FAQ   Search   Memberlist   Usergroups   Register   Profile   Log in to check your private messages   Log in 
Scots Independence & UK Politics LATEST
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 20, 21, 22  Next
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Next Level Forum Index -> General Discussion
  ::  Previous topic :: Next topic  
Author Message
Site Admin

Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 8686

PostPosted: Fri Nov 01, 2013 7:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

A free Scotland: a free Currency.

by Fintan Dunne - Nov 2, 2013

Just out is a piece of essential banker propaganda-busting analysis from
MMT'er, Bill Mitchell of the choices now facing an independent Scotland.

Getting right down to it, he writes:

"If Scotland wants to be truly independent it has to have its own currency.
Then all the issues about what ratings the public debt would get from the
bond markets and the rating agencies and all the rest of the nonsense
would fade away into irrelevance."
-Bill Mitchell

Two fingers then, to the idea of governments borrowing
their own currency from a bunch of corp welfare bankers.

It get's worse (better)! :

A sovereign government does not need to save to spend – in fact, the
concept of the currency issuer saving in the currency that it issues is

Indeed it get's outright heretical!!

A sovereign government can sustain deficits indefinitely without
destabilising itself or the economy and without establishing conditions
which will ultimately undermine the aspiration to achieve public purpose.

An Indefinite Deficit!
Besides being a great title for an album, that's impossible
-according to mainstream economic theory(propaganda)

Impossible my ass, says Mitchell:

There is never a solvency issue for a currency-issuing government no
matter how fancy you want to define the condition. Read: never.
Expectations of the private sector play no role in that condition.

A currency-issuing government can always meet its liabilities as long as
they are in its own currency. Its central bank can continuously run with
negative capital (in accounting terms) and what we think about the
capacity of that type of government to pay up is irrelevant.


"Expectations of the private sector play no role ."

Or to put it another way: who gives a f**k what bankster's think.

Scotland can print it's own currency.
And spend it on whatever it wishes, too.

It can spend enough to ensure that all of Scotland's resources (both
natural and human) are being mobilized fully for social benefit.

Scots should gaze across the Atlantic to the USA --where neoliberal
bankster economics has consigned 100 million working-age people
to a vast pile of unused human resources --paying some a pittance
to do nothing and deeming them all to be "unemployed."

Is 100 Million on the scrapheap the Neoliberal Nirvana, then?

Thanks, but no thanks.

Scotland take note:

Bonnie Scotland – ignorance or
denial – either way it is fraught

Posted on Wednesday, October 30, 2013 by bill

So-called informed policy briefing papers have started to emerge, which
will distort the choice available to the Scottish people by perpetuating
basic myths about the way monetary systems operate and the choices
particular currency arrangements provide government.

As I’ve said before, if the medical profession offered the sort of analysis
and professional opinion that my own profession offers, then they would
be very few practising medics because they would have all been sent
broke through malpractice lawsuits.....


Minds are like parachutes.
They only function when open.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
James D

Joined: 16 Dec 2006
Posts: 998

PostPosted: Sun Nov 03, 2013 2:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Good article and I hope we Do go for our own currency asap post- Independence.
Maybe even a Bitcoin-Silver-Oil backed mix! Wink

But right now, even though it's f*cked, we need to stick with the Pound, especially because "They" say we "Can't" and to maintain confidence in the economic possibilities.

A new currency now would just be another stick to beat us with - " ... you're too wee, too poor, too stupid and now your pretendy currency will crash, oh dearie me, we'd be better just stick together with what we know - even though it's shite, but what can you do, oh well ... "

The latest poll gave Yes 37% No 45% Don't know 17%

Just an eight point gap - so all to play for with less than a year to go.
Most Don't know's tend to go to Yes, especially if they bother to do some research, so hopefully that 45% for No will be as high as it gets for them.

Independence is just the beginning - the possibilities are endless!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
James D

Joined: 16 Dec 2006
Posts: 998

PostPosted: Wed Nov 27, 2013 8:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yesterday the Scottish Government published its White Paper setting out the case for Independence.

Here's a summary -


And here's a round up of the reaction to it -

Of course amidst all that frothing at the mouth from the MSM in general, there is NO equivalent case being put by the NO side on what will happen should there be a NO vote!
Where's the Black Paper?

Should the YES vote win the referendum next September then a historic date (the same as the Union of the Crowns 1603 and the Parliments 1707) has been set for Independence.

24th March 2016 - INDEPENDENCE DAY!

The Scottish Government's White Paper is quite conservative in how it sees the transition to Independence, however others what to grasp this opportunity and go much further and are already imagining the type of Scotland they want to live in.

Declaration of Radical Independence

A community, a society and a nation. An economy, an environment and a home.

These are not objects that exist because they are measured and weighed and counted.

They are not commodities, they are not someone’s gift.

They are the footprints each of us leave. They are the sum total of our actions and of our will.

Scotland wills itself to be a better nation, one we rebuild with our own hands. Who then will tell us our will is not big enough? Who then will tell us our hands are not strong enough?

Must the hope of the Scots for a better Scotland be the hope of the beaten for a less painful defeat? Must the will of the Scots once again come second to greed and privilege?

This despair has a name. It’s name is NO.

It is a despair that believes poverty inevitable and the decline of public service necessary. It is the cry of people who believe that wealth should belong to whomever has the sharpest claws.

Our poverty, our decline, their wealth, their NO.

For 30 years we have waited for Britain’s rulers to live up to our hopes. They either didn’t notice or didn’t care.

But now they notice. Now they see the chance for working men and working women to take back a nation. Now they tremble at the thought that we might really do it.

Because what drives NO forward is the fear of those who stand to lose their privilege. They fear their kingdom of greed faces its demise. They fear real democracy. They fear that in a land beyond Westminster we will rediscover hope.

That hope has a name. It’s name is YES.

Look at the forces that stand behind NO. Look at the forces that stand behind YES. Choose your side.

Together we can raise up our heads and work for a Scotland yet to come but visible already. A Scotland of the Common Weal, of shared wealth and shared wellbeing.

Our Scotland. All of us first.


Independence will generate a £109,000,000,000 asset windfall for Scotland

An independent Scotland will inherit a fair share of the UK’s £1.3 trillion assets. This is of huge significance. These assets will generate a huge economic windfall for the people of Scotland of £109 billion. It will make Scotland far wealthier and allow us to reshape our institutions’ towards priorities that suit Scotland.

The whole campaign has just moved up another gear.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
James D

Joined: 16 Dec 2006
Posts: 998

PostPosted: Wed Jan 15, 2014 4:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

There have been a couple of significant developments lately which seriously undemine two of the NO-vote's main (although false) arguments - Namely that an Independent Scotland will NOT have the continued use of the Pound Sterling nor continued membership of the European Union.
Complete pish! - as we always knew, but now both MYTHS have been completely blown out of the water!

Une Ecosse indépendante: a French legal view

Earlier this week, a renowned expert in EU law published a paper arguing that it is in the interests of the EU to negotiate with the Scottish government following a yes vote, in order to ensure a smooth transistion into EU membership for an independent Scotland. Naturally the news was absent from the Scottish media, which only publishes information relevant to the debate on independence if it comes in a press release from Better Together covered in scary Halloween stickers.

Yves Gounin, formerly chief of staff to the French minister for European Affairs, wrote the article for the respected French journal Politique Étrangère. Gounin is currently a Conseiller d’État, a member of the legal body providing official legal advice to the French Government so his views carry some considerable weight.

Night bombing

Now here’s an explosive thing to drop at 10 o’clock on a Sunday night.

"Treasury gives debt pledge on Scotland"

Click the image to read the full Financial Times story. Did the game just change?

(The implications of this are huge even beyond those identified by the FT. It suggests, for example, that the UK has already planned for a Sterling union to be in place, because it’s extremely doubtful it would want any debt-repayment arrangement between Scotland and the rUK to be conducted in a different currency. ...)

Treasury debt announcement is a game changer

In TV broadcasts where the independence referendum is discussed it is not unusual to hear the interviewer suggest to a guest pundit or politician that the Yes campaign needs a game changer; what can they do? they implore.
As with all election campaigns, it is rarely the clever strategy that can give one side the edge over the other but the unexpected event, the happenstance. Just such an event happened today when the UK Treasury announced its intention to underwrite every penny of the UK's debt mountain which currently stands at 1.4 trillion pounds.

The Yes campaign didn't need a game-changer, the panic that has engulfed the No campaign since the turn of the year has been evident and growing for some time.

George Kerevan: The Treasury Blinks First

ON Monday, the UK Treasury issued the following statement. It's worth reading in detail:

"The Treasury has today set out detail on government debt in the event of Scottish independence. The technical note makes clear that the continuing UK Government would in all circumstances honour the contractual terms of the debt issued by the UK Government. An independent Scottish state would become responsible for a fair and proportionate share of the UK's current liabilities."


Quite simply, the Treasury's refusal to plan for Scottish independence has spooked the financial markets and this is a belated attempt by the Treasury to calm things down.

The UK's finances are a mess. Britain has an alarming high National Debt of around £1.4 trillion, to which Chancellor Osborn is adding in excess of £100 billion every year. Total debt as a proportion of UK national income is rising (see tables on page 30 of the Chancellor's Autumn mini-budget).

Worse - as far as lenders are concerned - is the fact that the UK still has a so-called structural deficit.
ON Monday, the UK Treasury issued the following statement. It's worth reading in detail:

"The Treasury has today set out detail on government debt in the event of Scottish independence. The technical note makes clear that the continuing UK Government would in all circumstances honour the contractual terms of the debt issued by the UK Government. An independent Scottish state would become responsible for a fair and proportionate share of the UK's current liabilities."


Quite simply, the Treasury's refusal to plan for Scottish independence has spooked the financial markets and this is a belated attempt by the Treasury to calm things down.

The UK's finances are a mess. Britain has an alarming high National Debt of around £1.4 trillion, to which Chancellor Osborn is adding in excess of £100 billion every year. Total debt as a proportion of UK national income is rising (see tables on page 30 of the Chancellor's Autumn mini-budget).

Worse - as far as lenders are concerned - is the fact that the UK still has a so-called structural deficit
Eight per cent of the Bank of England's Treasury bond holding - acquired through quantitative easing - should by rights go to Scotland. But that transfers ownership of a chunk of rUK debt to a foreign country. It means that instead of the UK state owing itself money (because it 'owns' the Bank of England) it would suddenly have a new foreign creditor.

To avoid this financial problem, surely it would be preferable to have a common sterling zone and have formal Scottish representation on the Bank of England's Monetary Policy Committee (which sets interest rates). In return, an independent Scotland would magnanimously forgo removing its share of the Bank of England's assets from London.

UK Government plans to share Sterling currency with Indy Scotland

In order to encourage Scottish people away from voting for independence, the UK Treasury has led an all out untruthful and overwhelmingly negative campaign aimed at undermining the economic confidence of Scotland. Unable to provide a positive economic vision for Scotland remaining in the Westminster system, they have resorted to attacking Scotland’s economic foundations.

The key scare-stories from the No campaign have been that:

1) Scotland’s economy is weaker than it actually is, this has been comprehensively disproved by Business for Scotland.

2) That there is “uncertainty” about the continued use of the pound, but as Business for Scotland pointed out it is in the rest of the UK’s interest as well as Scotland’s to maintain the currency union.

3) That there is “uncertainty” over EU membership when actually it is the UK Government that’s creating uncertainty, for instance by not seeking clarity on the process for Scotland’s EU membership.

4) And of course the old favourite, still going since the mid 70′s, that the oil is about to run out, when in fact as we have proven, there are new potential untapped reserves. The UK government prefers to have nuclear submarines based on the West Coast of Scotland rather than the prosperity an oil discovery would bring. There is also sufficient economic life left in Scotland’s North Sea reserves to underpin a strategy for renewing Scotland’s economy by investing in our areas of economic strength, as opposed to the slow managed decline strategy that Westminster is following.

London realises that Sterling needs Scotland’s exports, (whisky, food, oil and gas etc), to underpin its balance of payments, and global markets will expect an independent Scotland to be part of a currency union as retaining sterling would make sense because of Scotland’s ties to the British economy, according to Deutsche Bank AG and Citigroup Inc.

Victims of their own scaremongering

Independent Scotland would have exceptional credit rating

Scotland’s fiscal position is already stronger than the UK’s


An independent Scotland in national credit worthiness terms would be one of the strongest in the world only lagging being similar leading independent wealthy nations such as Norway. Meantime, the UK has lost its triple AAA credit rating. Of course, Norway had the benefit of a head start having become independent from Sweden much earlier than Scotland has from the UK.

Sterling is Scotland’s currency now, it will be Scotland currency after a Yes vote and today’s announcement paves the way for the Scottish people to see through the No Campaign’s scaremongering and bluffing on both the maintenance of the existing currency union and the division of debt and assets.

And we've only just started 2014 ...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
James D

Joined: 16 Dec 2006
Posts: 998

PostPosted: Tue Feb 04, 2014 3:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

An interesting study has been published by Dr John Robertson of the University of West of Scotland which shows that BBC Scotland and STV are 3-2 more likely to promote the NO vote, as in clearly and demonstrable biased. And that's just when they report stories! Their favourite tactic is just to completely ignore any good news for the YES side.


Suprise, suprise they didn't report that either!


By Paul T Kavanagh

The recent paper from the University of the West of Scotland on bias in the Scottish broadcast media has not been given any coverage in the media which is the subject of its study. Scotland's broadcasters don't want their audience to know that they are biased, partial, and only covering one side of the story.

BBC Scotland's management have mounted an extraordinary attack on the paper and its author, but undaunted the paper's author Dr John Robertson has come out all guns blazing and has published the snotty letter he received from the BBC, together with his devastating critique. Full details can be read here.

There can now be no doubt that BBC management are deliberately downplaying the referendum and equally deliberately are favouring the No campaign. However the report from UWS only covered stories which actually get airtime. Dr Robertson pointed out in his reply that he had not studied the bias involved in story selection, and said that he believed that the Scottish media was also skewing its coverage of the independence debate by not giving airtime to many stories favourable to independence.

That's if they're not delibertately twisting and spinning the words to make traps for fools.


The media is positively jumping with analyses of Mark Carney’s much-anticipated speech about currency unions, with thousands of words being expended to discuss something we’ve already summed up accurately in eleven [“Yeah, whatever you guys arrange between yourselves, we’ll make it work.“ ]. It’s almost comical to watch the amount of anti- (and very occasionally pro-) independence spin being put on a text which went pathologically out of its way not to make any kind of judgement whatsoever on the subject.

Ladbrokes seem pretty clear though: Scotland 1/100 to enter currency union - 50/1 not to !!

And then the Financial Times dropped this bomb!


It’s not as if the Financial Times doesn’t have history with dropping great big payloads of high explosive into the middle of the independence debate late on a Sunday night. But a piece coming up in Monday’s edition (and online tonight) is going to choke a few breakfasts in London tomorrow morning.

It’s not the information in itself that’s new. Most of it is stuff the likes of this site have been screaming for the last two years. But the starkness of the language, and more pertinently the source of it, is going to rock the boat some and no mistake.
An independent Scotland could also expect to start with healthier state finances than the rest of the UK”, for example, is not what we tend to hear from the UK media. (And doesn’t even factor in the effect of Scotland being likely to negotiate a lower debt share than its per-capita percentage.)
Similarly, “Although Scotland enjoys public spending well above the UK average – a source of resentment among some in England, Wales and Northern Ireland – the cost to the Treasury is more than outweighed by oil and gas revenues from Scottish waters”
The article is illustrated with some commendably clear graphics, but the one above in particular is simply dynamite. With the current UK setting the benchmark at 100, it clearly indicates, from Westminster’s own data, that right now an independent Scotland would be 11% better off overnight compared to staying in the UK.

Based on the current total Scottish budget (Scottish Government and UK government) of around £64bn, that’s somewhere in the vicinity of £7 billion a year. We don’t think even the SNP has ever put such a dramatic figure on how much wealthier Scots would be as an independent nation. It’s £1,321 a year for every man, woman and child in the country, or £5,812 a year for the classic 2.4-children nuclear family. Which puts that whole “£500″ thing into some perspective.

Of course that didn't get reported either!


New figures from the Global Connections Survey demonstrate that Scotland is one of the world’s top exporting nations with the economic strength to succeed as an independent country.

Scotland’s exports were worth nearly £100 billion in 2012 alone, a 17% increase on 2008.

The Financial Times reports that the figures offer “a picture of a mature and independent trading nation” which “would also be a vibrant exporter of other goods and services to the world.”

Scotland’s strong export figures create a trading surplus that enhances UK Sterling’s balance of payments. The UK currently suffers from a large trade deficit, but Scotland’s use of the pound underpins the value of the currency. This is a key reason for why a currency union is in the best interests of the rest of the UK.

The good news just keeps coming - Thank God for the Internet or we'd never know! Cool
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
James D

Joined: 16 Dec 2006
Posts: 998

PostPosted: Fri Feb 07, 2014 8:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Business for Scotland puts poor bemused BBC right on a few matters.

Have you ever wondered what Hell is like?

By G.A.Ponsonby

If you're good you go to heaven and if not then you go to hell. Eternal damnation is what awaits sinners and floating about in fluffy clouds is the prize for all goody-two shoes.

But what is hell? This week we saw a snapshot of what hell might look like when the Better Together gates opened and the flames of fear roared out.

The polls have spooked the Unionists there's no doubt about it. This week we had a re-run of virtually every scare. The best – or worst depending on your view – was the comments from BP Chairman Bob Dudley.

"Great Britain is great and it ought to stay together..." said Bob who went on to express his concern about the uncertainty of independence. Top of Bob's list were currency and EU membership.

When I tuned into Reporting Scotland just in time to see wee Glenn Campbell scamper over to Alex Salmond to ask in his usual whining tone if the First Minister had a response to Bob's comments, but no apparent interest in pursuing and questioning Dudley, I thought to myself … this is what hell's like.

Hell is where halfwits make news headlines on the BBC by uttering halfwitted statements that nobody questions. It's where journalism is measured not by your ability to question, but by your ability to accept.

Hell is either Ed Milliband or David Cameron fighting over the UKIP vote by demonising anyone who isn't born and bred in Blighty. Hell is watching as whichever one wins the UK election sets about turning the screw on the dumb-ass Jocks who voted against independence.

Hell is Johann Lamont as First Minister of Scotland with Iain Gray in charge of the nation's finances. It's Jackie Baillie in charge of welfare and Duncan McNeil in charge of … well anything really.

Hell is Scottish Labour realising that needs-based has replaced the Barnett Formula. Hell is watching Scottish Labour trying to explain to the poor, the sick and the elderly why they are still Better Together despite having four billion quid cut from Scotland's grant. It's being told that we are subsidised.

Hell is
watching Scotland's much promised extra powers never materialise whilst crucial powers we once had are eroded. Hell is new nuclear power plants installed in Scotland alongside the replacement for Trident.

It's watching as the oilfields are sucked dry and the gas exhausted, but no fund. It's the missed opportunity of renewables and freezing pensioners who failed the means test.

Hell is having to listen to somebody say they are "proud to be Scottish and proud to be British" as the body of a young Scot in a coffin draped in a union flag is lowered into a grave.

Hell is the look on the faces of some of those who voted No, and those who promoted No, when they see what it did to Scotland. Hell is future generations asking why we had no belief in them.

Hell is the world seeing Scotland as the ony nation ever to reject its own independence.

Hell is in the word No.

And finally at least Artist Taxi Driver gets it - God bless him!

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Site Admin

Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 8686

PostPosted: Thu Feb 13, 2014 7:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Remember when JamesD reported the UK Treasury were forced by
market wobblies to guarantee all UK debt - and thus let Scotland off
the legal hook - if not the moral one?

Boy has that bit them on the ass!

Salmond goes for the jugular Laughing

Alex Salmond responds angrily to
Osborne's rejection of currency union

No deal on sterling will mean no deal on national debt, Scottish
first minister says, as all three pro-union parties back chancellor

Alex Salmond has renewed his threat that Scotland could refuse to pay its
share of the UK's debt
as he bitterly attacked George Osborne's decision
to veto any currency union after independence......

Initially turning down bids for television interviews, he issued a statement
saying that if the UK did refuse to set up a new sterling zone, it would
harm UK businesses and would leave the UK government having to pick
up the entirety of UK debt.

"All the debt accrued up to the point of independence belongs legally to
the Treasury, as they confirmed last month – and Scotland can't default
on debt that's not legally ours
," the statement said.

"However, we've always taken the fair and reasonable position that
Scotland should meet a fair share of the costs of that debt. But assets
and liabilities go hand in hand, and – contrary to the assertions today –
sterling and the Bank of England are clearly shared UK assets.".....

The joint attack from Osborne, Alexander and Balls – the first time all
three pro-union parties have endorsed the same economic policy on
independence – will be used by the pro-UK Better Together group to
mount a new "vote no to save the pound" campaign in coming weeks.

Several recent polls show a majority of Scottish and UK voters believe a
currency union would be the best option for both countries.
But Better
Together sources said their private polling showed that economic security
was a crucial factor for the "middle million" of Scotland's voters who have
yet to make up their mind on independence.

"They feel the burden of proof rests with the Scottish National party and
are looking for reassurance that things will be fine," the source said. "If
there's a backlash, it will be short-lived and it will be from people who are
already thinking that way anyway."

Henry McLeish, a former Labour first minister of Scotland, said there
would be an immediate backlash in Scotland against Osborne's attack
on the currency proposal. It would increase support for independence,
by angering many wavering Scottish voters and building up their sense
of alienation.

Insisting he would vote no to independence, McLeish told the Guardian:
"The great danger for them is that the no campaign now is losing votes
because it's so relentlessly negative, with no empathy for Scotland at all.
[A lot] of people will say 'we're sick of this, these threats won't work'.


"Sterling and the Bank of England are clearly shared UK assets"

And good luck trying to claim otherwise Laughing

Minds are like parachutes.
They only function when open.

Last edited by Fintan on Fri Feb 14, 2014 7:55 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
James D

Joined: 16 Dec 2006
Posts: 998

PostPosted: Fri Feb 14, 2014 10:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It's St. Valentine's Day and there's no love or flowers coming from Westminster!
You're right Fintan they're shiting it and getting nastier every day.

Your article from the Guardian is classic -
Alex Salmond has renewed his threat ...

He has issued No threats, just stated the obvious - the threats all come from Westminster.


Initially turning down bids for television interviews ...

No that was Osborne -

Alex Salmond did give this TV interview to STV who might just be starting to see the writing on the wall -

... the "middle million" of Scotland's voters who have
yet to make up their mind on independence...

That'll be the Don't Knows who are increasingly moving to YES, so this must be their new name so's not to be confused.

And as for poor Henry Mcleish try as he might to look for a positve NO, even he's looking more like voting YES.

He's well summed up here -

In frustration at the lack of progress in positivity from the official no campaign, Henry has made a brave stab at suggesting what a positive prospectus for the Union might look like. It’s Henry’s tragedy, and will be a tragedy for Scotland if we vote no, that under Westminster’s brand of politics each of the five key points in Henry’s attempt to write a White Paper on No all by himself is as out of place as a raised toilet seat in a convent, and just as likely to provoke recriminations, accusations, and excommunication.

Here's Wings to help make sense of it all -

In a world full of seasoned political reporters, it seems inconceivable that we’d be the only people who understand their special language of evasion and obfuscation and code, yet over and over, journalists and broadcasters seem unable to pick up on comments that couldn’t be any clearer if they were written out in neon tubes, taped to a hammer and smashed into the interviewer’s face.

We’ve seen it when Unionist politicians talk of bringing more responsibilities to Holyrood, and dopey hacks robotically report it as an offer of more powers. We’ve seen it in the way that nobody’s apparently able to understand what Labour’s plan to “pool and share resources” actually means if you’re the one with the most resources. And we’re seeing it again today.

We made a prediction in our piece yesterday about George Osborne’s speech:

“You’ll read thousands and thousands of words today about the speech, and we’ll wager that few or none of them will address its true meaning. The UK wants Scots to vote with a gun to their heads – the threat of expulsion from the EU, no matter how much the rest of the EU wants to admit Scotland, via a UK veto.”

Sure enough, there’s been barely a mention of it. The media is talking entirely about currency and currency unions, a subject on which Osborne said basically nothing new whatsoever, and totally ignoring the not-very-hidden subtext that was the Chancellor’s real threat to Scotland. And then we said this:

“But what was actually revealed by the speech is that the UK government is absolutely terrified of Scotland refusing a share of debt.”

And that’s the real meaning behind today’s front-page Herald splash.

Again, it’s not even very well hidden. The Herald actually manages to pick it up, in a single line it casually tosses out then doesn’t bother to explore further or highlight:

“Dismissing the SNP Government’s 18-month timescale for completing negotiations as ‘totally unrealistic’, the source said: ‘A Yes vote in the referendum would be the start of a process, not the end of one; we would start negotiations. But if Alex Salmond made impossible demands, we would not just roll over and agree to everything he wanted. If we could not reach agreement, the status quo would be the default option.’

The senior Coalition figure said one such impossible demand would be the First Minister’s threat, repeated yesterday, that Scotland would not pay its share of UK debt if it were denied a currency union by Whitehall.”

It’s as if the politicians are sitting at a table ostensibly having a conversation about the weather, while actually cryptically negotiating the end of the Union by carefully moving the condiments and cutlery around, and the headlines are “RATHER WINDY OUT THIS MORNING, SAYS CHANCELLOR”.

Because the short version of what happened yesterday is this:

OSBORNE: You’re not getting a currency union.

SALMOND: I don’t believe you. But fine – we’ll use Sterling informally*, but if you’re not going to share the UK’s assets with us we’re not taking any debt.

OSBORNE: We really need you to take the debt. So much so that if you don’t, we’ll freeze you out of the EU and NATO.

SALMOND: You and I both know you can’t pull that off, George. You think the Americans will let you put us outside NATO, given the incredibly important strategic position we have in the North Atlantic? You remember what the “NA” bit in “NATO” stands for, don’t you?

And the EU would have a blue fit – it hasn’t a clue how to go about expelling a country that’s already in and wants to stay. And that’s even if it wanted to kick Scotland out, which it doesn’t.

OSBORNE: Okay, then here’s the big one. Walk away from the debt and we’ll just flat-out refuse to accept the referendum result. We’ll stall and obstruct the negotiations right up to 2016, and then you have to win an election on the basis of constitutional chaos. Fancy that?

No matter what they say the Edinburgh Agreement is a legal and binding document which must be respected.

That hard ball they want to play's looking softer every day!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Site Admin

Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 8686

PostPosted: Mon Feb 17, 2014 11:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote


SNP Independent Scotland Sterling Sharing
Trojan Horse to Plunder British Pound

Politics / UK Politics Feb 14, 2014 - 01:52 AM GMT
By: Nadeem_Walayat

UK politicians of all three major parties surprised everyone by unequivocally rejecting the SNP's cunning plan
to effectively permanently park a Trojan Horse outside the Bank of England on Scottish Independence day that
would effectively allow Scotland to go on an spending binge on a sterling credit card by printing debt without the
consequences of currency panic that normally would result in very high if not hyperinflation, but instead like a
cancer seek to consume its English host
over a number of years as the policy of sterling sharing sucks the
financial life blood out of the British Pound


That's a full-on anti-SNP rant from Nadeem Walayat,
the editor of the website Marketoracle.co.uk

Maybe you rely on MarketOracle for inside dope on events?
Heck, I've even linked an article from the website today by
Ty Andros. His viewpoint I have to allow as part of balance
and I can't find the article on any other site.

But as we are now aware of the editor's anti-SNP stand,
you may be inclined to use your judgement re the site. Wink

Minds are like parachutes.
They only function when open.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
James D

Joined: 16 Dec 2006
Posts: 998

PostPosted: Mon Feb 17, 2014 3:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

An amazingly inaccurate article - What a complete tosser!
If he's an economic expert - I'm Adam Smith!

Anyway I ploughed through it just to see what ever increasingly exagerated porkies he'd come out with.

I've passed it on to Cybernat Command for their shredding analysis and amusement lol Wink

I'll get back to you with any vomitback.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
James D

Joined: 16 Dec 2006
Posts: 998

PostPosted: Tue Feb 18, 2014 7:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

These probably best sum up reactions to this week's serving of the regurgitacion-continual-broken-record playing of the NO's "Better Together" mythical untruths regarding currency/EU membership etc., etc. that have been answered and rebuked so often by the YES side that there is really no further necessity to address them - and indeed the "debate" is moving on without them to discuss themes beyond independence on how we will forge a new Independent Scotland that appears ever more certain.

There’s been a lot of cringing from Unionists over the past week, along with shocked incomprehension, misplaced anger, and what can only be described as out and out anti-Scottish racism. The realisation has dawned upon many south of the Border that Scotland really is serious about this whole indy lark, and there will not be the crushing victory for the no campaign which Better Together expected at the outset. Consequently the comments sections in the UK online press have been swamped by hordes of new posters for whom the penny has just dropped that seismic changes are afoot in Caledonia.

I don’t know a single person who got a loving phone call from friends or relatives in England, begging Scotland to stay in the UK and telling us how much we’re wanted and needed. On the other hand if you want hear that we’re ungrateful subsidy junkies who hate the English, that we’ve done nothing of any use or value and if we vote yes we’ll be evicted and left naked impoverished and alone in the cold next to the barbed wire fence of the UK Sovereign Base Territory at Faslane, you can knock yourself out in the comments section of the Mail, Express, Telegraph or Guardian. It will make you feel dirty, but not in a sexy way.

Most of the Unionist posts make Katie Hopkins appear informed, erudite, and reasonable. Some suffer from the quaint delusion that the border runs along Hadrian’s Wall, so we’d get to annexe Berwick and Newcastle, which is fine by me if folk in Newcastle or Berwick agree to it. Most think that the oil in Scottish waters doesn’t belong to Scotland at all, it belongs to the oil companies or will be split in negotiations and Westminster will take most of it. Eh no, think again, and go look up the phrase “territorial asset”.

Almost all of them think that an independent Scotland would have been liable for the entire costs of bailing out RBS and HBOS, even though most of their business is conducted in England and the operated under Westminster’s regulatory system. (An independent Scotland would only have been liable for that part of the banks’ business operating within Scotland.)
The barrage of negativity, of insults and ignorance is wearisome and sometimes upsetting. But it is also necessary, because it reveals to Scotland what our place in this Union really is, and shows us what the rest of the UK thinks about us. It strips away the rhetoric of Better Together and reveals the Union in its true form. It’s not pretty is it, yet these are supposedly our closest friends and allies, who are so close to us that we are not foreigners to them.

But despite this supposed closeness, it’s becoming plain to everyone in Scotland that our country is deeply deeply alien to the English establishment. They don’t know us, they don’t understand us, and they have no concept of what is or is not in Scotland’s best interests. Yet these are the people who think they can do a better job of governing us than we can do ourselves. We are already foreigners to them, and we have been all along.


During the week in which George Osborne likened the Scottish Government to ‘an angry party to a messy divorce’ and helpfully informed us that a currency is not like a CD collection, something dramatic changed within the indyref debate.

Cameron’s oft repeated mantra that ‘this is a decision that is squarely and solely for those in Scotland to make’ has been exposed by the entry of the British establishment as the most important player in the politics of the referendum. Unsurprisingly, in this blatant exercise of raw political power, it won’t be taking questions.

The union was founded in the wake of the economic suffocation of Scotland. Perhaps its fitting that the very final attempts to defend it use similar tools to those that marked its birth.

The legislation that brought Scotland to the negotiating table, the Alien Act of 1705, embargoed Scottish goods and crippled a country already on its knees after years of war, famine, and political upheaval. Though the co-opting of a corrupt aristocracy and protection of the Kirk sealed the deal, the handmaiden was economic warfare.

It was a strange beginning to what is now regularly described as the most successful union in history. Most states forge some kind of foundation myth about where they come from: Great Britain has not. Perhaps its origins were just a bit too unflattering to those involved to be properly commemorated. On this front, precious little has changed: grand narratives from Cameron about sport, history books and the D-Day landings, sit uncomfortably alongside Osborne’s decree.

Recent pronouncements from London on currency and EU membership follow a similar pattern of behaviour. Scotland, in rediscovering its sovereignty, will suffer economic penalties, it will be forced out into the cold and left to fend for itself. Listening to Osborne’s language you’d be forgiven for thinking that we still lived in the mercantilist 18th century: in which markets and the nation state were virtually interchangeable. It’s not so much that the pound is only for Britons (everyone knows this isn’t really the case) it’s just not for Scots who freely determine how to govern themselves.

What is fascinating about these developments and the reaction that they have fostered is the final emergence of the union as an active participant in the debate. Its true face may not be pleasant but in allowing the mask of its hitherto abstract role to slip, it has made a categorical error. The truth is that nobody knows what the Scottish public make of the union, any more than they know how a high turn out could affect the result of a referendum. This is the first moment in the long history of Scottish self-government that the larger partner has, like a wartime coalition, overruled normal party politics and directly entered into the fray.

And here's Big Eck, cool, calm and collected giving his take on the illogical frothing at the mouth outbursts of the broken union's spokesmen.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Site Admin

Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 8686

PostPosted: Thu Feb 20, 2014 8:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote


Scottish independence:
Currency Union Warning 'Backfires' on Westminster

Voting analyst says support for independence increased
after George Osborne ruled out a currency union

Nicholas Watt, chief political correspondent
The Guardian, Thursday 20 February 2014 19.56 GMT

A warning by Britain's three main political parties that they would rule out a currency union with an independent Scotland has "backfired" as a new poll shows that only slightly more than a third of voters believe Westminster, according to a leading psephologist.

As David Cameron tries to win over wavering voters by holding the first meeting of his cabinet in Scotland next week, John Curtice said that the gamble on a currency union had failed to boost the pro-UK camp amid signs of an increase in support for independence.

The professor of politics at Strathclyde University issued his warning as Alex Salmond said that George Osborne's decision to rule out a currency union in a speech in Edinburgh last Thursday had "backfired in spectacular fashion".

Salmond told MSPs: "Most people in Scotland would feel that George Osborne insulted the intelligence of the Scottish people … The indications we have so far is that the joint enterprise between George Osborne and Ed Balls has backfired on the two unionist parties in spectacular fashion."

The first minister turned on Labour, the Tories and the Liberal Democrats after a poll in the Scottish Daily Mail showed an increase in support for the pro-independence side in the week since the chancellor's speech. The Survation poll found that 38% support independence (up six points on a poll two weeks ago) compared with 47% who support the UK, down five points. Survation cautions that a direct comparison cannot be made between its two polls because of a change in its methodology.

The poll also found that only 37% of voters believe that the Westminster parties mean what they say, suggesting that Salmond's attack on Osborne for "bluff" is striking a chord. Curtice pointed out that only 48% of voters want to form a currency union anyway.

Curtice said that the strategy of the pro-UK Better Together campaign – to create a game-changing moment by ensuring that Britain's three main political parties ruled out a currency union on the same day – has failed. Curtice wrote on the BBC website: "The poll's headline findings suggest that, if anything, the 'no' side's stratagem has not only failed to deliver any immediate boost to the unionist cause, but has actually backfired.".......


Minds are like parachutes.
They only function when open.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Next Level Forum Index -> General Discussion All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 20, 21, 22  Next
Page 3 of 22

Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

Theme xand created by spleen.