Confidemus Posted August 27, 2014 Share Posted August 27, 2014 Staggering hypocrisy - plan A is to absolutely remain part of this financial basket case as you put it. So we want them to provide the basis of our economy and support our currency but if they refuse they are a basket case? I keep waiting for you to wake up to reality Tubbs. Time's running out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tubbs Posted August 27, 2014 Share Posted August 27, 2014 No, we're looking for a currency union to provide a bit of stability for both sides while Scotland transforms itself into a strong and vibrant independent country. Yes so do you agree we will be having a CU with a basket case ( this is the point I was responding to). Do you also agree that the CU is just a temporary fix and therefore the transactions costs are not that important for the UK as we plan to leave the pound at some point? so the UK might as well bite the bullet now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayrmad Posted August 27, 2014 Share Posted August 27, 2014 Yes so do you agree we will be having a CU with a basket case ( this is the point I was responding to). Do you also agree that the CU is just a temporary fix and therefore the transactions costs are not that important for the UK as we plan to leave the pound at some point? so the UK might as well bite the bullet now? I certainly don't think we're as good as we think, Ireland have a lower risk premium ffs. I think a CU will be a temporary fix although I don't think Salmond & Co see it the same way. The transaction costs are important but finding an agreeable settlement while keeping market jitters to a minimum will be the main driver for both sides. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tubbs Posted August 27, 2014 Share Posted August 27, 2014 I certainly don't think we're as good as we think, Ireland have a lower risk premium ffs. I think a CU will be a temporary fix although I don't think Salmond & Co see it the same way. The transaction costs are important but finding an agreeable settlement while keeping market jitters to a minimum will be the main driver for both sides. The transactions costs are so important that the SG has refused to provide their estimate of how much this will cost Scottish commerce. They have provided the figure for rUK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayrmad Posted August 27, 2014 Share Posted August 27, 2014 The transactions costs are so important that the SG has refused to provide their estimate of how much this will cost Scottish commerce. They have provided the figure for rUK. It's rUK that are saying fcuk you not the SG. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tubbs Posted August 27, 2014 Share Posted August 27, 2014 It's rUK that are saying fcuk you not the SG. Its the SG's responsibility to provide all information to allow the 'sovereign will' of the Scottish people to be informed right now they are just holding back stuff that doesn't suit them whilst peddling nonsense about mandate We have a currency and political union with rUK - its us who are rocking the boat but no matter its hard for the SG to withhold information in respect of a scenario they are now openly talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayrmad Posted August 27, 2014 Share Posted August 27, 2014 Its the SG's responsibility to provide all information to allow the 'sovereign will' of the Scottish people to be informed right now they are just holding back stuff that doesn't suit them whilst peddling nonsense about mandate We have a currency and political union with rUK - its us who are rocking the boat but no matter its hard for the SG to withhold information in respect of a scenario they are now openly talking about. It's an easy one for the SG, "you want to fcuk us over so you tell us what you're costing us". Personally I couldn't give a flying what our currency is as long as we're trying to find the best option, it's all smoke and mirrors that will see us rejecting the UK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tubbs Posted August 27, 2014 Share Posted August 27, 2014 It's an easy one for the SG, "you want to fcuk us over so you tell us what you're costing us". Or another way of looking at it is from the Scottish commerce angle - you know what this will cost us but wont tell us? So what kind of mandate are you seeking from us? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayrmad Posted August 27, 2014 Share Posted August 27, 2014 Or another way of looking at it is from the Scottish commerce angle - you know what this will cost us but wont tell us? So what kind of mandate are you seeking from us? I think my option is the more Scottish approach, the very approach that BetterTogether have failed to realise from day one, I'm delighted, they've fcuked it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayrmad Posted August 27, 2014 Share Posted August 27, 2014 Is it just me that's hearing of lots of NO's DK's switching to YES? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted August 27, 2014 Share Posted August 27, 2014 Or another way of looking at it is from the Scottish commerce angle - you know what this will cost us but wont tell us? So what kind of mandate are you seeking from us? So in the Unionists eyes, the BT campaign and WG don't have to have to provide any information for anything that they don't want but the SG do. Hypocricy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tubbs Posted August 27, 2014 Share Posted August 27, 2014 So in the Unionists eyes, the BT campaign and WG don't have to have to provide any information for anything that they don't want but the SG do. Hypocricy. Ok then if your position is the SG are as bad as HMG then fair enough. They are seeking an alleged mandate and not telling business the financial consequences on this side of the border when telling business on the south side. Strange, I thought is was a Scottish Government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted August 27, 2014 Share Posted August 27, 2014 Ok then if your position is the SG are as bad as HMG then fair enough. They are seeking an alleged mandate and not telling business the financial consequences on this side of the border when telling business on the south side. Strange, I thought is was a Scottish Government. Yes but we keep being told that the WG don't have to provide any information on what will happen if there is a yes vote as this what their campaigning for. They did state that there would be no CU and therefore it is their place to provide the information relating to this position. The SG what a CU, that is their position, so by the same standards they have no need to dessiminate the consequences of the UK government's position. In much the same was as the '79 referendum will be remembered for the un-democratic criteria so this one will be remembered as the one where the ruling classes showed that maintaining the political status quo is of greater convern than the good of the country (both the UK collectively and Scotland individually). ETA: If the BBC were doing their job properly then the people of England would be just as outraged by their politicians behaviour as many in Scotland have been. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Confidemus Posted August 27, 2014 Share Posted August 27, 2014 Is it just me that's hearing of lots of NO's DK's switching to YES? Nope, it's not just you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayrmad Posted August 27, 2014 Share Posted August 27, 2014 Nope, it's not just you. Pleasing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tubbs Posted August 27, 2014 Share Posted August 27, 2014 Yes but we keep being told that the WG don't have to provide any information on what will happen if there is a yes vote as this what their campaigning for. They did state that there would be no CU and therefore it is their place to provide the information relating to this position. The SG what a CU, that is their position, so by the same standards they have no need to dessiminate the consequences of the UK government's position. In much the same was as the '79 referendum will be remembered for the un-democratic criteria so this one will be remembered as the one where the ruling classes showed that maintaining the political status quo is of greater convern than the good of the country (both the UK collectively and Scotland individually). ETA: If the BBC were doing their job properly then the people of England would be just as outraged by their politicians behaviour as many in Scotland have been. On the day a chunk of Scottish commerce says the case has not been made; here we are agreeing that the SG has info on potential business costs for Scottish businesses it is not willing to disclose; presumably as it is not politically beneficial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Confidemus Posted August 27, 2014 Share Posted August 27, 2014 On the day a chunk of Scottish commerce says the case has not been made; here we are agreeing that the SG has info on potential business costs for Scottish businesses it is not willing to disclose; presumably as it is not politically beneficial. Funny that isn't it? A couple of days after Darling takes a pounding a "chunk" of Scottish commerce decide it's time to come out to play. BTUKOK genuinely must think we button up the back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted August 27, 2014 Share Posted August 27, 2014 On the day a chunk of Scottish commerce says the case has not been made; here we are agreeing that the SG has info on potential business costs for Scottish businesses it is not willing to disclose; presumably as it is not politically beneficial. I wouldn't even start on the topic of governments not disclosing information. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayrmad Posted August 27, 2014 Share Posted August 27, 2014 BTUKOK genuinely must think we button up the back. And it's going to cost them one of their trinkets. How bad and out of touch does a campaign have to be to lose a shoe in? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Confidemus Posted August 27, 2014 Share Posted August 27, 2014 And it's going to cost them one of their trinkets. How bad and out of touch does a campaign have to be to lose a shoe in? They are dreadful. It's almost as if they're trying to lose. Which they will. Tick tock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.