[Ulrich Mayring]

Nah, to join the EU you sign a treaty with all existing EU countries. If you want to leave they'll give you terms for leaving you have to agree to. If you don't agree to those terms, it'll drag on for a couple of years and eventually you're thrown out unceremoniously and no one ever talks to you again

If you get out of the EU, you automatically get out of the Euro, btw. But you can leave the Euro de facto anytime by issuing a new currency and passing a law that all government spending and taxation will be in the new currency. Greece has an emergency plan that does just that and can be activated at any time.

I believe the UK and Denmark have an opt-out clause for the Euro as well. Generally, they agreed to adopt the Euro as soon as they fulfill the convergence criteria.

Ulrich

[Paul Gray]

Late 2008/early 2009, Greek GDP was $341 billion.  Now it's around $241 billion.  i.e. in under six years GDP has dropped 29.3%.  That's almost exactly the same amount GDP fell in the U.S. during the Great Depression.  See http://www.tradingeconomics.com/greece/gdp

Also since 2009, the Greek unemployment rate went from around 9% to over 27%.  Youth unemployment, for adults under 25, went from the low 20s to 60%.  It's now hovering in the low to mid 50s.

All these numbers are full-blown disasters, whether viewed over time or as a snapshot.  And Greece is not alone.  Spain faces similar unemployment numbers, as Bob said deflation threatens the entire continent, and even Germany, Europe's economic leader, is pulling back.  

The various bailouts have not succeeded: that's why the ECB was forced to start its own Quantitative Easing program, buying a trillion dollars (or is it euros?) of mostly worthless debt European banks can't afford to show on their books.  

The euro has fallen from over $1.60 to under $1.30.  The ECB recently introduced negative interest rates: you have to pay them to loan your money to them.  Much of the continent depends on Russian gas & oil, which the kind and gentle hands of Vladimir Putin could pull out from under them without a moment's notice.  

IMO the EU as a whole faces the biggest crisis in its young lifetime.  

Which is why I, as a life-long socialist, am having serious thoughts about voting for a right-wing bunch of nutters called UKIP...

Duncan,

I feel your pain. As a pro-European I was always, and still am, strongly opposed to the Euro. It was always economically unworkable and remains so today. But please don't ever vote for those lunatics.

[Jon Wiggett]

Rich,

using and sharing are not quite the same, however I will allow you to enjoy your faux correctness. Shame about your refusal to answer those questions that apparently do not suit. Still I guess I did not expect anything else at this point anyway despite you saying you would.

Jon

I'll try one more time Jon....  Scotland and the rUK currently share a common currency, the Pound Sterling, and use it for all internal transactions.  If there is a Yes vote on Thursday, negotiations will commence as to how to divide up the assets and liabilities relating to the pound once independence is achieved, which will be 18 months from now.  In the interim, Scotland will continue to use the currency and continue to have a shared interest in that currency.  During that 18 month period, Scotland will also continue to be a member of the UK and governed by the Westminster Parliament.  During that 18 month period, Scotland will also enter into negotiations with the EU for its potential entry.  In those negotiations, I would be very surprised if they did not discuss the possibility of using the Euro which, to me, would be the preferred long term option.  Others might disagree.  I did write my Masters thesis on the impacts of a common currency on the peripheral regions of the EU, and my first degree was in English, so I am not completely ignorant of the issues (or the semantics) we are talking about.

Please remind me of any question you have asked that I have not responded to and I will answer them as best I can and as soon as I can.  After that, I'll wait until Friday morning to make any further contributions to this thread.

Slainte

Rich

Rich,

you started off by promoting Eire as an example of how an independent Scotland could continue to use the pound sterling after independence but now are claiming you were only talking about Scotland using the pound until independence but then you would be surprised if it did not consider using the euro.

Just for your information Scotland has no other choice than to use the pound until a possible independence and Salmond has already ruled out using the euro. I am very impressed  with your masters degree though quite clearly you have not used the nounce when thinking through your shifting argument.

 'I like Mark am curious as to why you have not got the vote having lived here so long.'

Jon

[Paul Gray]

Rich,

Speaking as pro-European Euro (currency) sceptic I'd be genuinely interested in what you concluded in your thesis.

Paul Gray
Bsc Economics

[Mark Chaplin]

"To use a more recent example, the Baltic states have moved from one mega-state (the USSR) to another (the EU) over the past 20+ years.  Do you think that they want to move back?"

Rich on this we agree although you may forget the reason the Baltic States were part of the USSR was war, invasion and occupation followed by the iron curtain. This is probably the reason the average Estonian, Latvian or Lithuanian doesn't want to go back to being part of Russia, deportation to a gulag isn't that popular I'm told in the Baltic States. "The total number deported in 1944–55 has been estimated at over half a million: 124,000 in Estonia, 136,000 in Latvia and 245,000 in Lithuania."

[Mark Chaplin]

The reason many Brits have a beef with the European Union is we joined the EEC otherwise known as the Eurpoean ECONOMIC Community, this is what we voted to join the the 1970s. What we didn't vote for or expect was political union and ridiculous laws from Brussels. Currently the most serious issue in Europe requiring law is the electrical consumption of vacuum cleaners, clearly far more worthy of legislation than trying to fight ISIS, reduce unemployment or tackle debt.

[Chris Kane]

Jon, Rich doesn't get a vote because the electoral roll is limited to citizens of the UK, EU and Commonwealth countries. It produces the bizarre outcome where an Australian, Canadian or South African can vote within weeks of moving to Scotland, while he can't.

I still don't understand why they allow any non-UK citizens on their electoral roll.

[Bob_Huntley]

Jon, Rich doesn't get a vote because the electoral roll is limited to citizens of the UK, EU and Commonwealth countries. It produces the bizarre outcome where an Australian, Canadian or South African can vote within weeks of moving to Scotland, while he can't.

I still don't understand why they allow any non-UK citizens on their electoral roll.

One reason could be that without Australian, Canadian and South African volunteers their wars might not have succeeded.

Bob

[Rich Goodale]

Jon

I don't see a question in your most recent post, but if it is regarding why I don't have a vote, Chris Kane answered it above (I'm pretty sure I answered it earlier in a reply to Mark, but I could be wrong).  As to the Euro, Salmond never said he would never consider the Euro, he just said that keeping the pound was his preferred option.  As a very shrewd politician, he knew that expressing any love for the Euro given its recent crisis was toxic, but I'll bet you a pint that he (or whoever is running an independent Scotland 2-3 years from know) will eventually hook up with Brussels rather than rUK.  I'll also bet you another pint that Salmond will not be the first PM of an independent Scotland.  Even if he wins the "war" he'll either retire early or be tossed out, just like Churchill in 1945.  In fact I'll bet you a further pint that in the case of independence, the SNP will not exist 5 years from now.  They will have lost their raison d'etre, and the country will be run by shifting coalitions of the other 4 parties.

Paul

I am not an economist but a lowly MBA, but my paper was based on work I did with Harvard economists whilst I was getting my MBA.  Essentially I stole/built upon Gunnar Myrdahl's thesis that currency unions inevitably lead towards a concentration of wealth towards the geographic center of the states of the union, draining resources from the peripheries.  In the case of Europe, this center was (and still largely is) the area connecting London, Paris, Milan, Frankfurt and Amsterdam).  I went on to describe the negative effects of this concentration on places like the north of Britain, the Iberian peninsul, the south of Italy and even the eastern and northern parts of what was then West Germany.  I predicted that the more that the EU (in those days the EEC) concentrated political power in the center the more they would have to find ways to transfer capital to the peripheral regions.  Given that this was an MBA thesis, I then speculated on the opportunities for investment banks in facilitating these capital transfers.  Since I did this in 1972, that's about all I remember!

Mark

I know well the history of the Baltic States, and lived through the darkest periods of the cold "war" at an age when I was both impressionable and knowledgeable.  I was in my last years of High School when the Cuban Missle Crisis occurred and I was at University and the US Army during the height of the Vietnam War.  How old were you in the 1944-55 period that you cite?  And how well do you know the history of Scotland and England in the years leading up to and following the 1707 Act of Union?  From what I have read, it was not dissimilar to the histories of the Baltic States and the Soviet Union from 1917-1989.  Have you heard of the Highland Clearances, which happened many decades after the 1707 Union?  If you do, you will know just one of the many reasons that these days many Scots still feel very aggrieved and are willing to take that leap of faith that will be independence. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highland_Clearances

Chris

I beleive that Scotland (and rUK) is required by EU law to give the vote to citizens of any EU state who are resident in the country.  Commonwealth citizens residing in Scotland also get the vote, just because (as Bob says below).  So do the Irish, again just because.  Americans, such as me, do not count, probably due to spite over that 1776 thingy.

Bob

If your thesis is true, than the Russians and the Yanks should get to step to the front of the queue, as without them, the UK would now be speaking German  .

Signing off until Friday, as promised.  If anybody wants to continue this debate, e-mail or IM me.

Rich

[Duncan Cheslett]

I believe the UK and Denmark have an opt-out clause for the Euro as well. Generally, they agreed to adopt the Euro as soon as they fulfill the convergence criteria.

Ulrich

Unlike virtually every other country in Europe, who adopted the Euro despite failing woefully to fulfil the convergence criteria!

[Duncan Cheslett]

Duncan,

I feel your pain. As a pro-European I was always, and still am, strongly opposed to the Euro. It was always economically unworkable and remains so today. But please don't ever vote for those lunatics.

I'm sure that I won't. I would however, like to see the other parties get their noses bloodied over Europe and have to review their policies.

As Mark says, the UK joined an economic free trade area or 'Common Market' in the 1970s, not an embryonic United States of Europe. In this at least UKIP undoubtedly  has its finger on the pulse of UK public opinion.

Personally, I can see much mileage in a 'North Sea Alliance' of the UK, Scandinavia, the Benelux countries, Poland and Germany. Possibly Ireland...

[Jim Nelson]

Do you think this will sway the vote? 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/15/john-oliver-scotland-last-week-tonight_n_5821950.html

[Wayne_Kozun]

This editorial was published over the weekend by The Globe and Mail ("Canada's National Newspaper")

Dear Scotland: An open letter from your Canadian cousins

The punchline:

There is an alternative to independence: federalism. It’s something we’ve been practising and perfecting for a century and a half. You’ve been at it for a decade and a half. Give it time. We’re not sure if the “Devo Max” plans to devolve nearly complete responsibility for taxation to the Scottish Parliament, plans being floated by the British government in the final days of a referendum, are necessarily the way to go. But some devolution of taxing authority can take place. The Scottish Parliament has little power to raise its own revenues – whereas Canadian provinces have a full range of taxation and spending powers. That’s federalism. That’s how strong subnational and national governments can coexist.

Once upon a time in Quebec, the independence option was the choice of the young, as it is in Scotland. That time has passed; most young Quebeckers today do not imagine that their very real economic and social challenges will be addressed by drawing a new border. But it took us a half-century to get to this point. The same can happen for you, too.

So, dear cousins from beyond the seas, here is our advice and our plea: Stay in the United Kingdom. Let time pass and passions subside. Make changes happen, but within the U.K. And meet us back here in, say, 2040. You can take the U.K. apart then, if you still want to. We think you will not. And we know this: If you take it apart now, you can never, ever put it back together again.

[Jon Wiggett]

Rich,

the Euro was originally the favoured option of the SNP for an independent Scotland until the recent white paper when it was omitted hence ruled out. You are correct in the reason why but this shows the short termism being used in this debate by both sides. This is also the reason the option of using the pound is being pushed though it is akin to saying the currency would be the US dollar.

Your original stance of saying it Eire was a good example of how an independent Scotland could use the pound as its formal currency long term with no currency union as it (and this is clearly what you were saying) that has now morphed into using it until it left the UK is typical of the low level of debate. Lots of big statements that collapse when examined closely.

I do agree that the popularity of the SNP has probably reached its peak and suspect Scotland will have a hung parliament from the next election onward however I would wager that Salmond has another decade in him as SNP leader in the case of a no vote but possibly shorter if its yes and a Scottish land of milk and honey does not emerge.

The 1707 union came about as a result of the collapse of the Darien Project which was almost exclusively Scottish and the overwhelming majority of the landlords involved in the Highland clearances were Scottish.

Jon

[Wayne_Kozun]

If the vote is Yes then the UK election of next May will be interesting since Scotland, with one foot out the door, will still be sending representatives to Westminster and may hold the balance of power to elect a Labour govt.  Presumably this govt would collapse as soon as Scotland does leave as they would no longer have the plurality in parliament.

[Tony_Muldoon]

If the vote is Yes then the UK election of next May will be interesting since Scotland, with one foot out the door, will still be sending representatives to Westminster and may hold the balance of power to elect a Labour govt.  Presumably this govt would collapse as soon as Scotland does leave as they would no longer have the plurality in parliament.

Apparently  the government have forbidden the Civil Service to look at any ramifications of a Yes vote or do any contingency planning whatsoever. So we have no date for when independence would start.  "18 months" is the most frequently stated opinion.  In truth both parliaments will be tied up for years to come sorting it all out and for both parts of the Union it would be a confused next decade.  Not good for either.  Possibly good for both longer term?


Papers are saying the markets are weighted 81% in favour of a no vote.  Expect a financial bloodbath if it's a Yes.

[Frank Pont]

It is interesting that the vote is too close to call at this point. Never expected that.....

[Mark Pearce]

It is interesting that the vote is too close to call at this point. Never expected that.....

Though the bookmakers have a No vote 4/1 on.

[Terry Lavin]

It is interesting that the vote is too close to call at this point. Never expected that.....

Though the bookmakers have a No vote 4/1 on.

That is the answer we've all been waiting for.

[Frank Pont]

It is interesting that the vote is too close to call at this point. Never expected that.....

Though the bookmakers have a No vote 4/1 on.

Hmm, that is pretty obvious then

[Mark Johnson]

really dumb American question about the referendum.

How does the ballot counting process work?   Are ballots counted electronically or by hand?  In other words, Thursday night will you know the winner of the election or could tabulation take a few days?

[Chris Kane]

Chris

I beleive that Scotland (and rUK) is required by EU law to give the vote to citizens of any EU state who are resident in the country.  Commonwealth citizens residing in Scotland also get the vote, just because (as Bob says below).  So do the Irish, again just because.  Americans, such as me, do not count, probably due to spite over that 1776 thingy.

Thanks Rich. It doesn't sit comfortably with me at all but I understand the logic behind the rule.

Are you eligible for British citizenship?

[Malcolm Mckinnon]

Wow! Niall Ferguson is either a moron or a total shill for the new world order Fabians.

I don't believe he is a moron. Harvard would be ashamed that this guy actually teaches history there in light that he, despite being a Scot by birth, is a complete ignoramus regarding Scottish History. Could Niall truly be unaware of the Darien Scheme and ,yet, lecture us on Scottish history and also the students at Harvard?

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/15/opinion/scots-must-vote-nae.html?ref=opinion&_r=0

I would guess he is a shill for the "New World Order" Fabian agenda.  The NY Times Editorial Page has been banging the "No" drum all week. They, along with the Council on Foreign Relations" must be terrified by the up and coming non-world government votes taking place in Scotland and Catalonia. No historian from Harvard could lie so outrageously right on the NY Times editorial page and get away with it in a just and normal world. Sad how the western media has fallen.

What an embarrassment that they would lie to us so blatantly with such credentials. They must think that we are idiots.

As far As I am concerned the NY Times and the rest of the mainstream media have absolutely zero credibility.





Malcolm

[Michael Tamburrini]

It is interesting that the vote is too close to call at this point. Never expected that.....

Though the bookmakers have a No vote 4/1 on.

Hmm, that is pretty obvious then

The odds have been skewed because of the large bets placed on no earlier in the campaign. 

[Mark Pearce]

It is interesting that the vote is too close to call at this point. Never expected that.....

Though the bookmakers have a No vote 4/1 on.

Hmm, that is pretty obvious then

The odds have been skewed because of the large bets placed on no earlier in the campaign. 

So you're saying that, being exposed to a big loss in the event of a NO vote the bookies are doubling their exposure by risking a big loss in the event of a Yes vote?  I'm not sure they're that genertous.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()