders than regulators.

    It is worth noting that we are the only country in the EU with a financial transaction tax at present - aka stamp duty. Surely the best way around this would be to implement a Europe-wide FTT, only where there is no an existing local tax,
    We need to get rid of stamp duty and replace it with higher bands of council tax. I don't want to be locked into it by the EU.
    He is talking about the 0.5% stamp duty on shares not stamp duty on property.
    Ah. How does this differ from an FTT?
    It doesn't - except than an FTT might also apply to bonds. (Although I can't imagine European governments doing anything that would raise the cost of them issuing debt - if you charge a 0.5% tax on people transferring bonds, that means people will pay less for bonds, and therefore European government have to pay more for their debt. Therefore, I would imagine it would not apply - at least not to sovereign bonds.)

    It is worth noting that our FTT (stamp duty) disadvantages the UK relative to our European peers that do not have an FTT. This discourages London listings of shares relative to - say - Paris, and is one of the reasons there has been a market share loss for London over the last five years.

  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    edited September 2014
    Group Chief Executive of BP says NO

    Good job there are no oil related jobs in Scotland...
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,719
    edited September 2014
    BP's boss agrees with Sir Ian Wood's assessment on oil.

    But what does the boss of BP know about oil anyway.

    Kamal Ahmed
    @bbckamal

    BP's Bob Dudley on North Sea: "The province is now mature and I believe Sir Ian Wood correctly assesses its future potential" #indyref
  • Options
    Superstar actor to stand for Tories in Clacton, 50/50 chance vs other candidate tomorrow night...

    Tremble you traitorous pig-dog (for TSE)
  • Options
    HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    Socrates said:

    This "digital single market" role is interesting. It sounds like a non-job, but then it is a vice-presidency.

    This is going to be a very different commission to any that have gone before. Hill will be answerable to two other commissioners who will "steer" his work. How this will work out in practice is anyone's guess, but the idea that we will have "our man" defending the City looks damn shaky to me.

    You may find it interesting to read Hill's letter of appointment which sets out what is expected of him and how the chain of command is expected to work. It is available on line here:

    http://ec.europa.eu/about/juncker-commission/docs/hill_en.pdf
  • Options
    LennonLennon Posts: 1,738
    Socrates said:

    MaxPB said:

    Socrates said:

    rcs1000 said:

    The main issue for the EU Finance Commissioner from the UK's viewpoint is surely making sure that the transaction tax is not applicable in the UK.

    Arrangements about banker's bonuses is a minor issue in the context of things and more up to shareholders than regulators.

    It is worth noting that we are the only country in the EU with a financial transaction tax at present - aka stamp duty. Surely the best way around this would be to implement a Europe-wide FTT, only where there is no an existing local tax,
    We need to get rid of stamp duty and replace it with higher bands of council tax. I don't want to be locked into it by the EU.
    He is talking about the 0.5% stamp duty on shares not stamp duty on property.
    Ah. How does this differ from an FTT?
    What it is charged on (ie only shares, whereas FTT is (at least the last time I heard) planned on being on everything - Currency, Derivatives etc.)
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,245
    MaxPB said:

    Socrates said:

    MaxPB said:

    Socrates said:

    rcs1000 said:

    The main issue for the EU Finance Commissioner from the UK's viewpoint is surely making sure that the transaction tax is not applicable in the UK.

    Arrangements about banker's bonuses is a minor issue in the context of things and more up to shareholders than regulators.

    It is worth noting that we are the only country in the EU with a financial transaction tax at present - aka stamp duty. Surely the best way around this would be to implement a Europe-wide FTT, only where there is no an existing local tax,
    We need to get rid of stamp duty and replace it with higher bands of council tax. I don't want to be locked into it by the EU.
    He is talking about the 0.5% stamp duty on shares not stamp duty on property.
    Ah. How does this differ from an FTT?
    Not by a lot, but it is limited to shares. The EU FTT would be applicable to everything as it is currently drafted. If it gets watered down to shares as some in the City believe then it would be a net gain for us as it make share trading more competitive in relative terms.
    The latest draft of the proposals already (essentially) exempts derivatives on the basis that the value of the underlying cannot be used for a tax, and the notional on a CFD is essentially zero.

    Which really only leaves bonds, where European governments have a massive interest in not fucking themselves over.
  • Options
    The England genie is now firmly out of its bottle. So, paradoxically, YES is now the best answer for the UK. It will at least be clean. I really can't see the Westminster elite doing the decent thing for England. They'll offer Scotland the world but not firmly resolve the WLQ. And that will cause another round of anger with our politicians. Let's just get it over with.
  • Options
    NormNorm Posts: 1,251
    SeanT said:

    I'm an inch away from calling this for YES (for the first time ever, IIRC, which is quite something for a bipolar dipso like me).... and if Survation has YES in the lead then I will do so.

    But a comment by a lefty friend of mine, over wine last night, makes me pause - slightly, for now.

    He compared the YES campaign to a bunch of happy, slightly drunk young people, in a bar, with their cars and bikes out the back. Someone has an idea to head off to the beach to surf a really famous wave - known to be massively exhilarating, but also potentially dangerous, at times.

    In the beer garden the high spirits would be infectious. Shall I do it? Yes. Shall we ALL do it?? YES!! Cue air punching and swigs of beer - soon, even those who were reluctant get carried away and agree to take to the waters. Maybe the gang pick up some other people on adjacent tables they get infected, too, with the giddy spirits. LET'S DO THIS.

    So the convoy of cars and bikes approaches the beach and that dangerous, glorious wave hoves into view. Some climb out. Some stay in their cars. Some loiter in the dunes. And gaze at that enormous wave. Each is suddenly alone in his own thoughts.

    How many will quietly think, Ah, Uhm, think I'll just drive quietly back to the pub, no one will see. Others will pretend they went to a different part of the beach, and then and say they really did surf. Many of course will follow through and have a wild time.

    That's the human psychology Scots will encounter as they enter the privacy of the polling booth. The tendency to shy away from something scary, at the last moment, when you are alone with your thoughts, and not surrounded by whooping friends encouraging you on.

    Hmm.

    Nicely put - that's certainly what I'm hoping for. There's the other possibility that has been mooted ie enthusiasts for Devo Max have been saying Yes to pollsters hoping to gain more concessions and they'll vote No come the time. Not sure I entirely buy that as it's rather too convoluted but calling this referendum whatever Survation might say is darn difficult.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,245
    Lennon said:

    Socrates said:

    MaxPB said:

    Socrates said:

    rcs1000 said:

    The main issue for the EU Finance Commissioner from the UK's viewpoint is surely making sure that the transaction tax is not applicable in the UK.

    Arrangements about banker's bonuses is a minor issue in the context of things and more up to shareholders than regulators.

    It is worth noting that we are the only country in the EU with a financial transaction tax at present - aka stamp duty. Surely the best way around this would be to implement a Europe-wide FTT, only where there is no an existing local tax,
    We need to get rid of stamp duty and replace it with higher bands of council tax. I don't want to be locked into it by the EU.
    He is talking about the 0.5% stamp duty on shares not stamp duty on property.
    Ah. How does this differ from an FTT?
    What it is charged on (ie only shares, whereas FTT is (at least the last time I heard) planned on being on everything - Currency, Derivatives etc.)
    I don't think it's ever been proposed for currencies, although the initial proposals included derivatives.
  • Options
    Socrates said:

    This "digital single market" role is interesting. It sounds like a non-job, but then it is a vice-presidency.

    I'm not sure what the Digital Economy is, but it's Juncker's big thing.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D61kfyYMZ_A
  • Options
    FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,071
    Socrates said:

    Socrates said:

    OllyT said:

    Socrates said:

    OllyT said:

    Socrates said:

    OllyT said:

    I instinctively mistrust nationalism - most nationalist movements play on convincing people that all their problems are caused by someone else. UKIP and SNP are both fall into this category, one scapegoats the EU, the other scapegoats the rUK..

    Doesn't alter the fact that UKIP's main mantra is that everything is the fault of the EU and if we got out we'd all be living in 1950's England again and milk and honey would flow endlessly
    No, it's not. You just need to look at UKIP supporters on here like myself, Sean Fear and Richard Tyndall. We get into the nuts and bolts of a conversation. Most of the pro-EU supporters just bang on about the coming of the four horsemen of the apocalypse should we leave. Richard Nabavi is the one honourable exception. Also the EU debates - poll results afterwards showed that viewers felt that Farage had the better actual arguments.
    You are misreading my comment. There are undoubtedly genuinely held and rational views on both sides of the EU debate. My point is that in order to win power nationalist parties inevitably resort to whipping up hatred of an "enemy" that is the cause of all their problems. History is littered with examples and it rarely ends well. Have a quick look at the Mail, Express or Telegraph on any particular day and then try to convince me that the aim is not to whip up irrational anti-European hatred.
    That's not nationalism any more than any other ideology. Read the Guardian and the Mirror and then try to convince me that the aim is not to whip up irrational rich people hatred.

    Where's the irrational hatred of rich people in the Guardian? Describing the inequalities and in some cases injustices of modern Britain does not equal hatred.
    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jul/29/rich-wealth-good-inequality-green-party
    Can't see any hatred in there. With even the IMF starting to take inequality seriously the right needs to get out of denial mode. It is perhaps the number 1 reason they haven't won an election for 22 years in the UK.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,667
    rcs1000 said:

    MaxPB said:

    Socrates said:

    MaxPB said:

    Socrates said:

    rcs1000 said:

    The main issue for the EU Finance Commissioner from the UK's viewpoint is surely making sure that the transaction tax is not applicable in the UK.

    Arrangements about banker's bonuses is a minor issue in the context of things and more up to shareholders than regulators.

    It is worth noting that we are the only country in the EU with a financial transaction tax at present - aka stamp duty. Surely the best way around this would be to implement a Europe-wide FTT, only where there is no an existing local tax,
    We need to get rid of stamp duty and replace it with higher bands of council tax. I don't want to be locked into it by the EU.
    He is talking about the 0.5% stamp duty on shares not stamp duty on property.
    Ah. How does this differ from an FTT?
    Not by a lot, but it is limited to shares. The EU FTT would be applicable to everything as it is currently drafted. If it gets watered down to shares as some in the City believe then it would be a net gain for us as it make share trading more competitive in relative terms.
    The latest draft of the proposals already (essentially) exempts derivatives on the basis that the value of the underlying cannot be used for a tax, and the notional on a CFD is essentially zero.

    Which really only leaves bonds, where European governments have a massive interest in not fucking themselves over.
    It leaves FX as well and corporate bonds, but people I've spoken are saying the EU has been looking at our stamp duty as a template so it could just come down to shares which wouldn't be a big deal. Probably a net gain. I think the worry was that they would go down the Swedish route and destroy liquidity.
  • Options
    HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    Lennon said:

    Socrates said:

    MaxPB said:

    Socrates said:

    rcs1000 said:

    The main issue for the EU Finance Commissioner from the UK's viewpoint is surely making sure that the transaction tax is not applicable in the UK.

    Arrangements about banker's bonuses is a minor issue in the context of things and more up to shareholders than regulators.

    It is worth noting that we are the only country in the EU with a financial transaction tax at present - aka stamp duty. Surely the best way around this would be to implement a Europe-wide FTT, only where there is no an existing local tax,
    We need to get rid of stamp duty and replace it with higher bands of council tax. I don't want to be locked into it by the EU.
    He is talking about the 0.5% stamp duty on shares not stamp duty on property.
    Ah. How does this differ from an FTT?
    What it is charged on (ie only shares, whereas FTT is (at least the last time I heard) planned on being on everything - Currency, Derivatives etc.)
    Isn't there another issue - to whom is the FTT payable? Wasn't the original idea that the FTT was to be a Europe wide tax payable to Brussels and not to national treasuries.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,245
    MaxPB said:

    rcs1000 said:

    MaxPB said:

    Socrates said:

    MaxPB said:

    Socrates said:

    rcs1000 said:

    The main issue for the EU Finance Commissioner from the UK's viewpoint is surely making sure that the transaction tax is not applicable in the UK.

    Arrangements about banker's bonuses is a minor issue in the context of things and more up to shareholders than regulators.

    It is worth noting that we are the only country in the EU with a financial transaction tax at present - aka stamp duty. Surely the best way around this would be to implement a Europe-wide FTT, only where there is no an existing local tax,
    We need to get rid of stamp duty and replace it with higher bands of council tax. I don't want to be locked into it by the EU.
    He is talking about the 0.5% stamp duty on shares not stamp duty on property.
    Ah. How does this differ from an FTT?
    Not by a lot, but it is limited to shares. The EU FTT would be applicable to everything as it is currently drafted. If it gets watered down to shares as some in the City believe then it would be a net gain for us as it make share trading more competitive in relative terms.
    The latest draft of the proposals already (essentially) exempts derivatives on the basis that the value of the underlying cannot be used for a tax, and the notional on a CFD is essentially zero.

    Which really only leaves bonds, where European governments have a massive interest in not fucking themselves over.
    It leaves FX as well and corporate bonds, but people I've spoken are saying the EU has been looking at our stamp duty as a template so it could just come down to shares which wouldn't be a big deal. Probably a net gain. I think the worry was that they would go down the Swedish route and destroy liquidity.
    I can't see them doing it with currencies/FX, because it would be impossible to extra-terratorially enforce, and it would be very susceptible to workarounds: i.e. Sterling into widgets into Euros...
  • Options
    LennonLennon Posts: 1,738
    Pulpstar said:

    Heywood and Middleton looks like a rock solid Labour hold to me. Miles away from UKIP's area of strength.

    Market w/o Labour is perhaps the most interesting there.

    UKIP will really have the wind in their sails if they can beat the Conservatives in both Clacton and Heywood.

    Surely market w/o Labour is pretty straightforwardly UKIP. It looks quite like Wythenshawe on the surface and I wouldn't be surprised at a similar(ish) result, but with UKIP a fair bit higher given where they are now relative to February. (Lab 45 / UKIP 25 / Tory 15 / Lib 5 / Others 10) would be my initial (without looking at the demographics that closely) prediction.
  • Options
    oooooh

    Martin Boon @martinboon · 6m

    Massive polling weekend to come from @ICMResearch in advance of defining week for British constitution. Maybe even something on #indyref
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,096
    Lennon said:

    @Carlotta

    The Labour by-election strikes me as a different gether altothing. They could have held that more or less any time they liked and expected to win.

    I think they just want to get it out of the way quickly.

    I just wonder if they had held it a week or 2 after Clacton, and Clacton had been a massive boost for UKIP - if they were worried about a much closer race from a momentum / coattails effect - we all know that UKIP are expected to win Clacton, but for voters in Heywood being able to see that actually voting UKIP can give you a UKIP MP might have been an extra fillip. All irrelevant now anyway, but I think that they have probably done the right thing (no obvious downside), even if it gives the appearance of being 'rushed'
    The controversy is that they issued the writ before the deceased MPs funeral which breaks with tradition...

    Paul Goggins funeral was four days before the writ in W&SE

    But apparently they asked the family and IMO if he was staunch labour he wouldn't have minded, not a problem

    The MP here was also pro life and anti gay marriage

    Ukip should hammer home the fact that PC behaviour has caused a lot of problems locally, and Jim Dobbin was probably one of the last of the Labour politicians that was like them

  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,667
    rcs1000 said:

    MaxPB said:

    rcs1000 said:

    MaxPB said:

    Socrates said:

    MaxPB said:

    Socrates said:

    rcs1000 said:

    The main issue for the EU Finance Commissioner from the UK's viewpoint is surely making sure that the transaction tax is not applicable in the UK.

    Arrangements about banker's bonuses is a minor issue in the context of things and more up to shareholders than regulators.

    It is worth noting that we are the only country in the EU with a financial transaction tax at present - aka stamp duty. Surely the best way around this would be to implement a Europe-wide FTT, only where there is no an existing local tax,
    We need to get rid of stamp duty and replace it with higher bands of council tax. I don't want to be locked into it by the EU.
    He is talking about the 0.5% stamp duty on shares not stamp duty on property.
    Ah. How does this differ from an FTT?
    Not by a lot, but it is limited to shares. The EU FTT would be applicable to everything as it is currently drafted. If it gets watered down to shares as some in the City believe then it would be a net gain for us as it make share trading more competitive in relative terms.
    The latest draft of the proposals already (essentially) exempts derivatives on the basis that the value of the underlying cannot be used for a tax, and the notional on a CFD is essentially zero.

    Which really only leaves bonds, where European governments have a massive interest in not fucking themselves over.
    It leaves FX as well and corporate bonds, but people I've spoken are saying the EU has been looking at our stamp duty as a template so it could just come down to shares which wouldn't be a big deal. Probably a net gain. I think the worry was that they would go down the Swedish route and destroy liquidity.
    I can't see them doing it with currencies/FX, because it would be impossible to extra-terratorially enforce, and it would be very susceptible to workarounds: i.e. Sterling into widgets into Euros...
    I thought that was why the government took it to the ECJ and why the commission may water it down.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,245

    Lennon said:

    Socrates said:

    MaxPB said:

    Socrates said:

    rcs1000 said:

    The main issue for the EU Finance Commissioner from the UK's viewpoint is surely making sure that the transaction tax is not applicable in the UK.

    Arrangements about banker's bonuses is a minor issue in the context of things and more up to shareholders than regulators.

    It is worth noting that we are the only country in the EU with a financial transaction tax at present - aka stamp duty. Surely the best way around this would be to implement a Europe-wide FTT, only where there is no an existing local tax,
    We need to get rid of stamp duty and replace it with higher bands of council tax. I don't want to be locked into it by the EU.
    He is talking about the 0.5% stamp duty on shares not stamp duty on property.
    Ah. How does this differ from an FTT?
    What it is charged on (ie only shares, whereas FTT is (at least the last time I heard) planned on being on everything - Currency, Derivatives etc.)
    Isn't there another issue - to whom is the FTT payable? Wasn't the original idea that the FTT was to be a Europe wide tax payable to Brussels and not to national treasuries.
    According to Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_financial_transaction_tax#Tax_rate_and_revenues) it's proposed to go 'largely' to national treasuries, and any additional raised would be offset against existing countries' contributions.
  • Options
    SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322

    Lennon said:

    Socrates said:

    MaxPB said:

    Socrates said:

    rcs1000 said:

    The main issue for the EU Finance Commissioner from the UK's viewpoint is surely making sure that the transaction tax is not applicable in the UK.

    Arrangements about banker's bonuses is a minor issue in the context of things and more up to shareholders than regulators.

    It is worth noting that we are the only country in the EU with a financial transaction tax at present - aka stamp duty. Surely the best way around this would be to implement a Europe-wide FTT, only where there is no an existing local tax,
    We need to get rid of stamp duty and replace it with higher bands of council tax. I don't want to be locked into it by the EU.
    He is talking about the 0.5% stamp duty on shares not stamp duty on property.
    Ah. How does this differ from an FTT?
    What it is charged on (ie only shares, whereas FTT is (at least the last time I heard) planned on being on everything - Currency, Derivatives etc.)
    Isn't there another issue - to whom is the FTT payable? Wasn't the original idea that the FTT was to be a Europe wide tax payable to Brussels and not to national treasuries.
    Indeed. It would be an EU tax paid overwhelmingly by the British.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,245
    Socrates said:

    Lennon said:

    Socrates said:

    MaxPB said:

    Socrates said:

    rcs1000 said:

    The main issue for the EU Finance Commissioner from the UK's viewpoint is surely making sure that the transaction tax is not applicable in the UK.

    Arrangements about banker's bonuses is a minor issue in the context of things and more up to shareholders than regulators.

    It is worth noting that we are the only country in the EU with a financial transaction tax at present - aka stamp duty. Surely the best way around this would be to implement a Europe-wide FTT, only where there is no an existing local tax,
    We need to get rid of stamp duty and replace it with higher bands of council tax. I don't want to be locked into it by the EU.
    He is talking about the 0.5% stamp duty on shares not stamp duty on property.
    Ah. How does this differ from an FTT?
    What it is charged on (ie only shares, whereas FTT is (at least the last time I heard) planned on being on everything - Currency, Derivatives etc.)
    Isn't there another issue - to whom is the FTT payable? Wasn't the original idea that the FTT was to be a Europe wide tax payable to Brussels and not to national treasuries.
    Indeed. It would be an EU tax paid overwhelmingly by the British.
    Not true: see the Wikipedia article I linked to below.
  • Options
    Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    edited September 2014



    Can't see any hatred in there. With even the IMF starting to take inequality seriously the right needs to get out of denial mode. It is perhaps the number 1 reason they haven't won an election for 22 years in the UK.

    Yup. I didn't know Christine Lagarde and Mark Carney were "class envy" warriors.

    You wonder how disgusted the likes of Harold Macmillan would be with today's Tories, who think rancid inequality and poverty are a "price worth paying" just to satisfy some rich people, even at the cost of one part of the country desperately trying to get away because they hate it so much.
  • Options
    FinancierFinancier Posts: 3,916
    Plato said:

    Did anyone hear John Major on Today? I missed it, but this comment under his companion article in The Times caught my eye thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/columnists/article4201699.ece

    Alisuin Pickvance 2 hours ago

    John Majors recapitulation of this article on Radio Four this morning was a tour de force. Having listened routinely to the Today programme since the days of Jack de Manio, I have heard little better. An earlier commentator on this article described John Humphrys as a light weight fool, which he is not, but Major brushed him aside as though he were. It is very rare to see Humphrys in this position. Mr Major highlighted the importance of the currency question, but unlike Darling he discussed the issues concerning the rest of the United Kingdom which were not covered well in the second Darling/Salmond debate. Not only do I think that disenfranchised Scotsmen living in UK have not been given opportunity to voice their opinion in the matter, neither have the citizens of rest of the United Kingdom. Scotland is a nation of first-rate academics and business men and as Mr Major states are capable of running their own country effectively but if I were Scots Mr Salmond’s policies would concern me because they seem to be very good on spending money but somewhat vague on raising it. I ask myself if we are stronger together and have an economy underwritten by the bank of England why take the risk of going it alone when there is very little reward, save the satisfaction of Scottish nationonalist sentiment?
    @Plato

    Look at the BBC News website's commentary on the Indy Ref (Referendum Live).08.29 to 08.40 for some extracts and comment.
  • Options
    Alistair said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    steve hawkes ‏@steve_hawkes 1m

    Standard Life says given uncertainty about Scotland's future it has contingency plans to transfer business to England "if a need to do so"

    steve hawkes ‏@steve_hawkes 1m

    .."This transfer of our business could potentially include pensions, investments and other long-term savings held by UK customers"

    steve hawkes @steve_hawkes · 54s

    Standard Life ceo David Nish: "We have a long history in Scotland –but our responsibility is to protect the interests of our customers .."

    He couldn't be any clearer, but Malcolm will no doubt label him a 'bluffing turnip' or 'Tory stooge'.

    Links in with this article -

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10656483/Standard-Life-warns-it-could-quit-an-independent-Scotland.html

    They employ 5000 workers, north of the border.
    Yes , and they can put a brass plate up in London whilst 4995 people still work in Edinburgh. Another unionist stooge trying to help his pal.
    No, it's a CEO trying to protect his business and judging that with 90% of his customer base in a foreign country with a different currency and tax regime it would be smart to relocate there.....don't tell me you weren't expecting this?
    He did not say he was transferring 5000 jobs, he said he would protect customers. He can do this without any job moves. Moving the jobs would damage customers due to the enormous costs.
    You are not really very smart are you. Tory scaremongering as ever.
    Where would the re-domiciled business be taxed?

    Where will the myriad companies that are currently taxed in London pay their tax. Doh.
    Are NI and PAYE payments going to keep Scotland afloat?

    I wonder how long the Scottish government can keep paying for university tuition, when that corporation tax remains in the south.
    When historical-reference-and-projections of Scotland's revenues have been given it has been on the basis of the HMRC dis-aggregated accounts which already has the majority of 'Scottish' financial institutions paying their Corp Tax in England not Scotland.
    Including the Scottish Government ones?
  • Options


    Also given the widespread reports of intimidatory tactics in the press the last few days I wouldn't be surprised if people who will vote NO will be reluctant to admit this to pollsters.

    This seems the current repetitive bleat on PB, Apart from an egg, a bit of heckling and some aggressive stickering (all returned with interest by Noers), what intimidation do you refer to?
    Will this do?, media from both left and right below

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11079296/Anti-English-racists-terrorising-the-No-campaign-in-Scotland.html

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/aug/29/jim-murphy-scotland-better-together-speaking-tour-suspended-intimidation

    Plenty more if you do a news search of "scotland intimidation" at a well known search engine
    3 hours and you came up with that?

    Jog on son.
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670

    Alistair said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    steve hawkes ‏@steve_hawkes 1m

    Standard Life says given uncertainty about Scotland's future it has contingency plans to transfer business to England "if a need to do so"

    steve hawkes ‏@steve_hawkes 1m

    .."This transfer of our business could potentially include pensions, investments and other long-term savings held by UK customers"

    steve hawkes @steve_hawkes · 54s

    Standard Life ceo David Nish: "We have a long history in Scotland –but our responsibility is to protect the interests of our customers .."

    He couldn't be any clearer, but Malcolm will no doubt label him a 'bluffing turnip' or 'Tory stooge'.

    Links in with this article -

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10656483/Standard-Life-warns-it-could-quit-an-independent-Scotland.html

    They employ 5000 workers, north of the border.
    Yes , and they can put a brass plate up in London whilst 4995 people still work in Edinburgh. Another unionist stooge trying to help his pal.
    No, it's a CEO trying to protect his business and judging that with 90% of his customer base in a foreign country with a different currency and tax regime it would be smart to relocate there.....don't tell me you weren't expecting this?
    He did not say he was transferring 5000 jobs, he said he would protect customers. He can do this without any job moves. Moving the jobs would damage customers due to the enormous costs.
    You are not really very smart are you. Tory scaremongering as ever.
    Where would the re-domiciled business be taxed?

    Where will the myriad companies that are currently taxed in London pay their tax. Doh.
    Are NI and PAYE payments going to keep Scotland afloat?

    I wonder how long the Scottish government can keep paying for university tuition, when that corporation tax remains in the south.
    When historical-reference-and-projections of Scotland's revenues have been given it has been on the basis of the HMRC dis-aggregated accounts which already has the majority of 'Scottish' financial institutions paying their Corp Tax in England not Scotland.
    Including the Scottish Government ones?
    Yes, they are based on similar methodology.
  • Options
    OllyTOllyT Posts: 4,925
    Socrates said:

    OllyT said:

    Socrates said:

    OllyT said:

    Socrates said:

    OllyT said:

    I instinctively mistrust nationalism - most nationalist movements play on convincing people that all their problems are caused by someone else. UKIP and SNP are both fall into this category, one scapegoats the EU, the other scapegoats the rUK.

    Blaming someone else for your problems then often spills over into hatred and racism.
    Much as I would regret seeing the union split I would relish watching Salmond deliver over the next decade when the prop of blaming someone else for all your problems is removed.

    Ironically, if he wins, I think there is a fair chance Salmond would rapidly become the most hated figure in Scotland.

    Given that most of UKIP's voters' top concern is the level of immigration to the UK, it's perfectly reasonable to blame the EU for uncontrolled immigration, because we can't do anything about that 45% of it. It's not scapegoating when it's accurate.
    Doesn't alter the fact that UKIP's main mantra is that everything is the fault of the EU and if we got out we'd all be living in 1950's England again and milk and honey would flow endlessly
    No, it's not. You just need to look at UKIP supporters on here like myself, Sean Fear and Richard Tyndall. We get into the nuts and bolts of a conversation. Most of the pro-EU supporters just bang on about the coming of the four horsemen of the apocalypse should we leave. Richard Nabavi is the one honourable exception. Also the EU debates - poll results afterwards showed that viewers felt that Farage had the better actual arguments.
    You are misreading my comment. There are undoubtedly genuinely held and rational views on both sides of the EU debate. My point is that in order to win power nationalist parties inevitably resort to whipping up hatred of an "enemy" that is the cause of all their problems. History is littered with examples and it rarely ends well. Have a quick look at the Mail, Express or Telegraph on any particular day and then try to convince me that the aim is not to whip up irrational anti-European hatred.
    That's not nationalism any more than any other ideology. Read the Guardian and the Mirror and then try to convince me that the aim is not to whip up irrational rich people hatred.

    And I suppose the Nazis weren't nationalist either, just whipping up hatred of a religious minority. None so blind as those that will not see.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,036
  • Options
    SeanT said:

    Plato said:

    The petrol station near me has put up signs saying they won't accept Scottish notes. A small but significant little message to visiting tourists.

    I've just been chatting to a friend who said that the Saltire lifted above Number 10 fell down in true Omen style - is this true? He was laughing so much that I couldn't tell if he was pulling my leg.

    Scott_P said:

    @cathynewman: My Scottish £20 note got rejected at City Airport on landing from Edinburgh. Might as well have returned from a foreign country #indyref

    WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT I PREDICTED A WEEK AGO.

    Scottish £ notes will become worthless in England as of September 19, if it is a YES. People will not take them, unless on pain of prison. Cabs and small shops and other small enterprises will simply refuse
    We live with this in the Channel Islands where UK and Channel Island notes are interchangeable, but Channel Island notes are not accepted in the UK - so we have two sets of ATMs marked clearly "Local Notes" and "UK Notes". Taxis dropping you at the airport routinely ask if you want your change "local or UK".

  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    This is cheering me up a lot today.
    Scott_P said:

    Group Chief Executive of BP says NO

    Good job there are no oil related jobs in Scotland...

  • Options
    FinancierFinancier Posts: 3,916
    Danny565 said:



    Can't see any hatred in there. With even the IMF starting to take inequality seriously the right needs to get out of denial mode. It is perhaps the number 1 reason they haven't won an election for 22 years in the UK.

    Yup. I didn't know Christine Lagarde and Mark Carney were "class envy" warriors.

    You wonder how disgusted the likes of Harold Macmillan would be with today's Tories, who think rancid inequality and poverty are a "price worth paying" just to satisfy some rich people, even at the cost of one part of the country desperately trying to get away because they hate it so much.
    Your last paragraph is not true. The UK has paid itself too much for decades and now we all have to take a severe cut and I mean all, not like GBrown effectively cutting the private sector pensions and not the public sector's.

    Of course those who will miss the worst effects of required austerity will those who get off their backsides and find work (near their home or far away) or grow a business instead of sitting down, watching TV and eating towards obesity.
  • Options
    New Thread
  • Options
    SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    OllyT said:

    Socrates said:

    OllyT said:

    Socrates said:

    OllyT said:

    Socrates said:

    OllyT said:

    I instinctively mistrust nationalism - most nationalist movements play on convincing people that all their problems are caused by someone else. UKIP and SNP are both fall into this category, one scapegoats the EU, the other scapegoats the rUK.

    Blaming someone else for your problems then often spills over into hatred and racism.
    Much as I would regret seeing the union split I would relish watching Salmond deliver over the next decade when the prop of blaming someone else for all your problems is removed.

    Ironically, if he wins, I think there is a fair chance Salmond would rapidly become the most hated figure in Scotland.

    Given that most of UKIP's voters' top concern is the level of immigration to the UK, it's perfectly reasonable to blame the EU for uncontrolled immigration, because we can't do anything about that 45% of it. It's not scapegoating when it's accurate.
    Doesn't alter the fact that UKIP's main mantra is that everything is the fault of the EU and if we got out we'd all be living in 1950's England again and milk and honey would flow endlessly
    No, it's not. You just need to look at UKIP supporters on here like myself, Sean Fear and Richard Tyndall. We get into the nuts and bolts of a conversation. Most of the pro-EU supporters just bang on about the coming of the four horsemen of the apocalypse should we leave. Richard Nabavi is the one honourable exception. Also the EU debates - poll results afterwards showed that viewers felt that Farage had the better actual arguments.
    You are misreading my comment. There are undoubtedly genuinely held and rational views on both sides of the EU debate. My point is that in order to win power nationalist parties inevitably resort to whipping up hatred of an "enemy" that is the cause of all their problems. History is littered with examples and it rarely ends well. Have a quick look at the Mail, Express or Telegraph on any particular day and then try to convince me that the aim is not to whip up irrational anti-European hatred.
    That's not nationalism any more than any other ideology. Read the Guardian and the Mirror and then try to convince me that the aim is not to whip up irrational rich people hatred.

    And I suppose the Nazis weren't nationalist either, just whipping up hatred of a religious minority. None so blind as those that will not see.
    What a stupid, fatuous argument.

  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    All my politically aware friends think it's all gone too far already. They're sick of hearing about IndyRef [click the off button], want the Scots to bugger off and allow us to get on with it.

    There's no room left for soft-soaping them. Even if the result was 60/40 No - the genie is out and the Nats won't stop bitching. Even if they win, it'll be endless complaining and moaning to wear the rest of us down. Like a nagging wife who wants a divorce and all the goodies.

    Whatever happens on the 18th, nothing will be the same again.
    Patrick said:

    The England genie is now firmly out of its bottle. So, paradoxically, YES is now the best answer for the UK. It will at least be clean. I really can't see the Westminster elite doing the decent thing for England. They'll offer Scotland the world but not firmly resolve the WLQ. And that will cause another round of anger with our politicians. Let's just get it over with.

  • Options
    FinancierFinancier Posts: 3,916
    Plato said:

    This is cheering me up a lot today.

    Scott_P said:

    Group Chief Executive of BP says NO

    Good job there are no oil related jobs in Scotland...

    We have just had a visit from a geologist who works with the oil majors on new oil and gas fields.

    Currently he is working with the Russians who wish to exploit the potential fields around the islands in the Caribbean.

    Somehow I don't think Uncle Sam will be happy with that situation - another potential Cuba crisis but economics instead of IBMs? - let alone environmental and tourism considerations. Apparently the Russian believe that the rustle of money will sway many of the governments there.
  • Options
    Bob__SykesBob__Sykes Posts: 1,176
    SeanT said:

    Plato said:

    The petrol station near me has put up signs saying they won't accept Scottish notes. A small but significant little message to visiting tourists.

    I've just been chatting to a friend who said that the Saltire lifted above Number 10 fell down in true Omen style - is this true? He was laughing so much that I couldn't tell if he was pulling my leg.

    Scott_P said:

    @cathynewman: My Scottish £20 note got rejected at City Airport on landing from Edinburgh. Might as well have returned from a foreign country #indyref

    WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT I PREDICTED A WEEK AGO.

    Scottish £ notes will become worthless in England as of September 19, if it is a YES. People will not take them, unless on pain of prison. Cabs and small shops and other small enterprises will simply refuse.

    This will be an immediate effect.

    So if you are living on the Borders, in Scotland, or you go to England a lot, you will need English notes.

    Will people even accept credit cards of Scottish banks?
    I think it's very likely that worried Middle Englanders will be queuing up outside RBS and BOS etc branches the day after a yes vote withdrawing their money to put it somewhere more English.

    I know I would.
  • Options
    Ishmael_XIshmael_X Posts: 3,664
    SeanT said:

    Plato said:

    The petrol station near me has put up signs saying they won't accept Scottish notes. A small but significant little message to visiting tourists.

    I've just been chatting to a friend who said that the Saltire lifted above Number 10 fell down in true Omen style - is this true? He was laughing so much that I couldn't tell if he was pulling my leg.

    Scott_P said:

    @cathynewman: My Scottish £20 note got rejected at City Airport on landing from Edinburgh. Might as well have returned from a foreign country #indyref

    WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT I PREDICTED A WEEK AGO.

    Scottish £ notes will become worthless in England as of September 19, if it is a YES. People will not take them, unless on pain of prison. Cabs and small shops and other small enterprises will simply refuse.

    This will be an immediate effect.

    So if you are living on the Borders, in Scotland, or you go to England a lot, you will need English notes.

    Will people even accept credit cards of Scottish banks?
    Yes.

    And English dispensers will dispense English notes to Scottish bank cards.

    Problem solved.

  • Options
    James Forsyth tweets: "Hear that there'll be some much needed morale boosting news for the Union side this afternoon"
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,229
    Scott_P said:

    @cathynewman: My Scottish £20 note got rejected at City Airport on landing from Edinburgh. Might as well have returned from a foreign country #indyref

    all grist to the mill, we are being treated as foreigners or dummies so all for YES
  • Options
    John_MJohn_M Posts: 7,503
    Charles said:

    Small indirect indication: RedBox (the e-Times briefing) did a snap YouGov poll (which appears to beon what people thought of Brown's DevoMax plan. 32% thought it likely to help No, 14% thought it would hurt No. Scots were reportedly strongly in favour (no figures given) though in England only Londoners were and nationally it was an even split.

    John_M said:

    Morning all. I don't doubt that there will be turmoil in the case of a 'Yes' vote. However, I do think it's yet another example of what a great nation we are. We are prepared to let the Scots go their own way, in a reasonably civilised fashion. What other country would be so saintly?

    There have been lots of examples: Czechoslovakia is a recent one; the Baltic States were able to split off too without any very serious hassle despite genuinely deep reciprocal dislike among many on both sides; Denmark/Norway, etc. The Balkans were an aberration.

    Although the Norwegians *still* don't like the Swedes...
    Czechoslovakia was a made up country, same with the Baltic States. It's like Belgium splitting up; it had no real business being a whole in the first place. I'll grant you the Union of Kalmar.
This discussion has been closed.