Reply to: GBP against the Euro

[AtW]

Please have independence and take Brown with you !!

And take half the cabinet with him, if the condition for Scottish independence would be for those people to be jailed indefinately in Scotland then I'd vote for it and I am sure so will half of England!

[Cyberman]

Because their government decided to use some of its money for those things rather than for whatever it is that your government spends its money on.

Why assume that because Scots "get" these things "free", they "get" then "free" from England?

Scots also get better health care and more spent on roads than others per head in the UK. This money comes from all UK taxpayers, and it is more than 1,000 pounds spent per head than in England. Please have independence and take Brown with you !!

[AtW]

No sir, YOU are comparing empires, I am talking about secession. Scotland was never a part of the British Empire, it is part of Britain. I put that in bold because that is crucial. All of my other examples were likewise not of imperial possessions but of parts of a country, which wanted to secede.

It's a tad more difficult for the biggest empire on Earth to allow secession don't you think? Empires are characterised by large acquired territory rather than anything else, the British I think was the largest ever and it allowed to go most of colonies without war recently and maintains good relationship with most of them, which is a rarity.

There are plenty of countries that have got more or less separatists regions - say in Spain, and elsewhere, it's not a unique problem of England you know. What is unique is that England was the core member of Empire that allowed huge territories to go free pretty recently. That example how to do it should have been taken into account when USSR collapsed.

[expat]

50-60 years is not distant at all. Distant would be Roman Empire.





Those were not empires dude! You are comparing British Empire that I think was the biggest in history of this planet against effectively close neighbours that had some historical fights. Your examples do not qualify size-wise - it's not even in the same ballpark.

No sir, YOU are comparing empires, I am talking about secession. Scotland was never a part of the British Empire, it is part of Britain. I put that in bold because that is crucial. All of my other examples were likewise not of imperial possessions but of parts of a country, which wanted to secede.

Belgium was part of the Netherlands, wanted to secede, and was allowed to do so.
Norway was part of Sweden, wanted to secede, and was allowed to do so.

Ireland was part of Britain, wanted to seced, and was not allowed to do so.

So my point is, if Scotland, which is part of Britain, should at some time want to secede, will it be allowed to do so?

[AtW]

We are talking not of distant empire but of a close neighbour that had been assimilated, and wanted its independence back. In that vein:

50-60 years is not distant at all. Distant would be Roman Empire.

Belgium from Netherlands.
Norway from Sweden. Greenland, more or less, from Denmark.

Those were not empires dude! You are comparing British Empire that I think was the biggest in history of this planet against effectively close neighbours that had some historical fights. Your examples do not qualify size-wise - it's not even in the same ballpark.

[expat]

Rubbish - there isn't another still existing core member of empire that allowed its colonies to go free and keep good relations with them.

We are talking not of distant empire but of a close neighbour that had been assimilated, and wanted its independence back. In that vein:

Belgium from Netherlands.
Norway from Sweden.
Greenland, more or less, from Denmark.

All relatively peaceful; self-rule accepted by core country.

Compare with Ireland, for example.

[expat]

So how come Scots get free university education, free prescriptions, their own Parliament etc. ? You're having a laugh !!

Because their government decided to use some of its money for those things rather than for whatever it is that your government spends its money on.

Why assume that because Scots "get" these things "free", they "get" then "free" from England?

[Cyberman]

That old lie! No, it doesn't. The Barnett Formula is a Thatcher-era kludge described by its author Barnett as not a formula but a back-of-the-envelope estimate, designed to squeeze Scottish funding, not expand it. All it does is guarantee at least part of Scotland's enormous budget contribution coming back.

Total agreement there! Except:

1. England, unlike many other countries, does not have a good record for allowing peoples their freedom. Not without a good bit of violence. Even a little bit just makes the English self-righteously see themselves as the victims, so they "bravely" strike back.... it is sad. I can only say that the Scots are ready. English steel has never in history laid us low, only English gold, or treacherous Scottish nobility.

2. I will not go away without saying that many decent English people (and there are many) have long thought, rightly or wrongly, that they were subsidising Scotland - and they were willing to do so. That should not go unnoticed.

So how come Scots get free university education, free prescriptions, their own Parliament etc. ? You're having a laugh !!

[AtW]

1. England, unlike many other countries, does not have a good record for allowing peoples their freedom.

Rubbish - there isn't another still existing core member of empire that allowed its colonies to go free and keep good relations with them.

Personally I am all for Scotland to be independent or Wales if they want to. I doubt though that referendum on those parts of UK would succeed right now or at all.

[expat]

Scotland in the UK gets 1,000 pounds per head more in state spending than the rest of the UK.

That old lie! No, it doesn't. The Barnett Formula is a Thatcher-era kludge described by its author Barnett as not a formula but a back-of-the-envelope estimate, designed to squeeze Scottish funding, not expand it. All it does is guarantee at least part of Scotland's enormous budget contribution coming back.

The sooner they leave, the better as far as I am concerned.

Total agreement there! Except:

1. England, unlike many other countries, does not have a good record for allowing peoples their freedom. Not without a good bit of violence. Even a little bit just makes the English self-righteously see themselves as the victims, so they "bravely" strike back.... it is sad. I can only say that the Scots are ready. English steel has never in history laid us low, only English gold, or treacherous Scottish nobility.

2. I will not go away without saying that many decent English people (and there are many) have long thought, rightly or wrongly, that they were subsidising Scotland - and they were willing to do so. That should not go unnoticed.

[AtW]

Is it still OK to say "Sound as a pound!"?

As safe as "bricks and mortar" - maybe they meant different kind of mortar?

[thunderlizard]

Is it still OK to say "Sound as a pound!"?

[DiscoStu]

Watching AtW and CyberTory argue about economics is like watching two one-legged men try to have an arse kicking contest...

[AtW]

Inflation was immaterial

Oh really? So people are now paying out like extra £1000 per year in energy charges, food is much more expensive etc etc - and you say if pound dropped 25% value starting last year when dollar prices were at height would be great thing?

Inflation falls anyway as demand falls due to to current very serious crisis, exacerbated by HMG !!

It won't fall now that the rates were dropped - 25% drop in pound value is a very large devaluation, we will see modest reductions in energy bills next year now - BoE should have kept high rates to keep pound up, but they did not since they are obviously under the thumb of Govt despite "independence" bollox that I never bought into.

[Cyberman]

No, they would not because LIBOR would not have dropped with BoE dropping rates and inflation would soar because commodities are priced in dollars - pound only recently was £1 for $2, now it's closer to $1.5 - drop of good 25%, imagine what kind of inflation would this have caused when oil was $150 per barrel? Most of disposable income recently was eroded by energy prices, food (as consequence) etc - if anything BoE played it right to avoid dropping rates (and as the result devaluing pound) too early, at least now commodities peak is behind us so devaluation is not as bad as it would have been otherwise.

Inflation was immaterial and the BofE at last have realised that. Their priority should have been to avoid a recession, and they quite clearly have failed. Inflation falls anyway as demand falls due to to current very serious crisis, exacerbated by HMG !!