Something pointed out to me that I wasn't hitherto aware of:

Assuming Scotland agrees to take its fair share of UK debt (not a given). Scotland then sets up its own currency and central bank. Their share of the debt is then denominate in Scottish Groats (or whatever the currency is called) at some arbitrary/best guess rate. Lots of this debt is held by rUK institutions including banks.

Scottish currency then devalues 20% (not unlikely, small country with unproven central banks, currency could plunge or yo-yo). rUK institutions who held this debt (inherited from the UK debt that Scotland took its fair share of) are now underwater and need a bail out. Guess who pays? rUK taxpayers of course.

Scotland can't be allowed to not take its fair share of UK debt.

And when it does takes its fair share of debt, it can't be allowed through action, inaction, or bad luck, have its currency devalue leaving rUK taxpayer on the hook for a bail out.

There needs to be some guarantees over this. Like the transfer of oil fields to rUk in case of a need for a bail out.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/m.huffp...71dcf374b2/amp

I don't quite understand why she thought the bloke was being facetious. A prefectly reasonable question, I thought.

Last time the SNP's plan was for currency union with the rUK, but they didn't ask Westminster who later said they wouldn't allow this.

If the back up plan is to use Sterling anyway (sterlinisation) then they have all their monetary policy set in London with implications for debt raising (more costs) and pensions.

It's no wonder the SNP said very little on the currency options in 2014 because it's a minefield.

Much like the Brexit plan... there is no plan for Scotland Post ScotchUK... which is why Scottish politicians are being as vague as possible, much like Brexiters were and still are being now.

See the link hodgy posted, they have no idea what's involved.

As for Scotland adopting the pound, how's that going to work when they're in Europe using the English pound. :lol1:

[SILLY MODE]
Sturgeon has said the Scots have as much right to the [British] Pound as the rest of the UK.

But prior to the union of 1707 they had their own pound: Pound Scots... Which was valued 12x less than the, then, English Pound.

I wonder why she wants to keep the British quid. :lol1: ;)
[/SILLY MODE]

Westminster will never agree to a currency union because it means handing the Bank of Scotland a degree of monetary policy sovereignty over rUK. This would be insanity. The Bank of England would no longer have full control over Sterling.

As for Scots having the right to use the pound (sterlingisation), sure but they have the same right to use the dollar or cowry shell.

It used to be worth more apparently but Scotland had a lot of economic problems in the 17th century culminating in the ruinous Darian scheme which arguably forced them into the Union.

Interesting interesting. Gotta love history.

Of course you voted out. You succumbed to the bullsh1t like everyone else who hasn't actually got a clue about either the current state of play or the likely outcome. That's abundantly clear to see.

Yes, the writing on the bus said "let's" But it also said £350m a week. Which is a proven lie.

Must be nice to live in blissful ignorance.

Not everyone saw that and believed it :thumb:

Ignoring the Remoan insults yet again....

A proven lie? Like the need for another budget, should we vote out? Like the "fact" it will cost every man, woman and child in the UK £4300? Like the "fact" that companies would move abroad? Like the "fact" that we'd be at war again?

How is the £350m a week any more of a lie than those?

And what the remoaner sheep are now trying to do is tie the UK government to a promise that WAS NEVER MADE...you couldn't write this sort of stuff, you'd get laughed out of your job.

And OK, then, if the £350m is a lie, how much do YOU admit we pay, per week? Never mind weaselling, never mind what we might, or might not get back, how much does it cost in £££ to be a member?

See my post above :facepalm:

You really just reply without actually reading, don't you. Are you such an angry wee man that you are blinded to what's there in black and white?

No one has a clue, that's fact. It's all guess work and depends on perspective and whether your an optimist or pessimist. Until the deal is on the table and agreed we wont know

But one FACT we do know is the UK paid a rounded figure of £13 billion into the EU in 2015 (that is paid - rebate) and a round figure of £4.5 billion was spent in the uk by the EU, so an overall figure of £8.5 Billion.

Official budgetary figures in the link

https://www.gov.uk/government/upload...15.pdf#page=44


and a quick number crunch, 8.5bill/52 = £163 mill a week.

Err, yeah...as I posted earlier :p

But what you (and Jeff - although he's to blinkered to even see it) is the income generated and the duty saved by thousands of businesses in the UK by way of Eorpean trade. that trade within the Euopean arena

The UK is a net importer of goods and services. If there is no free trade agreement the estimates are that the UK will be facing £11bn extra trade costs. So that £8.5bn actually saves £11bn in trade costs, a net saving of being in Europe and benefitting from the free trade agreements of £2.5bn.

Of course if (and its a massive if) May can negotiate similar trade agreements with Europe then we might be a few billion better off, but even that's no where near enough to reverse the UK's current deficit.

So you admit its a guess yet their guess is BS and claim yours isn't?

liar liar pants on fire springs to mind

Eh?

Where am I "guessing" anything?

And see my edit above

as soon as you said 'its estimated' you made yourself look like a plonker. It's a guess, so could well be BS, which is what you claim others saying when they claim different to you. Simply put we don't know.

You even admit yourself we could be better off, so make up your mind which way your swinging.

If the price goes up then people look else where, emerging markets come into play, maybe even within the UK, which would mean money stays within the country even if the price does go up, which would be even better.

The reality is there will be an agreement reached, too much is at stake for both side for it not to be.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/782...ort-think-tank

And yes...Express, but the same report was quoted on BBC teletext this morning, so it's not made up. Your remoan lies are all being found out, one by one. LOL

And in 2014, the figure was £17.8 billion gross paid. And that's £342m per week, which is close enough for me. :thumb:

Your figures are just remoan bull, and you know it. LOL

oh, that's OK then........let's give 'em it anyway, and have to accept all the migrants, and all their silly rules and laws, why not?

Do you even read what you write?

Apologies for being honest :rolleyes:

Estimate does not mean wild guess. It's a future event so of course there are no hard numbers to go by. The "estimate" I quoted was as "estimated" by readily available on line sources and as "estimated" by way more intelligent and knowlegeable individuals than your or I. So i guess that makes those poeple and sources "plonkers" as well.

Even Business For Britain, a pro brexit organisation consiers those costs will be well over £7bn. I've seen calculations (there - is that a better word?) originating from the London School of Economics at £40bn.....!

At the of the day mate, everything forcast by either side is just a best guess as no one can forsee the actual terms of any trade agreements.

Does that make you a "plonker" too?

It also makes me laugh that those who are so quick to suggest that Scottish independence just wont work are often the very same who are convinced brexit will.

Whereas the reality is that there was and is no more of a post brexit plan for the UK than there was a post independence plan for Scotland.

This board should be in the definition of the word irony.

Jeff

Please mate, stop reading the Express and the Daily Mail and find some credible, non biased sources.

I hope I'm wrong, I really do and that UK plc prospers out of Europe. But its one hell of a gamble and has come about more due to political dick swinging than anything else.

There's no BS here. Google is your friend - but please, again, look for credible sources.

PS - when working out the cost of something its a generally accepted concept that you take what you pay out and deduct what you get back. Even a child can work that out. You know - basic arithmetic :thumb:

Have a read of this

http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/brexit02.pdf

the biggest difference is scotland is a net gainer from the uk, the uk is a net looser from the EU.

Scotlands books when you go look at the are extremely bad reading, they have ore debt than greece does :o

EU wont let scotland in so they will default

Greek debt is around €345 billion!

Scottish debt is around £15 billion!

So, clearly, Scotland has considerably less debt than Greece! Perhaps you should check your facts before making such extremist statements! Something those tabloid papers should also consider doing before printing their hatred!

In my opinion, Scotland is leaving the EU whichever way they go and either way they're screwed, so if they're ever going to break free and take back control, now would be the time to do it!

As pointed out above, the hypocrisy of the Brexiteers who think its great for the UK to leave the EU but bad for Scotland to leave the UK is just amazing!

You are mixing up debt and deficit for Scotland.

Nope! Read the headline!

Indeed lol, although IIRC Scotland doesn't have any debt per se, it has a share of UK debt which it may take up or it may not. I believe its share would be £150b or so.

Read the article, the writer - or headline writer - doesn't understand the difference between debt and deficit. Not that Scotland has a formal deficit per se anyway, it's estimated or calculated.

Sorry my bad wording. By debt I mean as said deficit. With no sign of anything to sort it out.

It is obviously incorrect as tdw explains.

:facepalm:

What were you saying about checking facts? :lol1:

This highlights a couple of things. First, you don't know what you're talking about. Second, you're gullible and believe the headlines. Typical traits of most of the clueless, desperate remoaners on here.

Now go away and research the difference between debt and deficit! :thumb: