Baxter Parp Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 It's not a rebate. Scotland's share of the debt would be 8.4% of 1.588 tn. A share of the 375bn would be an asset. It's two different things. No it's not, it's included in the national debt. It just happens to be held by the BoE instead of (say) RBS or Barclays. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 Come on Ad Lib, it is a lot easier saying "the pound" than "the assets that underpin the UK's unit of currency" They're completely different things though. The point is the currency is a legal instrument to provide a unit of measurement to evaluate assets. Different central banks use different units of measurement and the relative nominal value of the different units vary depending upon the assets to which they are connected. There is nothing to stop Scotland using a legal instrument of their own to imitate the legal instrument which is an organ of the British state from which it is leaving, but that is not the same as sharing "the pound" which would require a treaty agreement and is not in contemplation of domestic or international law by default. That is a distinct proposition not connected to how the different parties seek to or agree to distribute or allocate the actual physical things underpinning the nominal unit value represented, not embodied, by the pound sterling. If it comes to it I think the "less spiteful" EU members would persuade the WG that it is in everyone's interest for Scotland to be an EU member. Common Sense & Logic prevail in most circumstances. They will also lean on Scotland not to be dicks and to reach a mutually agreeable debt position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HardyBamboo Posted January 15, 2014 Author Share Posted January 15, 2014 Right. And failure to accept a portion of the debt is i assume "not spiteful". What you are saying is that the UK's European partners would say "look, we know you could veto New Scotland's membership, and we know they are refusing to take on any share of your debt now they have seceded, but gonnae just no use the veto you have"? We have covered that, debt & assets are a 2 way street. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 Is the value of a Newton measured against the centimetre? Nope, currencies have value and are assets when compared to other currencies. Currencies do not have value relative to other currencies. They are different units of similarly valued assets. Notes denominated in a currency pertaining to a right to real assets of a central bank absolutely do have value in the context of exchange. That's a different assertion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HardyBamboo Posted January 15, 2014 Author Share Posted January 15, 2014 They're completely different things though. The point is the currency is a legal instrument to provide a unit of measurement to evaluate assets. Different central banks use different units of measurement and the relative nominal value of the different units vary depending upon the assets to which they are connected. There is nothing to stop Scotland using a legal instrument of their own to imitate the legal instrument which is an organ of the British state from which it is leaving, but that is not the same as sharing "the pound" which would require a treaty agreement and is not in contemplation of domestic or international law by default. That is a distinct proposition not connected to how the different parties seek to or agree to distribute or allocate the actual physical things underpinning the nominal unit value represented, not embodied, by the pound sterling. They will also lean on Scotland not to be dicks and to reach a mutually agreeable debt position. Exactly what I have already said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 Exactly what I have already said. You have bound up the currency union with it though. The EU will not lean on rUK to adopt a currency union with Scotland. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HardyBamboo Posted January 15, 2014 Author Share Posted January 15, 2014 You have bound up the currency union with it though. The EU will not lean on rUK to adopt a currency union with Scotland. I never suggested they would, the point I am trying to make is that it would be in the rUK's interest, assuming Scotland is in a net debtor position, to get their money back in the same form & without the potential for variable exchange rates deflating the value of the repayments. Please remember, I don't think it is in Scotland's best interests to remain part of the currency union for anything other than the short term. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doulikefish Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 The Beeb reporting that boe are going to hold meetings in Scotland with representatives of the yes campaign Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 I never suggested they would, the point I am trying to make is that it would be in the rUK's interest, assuming Scotland is in a net debtor position, to get their money back in the same form & without the potential for variable exchange rates deflating the value of the repayments. Please remember, I don't think it is in Scotland's best interests to remain part of the currency union for anything other than the short term. I agree with you on the virtue of the currency union. The UK doesn't need to agree to a currency union to "get their money back in the same form and without the potential for variable exchange rates deflating the value of the repayments". It can simply insist that Scottish contributions towards the national debt are denominated in GBP. This isn't difficult. World Bank loans to Zimbabwe aren't paid back in the Zimbabwean Dollar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Parp Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 Currencies do not have value relative to other currencies. They are different units of similarly valued assets. Notes denominated in a currency pertaining to a right to real assets of a central bank absolutely do have value in the context of exchange. That's a different assertion. Ugh. Wrong. Notes don't even have any relation to real assets at all anymore, they're assets within themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 Ugh. Wrong. Notes don't even have any relation to real assets at all anymore, they're assets within themselves. No they aren't. They are bills of exchange which maintain a legal claim to a share in assets held by a central bank. They are nothing more than a contract between the bearer and the bank. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HardyBamboo Posted January 15, 2014 Author Share Posted January 15, 2014 I agree with you on the virtue of the currency union. The UK doesn't need to agree to a currency union to "get their money back in the same form and without the potential for variable exchange rates deflating the value of the repayments". It can simply insist that Scottish contributions towards the national debt are denominated in GBP. This isn't difficult. World Bank loans to Zimbabwe aren't paid back in the Zimbabwean Dollar. Aye, but they would need to get "New" Scotland to agree to that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 Aye, but they would need to get "New" Scotland to agree to that. And they have a great big stick of "we will veto your membership of international bodies if you don't play ball". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HardyBamboo Posted January 15, 2014 Author Share Posted January 15, 2014 And they have a great big stick of "we will veto your membership of international bodies if you don't play ball". quid pro quo? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 quid pro quo? What are you actually suggesting here? I'm simply trying to explain that currency relationships are unrelated to this. Scotland does not meaningfully have a "card" to play here about debts, because any perceived advantage is annulled by the UK government's powers to veto their membership of certain crucial international organisations. The quid pro quo is "don't shirk the debt and we won't block your EU membership. Currency doesn't come into it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayrmad Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 What are you actually suggesting here? I'm simply trying to explain that currency relationships are unrelated to this. Scotland does not meaningfully have a "card" to play here about debts, because any perceived advantage is annulled by the UK government's powers to veto their membership of certain crucial international organisations. The quid pro quo is "don't shirk the debt and we won't block your EU membership. Currency doesn't come into it. I think we'd survive quite comfortably if we weren't in the EU,you'd think the plug was going to be pulled if we didn't get in, we'll be in it and using the £ whether you like it or not, suggesting otherwise is just preposterous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 I think we'd survive quite comfortably if we weren't in the EU,you'd think the plug was going to be pulled if we didn't get in, we'll be in it and using the £ whether you like it or not, suggesting otherwise is just preposterous. I'm not suggesting we won't be in the EU or that Scotland can use the pound sterling if it pleases. These are not the same as what you're claiming about the currency union and the terms of membership. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burma Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 The Beeb reporting that boe are going to hold meetings in Scotland with representatives of the yes campaign Link? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doulikefish Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 From tim reid bbc twitter BoE's Mark Carney says his staff are working to arrange meetings / discussions with Alex Salmond or other ministers on visit to Scotland Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HardyBamboo Posted January 15, 2014 Author Share Posted January 15, 2014 What are you actually suggesting here? I'm simply trying to explain that currency relationships are unrelated to this. Scotland does not meaningfully have a "card" to play here about debts, because any perceived advantage is annulled by the UK government's powers to veto their membership of certain crucial international organisations. The quid pro quo is "don't shirk the debt and we won't block your EU membership. Currency doesn't come into it. Which ones? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.