Salmond "We can take Scotland in two weeks"

[TestMangler]

This is how it works, TM.

The guy has a position. He is working for the Scottish government so on the Yes side. Yet even he admits the weaknesses of the Scottish government position of reneging on the debt. So when someone admits a weakness in their position, you tend to believe them. What's in it for them to make up a weakness?

I think a CU is bad for EWNI and iScotland, because it leaves Scotland hampered by London fiscal policies. That doesn't suit either side.

Ok, agreed, so, like I said, you take that part of his view that suits your needs and you think reinforces your argument against a CU, and reject the rest where the same person states that no CU is bad for rUK.

If only leaves Scotland hampered by UK fiscal policy if you know what the terms of the CU are.

[Old Greg]

Ok, agreed, so, like I said, you take that part of his view that suits your needs and you think reinforces your argument against a CU, and reject the rest where the same person states that no CU is bad for rUK.

For the reasons I explained.

[Batcher]

Mr Beveridge seems to think there is a significant risk that it will be treated as default.

And when you say asset, are you still claiming that sterling is an asset?

We wouldn't be defaulting if we took our share of debt?

Sterling is a strong currency, helped in part by Scottish GDP. So it is an asset to whoever gets to use it

[Old Greg]

We wouldn't be defaulting if we took our share of debt?

The question was whether it would be treated as a default if Scotland refused to take on its share of the debt. I think we have established that the answer is: there is a significant risk.

Sterling is a strong currency, helped in part by Scottish GDP. So it is an asset to whoever gets to use it

No, it is an advantage to whoever gets to use it. It is not an asset.

[shaunbhoy]

Can you point out where I mentioned a free ride on everything?

I said we held a strategic position and therefore would be attractive as a NATO member even without WMDs on the Clyde.

Particularly when you point out to the Americans that under certain circumstances, you might be willing to throw all 125 of the New Scottish Defence Force into the fray.
And possibly equip them ALL with rolled-up copies of the Big Issue.

Add in a couple of Sopwith Camels and the revamped Vital Spark and it will really have ISIS bricking themselves.

[Batcher]

The only currency Scotland will be taking, other than Sterling, would be the Euro
A standalone currency would take years and the point at which such a position is taken is critical - Scotland would have to have overcome all the pain of a separation and emerged the other side with a healthy economy, we would then have to agree how debt - your mortgage for example - is repriced with the very real danger of a fall in the value of a new currency and soaring borrowing costs. In fairness to the 'Yes' team they have distanced themselves from this as they know it could kill an independent Scotland for generations if mishandled.

Saying we'll have a new currency is just way too glib and way too far in the future to even consider in this debate. Really.

How can Scotland take the Euro if we're kicked out of the EU like the No side say will happen? You have to be a member of the IMF for two years before you can join the EURO too.

The currency will be Sterling.

[Old Greg]

How can Scotland take the Euro if we're kicked out of the EU like the No side say will happen? You have to be a member of the IMF for two years before you can join the EURO too.

The currency will be Sterling.

Scotland won't be kicked out of the EU (or probably not, anyway).

But if EU membership is a must, that rules out sterlingisation as Scotland would have no central bank.

[TestMangler]

For the reasons I explained.

But you have no idea what the terms of a negotiated CU would be, so pointing out the disadvantages at this point in the discussion is somewhat silly, no ?

Carney also set out the benefits of a currency union including eliminating transaction costs, promoting investment & encouraging integration. And he highlighted some of the reasons why a currency union would suit the social and economic landscape of Britain, not least the lack of a language barrier to the movement of labour supply. Technical challenges highlighted in Mr Carney’s speech – such as fiscal and banking structures – were recognised by both the Scottish Government’s independence White Paper and the independent Fiscal Commission Working Group. In this respect, it was interesting that Mr Carney specifically mentioned the importance in his education of Sir James A Mirrlees, one of the members of Scotland’s Fiscal Commission Working Group, an architect of the currency union proposal and a nobel prize winner.

There was nothing in what Mr Carney had to say about the sharing of fiscal structures which suggested any of the policies like investing capital investment, reducing corporation tax, scrapping air passenger duty and an extension of free childcare to grow Scotland’s economy would not be possible within a currency union. In fact, much of the points he highlighted involve the kinds of sensible fiscal parameters and structures a financially prudent independent country would want, especially one that recognises the benefits of sharing services in a globalising world. Moreover, all western countries including the UK must learn the lessons of the credit crisis and over borrowing. Prudent fiscal parameters will surely apply to both Scotland and the rest of the UK in future and a Scottish negotiating team should insist on them.

[Unix]

The question was whether it would be treated as a default if Scotland refused to take on its share of the debt. I think we have established that the answer is: there is a significant risk.



No, it is an advantage to whoever gets to use it. It is not an asset.

If Scotland offer to accept it and rUK refuse because they don't want a CU then it's not going to be viewed as a default.

[DiscoStu]

If Scotland offer to accept it and rUK refuse because they don't want a CU then it's not going to be viewed as a default.

Why do you keep making things up? Do you have high-up sources in the ratings agencies?