Scottish Independence.....

Just switched it on, and within two seconds they were roaring at each other about an irrelevant pile of sh*te.

These are Grade-1 level politicians in Scotland.

In reality, they're Platers.
 
Last edited:
In against a staggering gob-shite, lest we forget. Salmond isn't even doing him the courtesy of letting Darling answer a question. People will not like this - manners count.....even amongst West-Coast tinkers like yourself, I hear. :D

Fu*ck it.....me and you should run the shop.

I demand closure of Flat racing at Ayr and Musselburgh.....Hamilton to be turned into an NCP multi-storey. You can do whatever the fu*ck you want after that.
 
Last edited:
It's hard to believe Salmond had no response to the 'so what's your plan B' question other than sit there and look stupid. It was the most obvious line of attack, and he couldn't prepare for it. Incredible.
 
There is no Plan B hence he couldn't provide an answer. He can't acknowledge the possibility of not using the £, because the Yes vote would immediately start to tank.

The Fat Man came across as both boorish and bufoonish in equal measure.
 
The consensus seems to be that Salmond didn't do too well. Hopefully that's the yes campaign seriously damaged.
 
i don't know DO...debates like this will get a small % of those that vote watching..most people will vote for status quo..its human nature..the unknown..oooh scarey

you can only seriously see a no vote coming...if I were Scots then Salmond alone would ensure i voted that way
 
I would like to know the supposed viewing figures. Mrs O & Orchidette watched it one room, Mrs O's mother watched it in another and I watched some cr@p on BBC Alba.

I watched about the last 20 minutes on STV+1.

I imagine BBC Alba would have taken a fair chunk of the tele-viewing public but I would be surprised if the vast majority of them weren't too bothered as they'd be supporting the BG campaign.

I only caught some headlines in the newsagent's this morning but thought that might not have been an accurate reflection. The BBC website shows the front pages of the six main dailies on sale up here. Two just said they 'clashed' and the other four expressed varying degrees of victory for Darling. The BBC commentator suggested the Yes campaign didn't think they'd won the debate.

They're expecting a 70%+ turnout on voting day. As I've said before, the best birthday present I could have would be a resounding rejection of Independence (under the SNP at any rate).
 
It's important for Scotland that the Yes campaign is not just beaten, but resoundly beaten. Would be a near death bell for Salmond's career if the margin was big enough.

I thought for someone to whom debating doesn't seem to come naturally, Darling was very good last night.
 
I gave up after about 20 minutes or so of it. Both of them are arseholes.

I'll still be voting Yes because its the only sensible choice.
 
Hamm said:
It's hard to believe Salmond had no response to the 'so what's your plan B' question other than sit there and look stupid. It was the most obvious line of attack, and he couldn't prepare for it. Incredible.
Click to expand...

I didnt see it but that is surely the death knell for the campaign.

I
 
In 1999, Alex Salmond called the £Sterling "a millstone around Scotland's neck", whilst promoting the idea of an independent Scotland adopting the Euro as its currency. Quite why this quote has yet to be used by the Better Together campaign is a mystery, as it would demonstrate not only incredibly bad judgement on the part of Salmond, but a degree of flightiness too.

IMO, it's a much heavier weapon to deploy, than simply trotting-out the technical arguments that might prevent a workable currency union - valid as they are. The killer blow hasn't been landed yet, and to be honest, I think it will be won on points, rather than by knockout.
 
Last edited:
Grasshopper said:
In 1999, Alex Salmond called the £Sterling "a millstone around Scotland's neck", whilst promoting the idea of an independent Scotland adopting the Euro as its currency. Quite why this quote has yet to be used by the Better Together campaign is a mystery, as it would demonstrate not only incredibly bad judgement on the part of Salmond, but a degree of flightiness too.

IMO, it's a much heavier weapon to deploy, than simply trotting-out the technical arguments that might prevent a workable currency union - valid as they are. The killer blow hasn't been landed yet, and to be honest, I think it will be won on points, rather than by knockout.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. Maybe they didnt want to appear anti eu?

The fact that the euro has been a complete failure and the EU basically couldnt run the books of a fish and chip shop should be enough to torpedo fattys smug grin
 
Salmond is today accusing Darling of being 'shouty' during the debate.

He genuinely lives on another planet.
 
Grasshopper said:
Salmond is today accusing Darling of being 'shouty' during the debate.

He genuinely lives on another planet.
Click to expand...

He was shouty. Neither of them could answer a straight question with a straight answer.

Did like this though.

Currency

1947-1971 - The pound was in a formal currency union with the US dollar in a fixed exchange rate known as the Bretton Woods system. In effect, the UK used the dollar and did not have an independent monetary system. This period is remembered for a long trend of economic growth, albeit not directly related to currency management.

1971 - After Nixon ended Bretton Woods so that he could pay for Vietnam, the GBP moved to a floating exchange rate with the USD similar to the way that Denmark is pegged to the euro today. In the same year, Decimalisation was introduced. This re-denomination remains the most drastic and noticable change in money handling that the British public has seen in living memory. Only limited control of the pound is possible.

1976 - Economic turmoil results in the UK asking the IMF for a bailout loan. One of the conditions of the loan is tighter management of the currency peg.

1979 - 1986 - Thatcher's government adopts monetarist policies involving loosening but not abandoning the informal peg with the USD.

1986 - The Louvre Accord. Thatcher's government agrees to change the benchmark of the currency peg from the USD to the German Deutsche Mark. The UK still does not have an "independent currency".

1990 - John Major's government signs a formal currency union taking the pound into the Exchange Rate Mechanism, the forerunner to the euro.

1992 - Black Wednesday. The pound is taken out of the ERM, not because of any failure of the Mechanism itself but because currency speculators, encouraged under Thatcher's policies of the '80's, realised that they could make a quick buck by crashing the system. George Soros infamously made himself £1 billion by this move. The pound is now "independent" of any other currency though still partially pegged to gold and silver. The Treasury estimates that the move cost British taxpayers around £3.3 billion.

1999 - Gordon Brown announces in advance that he'll sell the UK's remaining gold reserves and buy euros. Traders short the value of gold and drive it to a near historical low price. By 2002 the move is completed and the UK, for the first time ever, has a fully, freely traded and independent currency.

You'll notice all of the options on this list: Formal Currency Union, Informal currency union, fixed peg, floating peg, mixed basket peg and freely floating.

All of these options are currently on the table for Scotland's currency choice post independence. The UK has actively used all of them in the last 60 years. I don't recall at any time the UK declaring that it was no longer an independent country.
 
Why doesn't Salmond trot these alternatives out then, Simmo?

Is it because all of them carry higher risk than if there was a genuine currency union with ruK? Say it ain't so.
 
The past is irrelevant. The value of the £ is largely dependent on the fiscal policies of the member countries (useless EU take note)

The rest of the UK will not under any circumstances agree to being a hostage to fortune to what will be a rickety economy at best

If scotland does decide to peg its currency then thats up to them. But if by doing so its overvalued, then that will have serious consequences
 
Last edited:
Grasshopper said:
Why doesn't Salmond trot these alternatives out then, Simmo?

Is it because all of them carry higher risk than if there was a genuine currency union with ruK? Say it ain't so.
Click to expand...

tbh I felt he did a bad job of saying what he was trying to say - which was - we won't need a Plan B.
 
simmo said:
tbh I felt he did a bad job of saying what he was trying to say - which was - we won't need a Plan B.
Click to expand...

It's his hubris on this matter that will be his and the wider Yes campaign's undoing.

Even if it were to happen, 'another country' would maintain control over our interest rates etc, which makes the notion of us being 'independent' laughable.

I'd respect the Yes campaign more if said they wanted to ditched the £ and just told it like it is i.e. it's a risk we are prepared to take. At least it would be honest.
 
Think your quotes are flawed - at least in terms of your intended argument is concerned, simmo.

What you've demonstrated is an exchange-rate link, rather than a currency union. No matter what the £ was tracking at the time, it was the prevaling 'strong currency' of its day.......but the Government was still free to drop/lift interests to track that master currency, at its own discretion.

The point of a Scottish/rUK currency union - even on Salmond's preferred terms - is that it delivers control over interest rates directly to the Bank of England i.e. that which is there to set rUK interest rates; which Scotland would of course be compelled to adopt. This means Scottish fiscal and monetary policy would be dictated (in an indirect way) at a macro-level, by whatever the BofE chose to do. And whilst they may be independent from rUk Government, there's little doubt that they act hand-in-glove on such matters.

In a currency union under Salmond's T&Cs, the Scottish economy would continue to be controlled by a Westminster/Threadneedle Street axis......rendering the notion that we'd be "independent" laughable.

It's true that we'd have all the benefits of setting our own tax rates, determing the distribution of the wealth etc, but we get 95% of that under Indie-Lite/Devo-Max anyway.........without the economy-ruining costs associated with the creation of an Independent State (which, as we have already established, would be 'independent' in name only).

The Fat Man is fu*cked if he does, and fu*cked if he doesn't. But he doesn't really care about the implciations anyway. It's not as if he's going to be worrying about it, as he's chauffeured to his next Lear, to attend another President's Club meeting in Bora-Bora.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top