DAFC Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-29739085 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colkitto Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 Did nobody tell Sir Ian Wood about this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Other Foot Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 The UK government's Business and Energy Minister Matthew Hancock said: "We are determined to have set the right fiscal and regulatory regimes to make sure we can get the maximum possible economic extraction of oil and gas from the North Sea. "This discovery shows exactly what can be achieved in the North Sea if companies work together to maximise the considerable potential of remaining oil and gas reserves." Ah yes, the 'considerable potential' of the oil reserves has reappeared post-referendum. Fantastic. Now we have even MORE money to blithely dole out to London. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colkitto Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 Scotland really has to be the laughing stock of the world. Reject independence for your country and give all your oil revenues away. In a world that goes to war over oil I can't think of any other country who would voluntarily give it away. Norway must be bewildered at how fekin stupid we are! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reynard Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 Scotland really has to be the laughing stock of the world. Reject independence for your country and give all your oil revenues away. In a world that goes to war over oil I can't think of any other country who would voluntarily give it away. Norway must be bewildered at how fekin stupid we are! We might well get them all after these Smith commission negotiations. The revenue is de minimis now anyway. Scots didnt want to leave the union regardless of your whining. You'll just need to accept that. As mentioned before Scotland gets a Barneted share of stamp duty in England, which is a far greater amount than tax revenue from the north sea. So as these things get shared out, it's not so bad is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hampden Diehard Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 We might well get them all after these Smith commission negotiations. The revenue is de minimis now anyway. Scots didnt want to leave the union regardless of your whining. You'll just need to accept that. As mentioned before Scotland gets a Barneted share of stamp duty in England, which is a far greater amount than tax revenue from the north sea. So as these things get shared out, it's not so bad is it? You can play about with statistics as much as you like, picking the ones that suit your argument (as you have), but remaining oil reserves were a central plank of the "no" campaign. Now, all of a sudden, there are finds all over the shop and the picture is so much brighter. It's pish, and everyone knows it. People were duped, but then a lot of them didn't need much duping to go with the safe option, which is more of the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lex Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 What amazes me, is that yes voters think this is why they lost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reynard Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 What amazes me, is that yes voters think this is why they lost. Especially when it was clearly the b*****d English immigrants and old folk. Probably old English immigrants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reynard Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 You can play about with statistics as much as you like, picking the ones that suit your argument (as you have), but remaining oil reserves were a central plank of the "no" campaign. Now, all of a sudden, there are finds all over the shop and the picture is so much brighter. It's pish, and everyone knows it. People were duped, but then a lot of them didn't need much duping to go with the safe option, which is more of the same. One? Oil and gas revenue for the entire UK being 1.1bn in the first six months of this financial year. That's the cold hard fact. oil trading at $85 a barrel when the SNP did their sums based on it being $113 a barrel? That's another. Salmond claiming thei oil price would be $150 a barrel by 2020.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyle Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 This is good news regardless of whether we're in the Union or an Independent nation. People didn't vote no because of oil uncertainty IMO, so not sure why a 'GIRUY' is required everytime a news item like this is released. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Parp Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 This is good news regardless of whether we're in the Union or an Independent nation. People didn't vote no because of oil uncertainty IMO, so not sure why a 'GIRUY' is required everytime a news item like this is released. Why did people vote no then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reynard Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 Why did people vote no then? They didn't want to separate. Pretty simple stuff even for a dim nat like you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyle Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 Why did people vote no then? For plenty of reasons. Not many no voters I know voted that way because of oil. Plenty did vote no because the economic argument for an independent scotland wasn't strong enough, true, but oil only makes up a part of that argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliche Guevara Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 This discovery is pretty bad news then, as what I picked up from the Referendum was having vast oil reserves actually makes Scotland poorer. Or, have I been misled somehow? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davi3j Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 This discovery is pretty bad news then, as what I picked up from the Referendum was having vast oil reserves actually makes Scotland poorer. Or, have I been misled somehow? No You've not been misled...more oil = more money given away = poorer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pandarilla Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 For plenty of reasons. Not many no voters I know voted that way because of oil. Plenty did vote no because the economic argument for an independent scotland wasn't strong enough, true, but oil only makes up a part of that argument. Ahhh, too poor. The age old argument. It's good to see you back again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom McB Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 5,000 barrels a day. Current production is 1.5 million bpd. So an increase of 0.3%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clarkston5 Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 5,000 barrels a day. Current production is 1.5 million bpd. So an increase of 0.3%. But 113$ a barrel for the next 5000000 years but....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyle Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 Ahhh, too poor. The age old argument. It's good to see you back again. Like it or not, that is why people voted no. The Yes campaign's economic argument clearly wasn't strong enough as that was the biggest factor in why people voted no. Out of interest, what way do you think I voted? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom McB Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 But 113$ a barrel for the next 5000000 years but....... Alex-Salmond-007.jpg I like your style you scamp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.