When will indyref2 happen?

[John Lambies Doos]

Talking about the United Kingdom.

Ah. Fair enough

[NotThePars]

Ah. Fair enough

Have a good Sunday, JLD.

[John Lambies Doos]

Have a good Sunday, JLD.

You too bud

[Detournement]

On 5/26/2018 at 21:51, Baxter Parp said:

Austerity is what has held back growth in this country and prolonged the deficit - you can cut the deficit by investing in the country and making it prosperous.  Years of neoliberalism have made people think that cutting deficits requires cuts.  It does not.

Growing the economy requires investment from somewhere. The easiest and most effective way to do it is via the government running a deficit. The UK has been trying to grow the economy via private debt based on asset inflation which is crazy and will crash again soon. Foreign investment is pie in the sky thinking for an advanced economy.

The economic structures that Wilson proposes aren't all that different from what has been  forced on Greece. It is impossible to campaign on this platform and it displays a startling ignorance of prevailing political trends. The entire of premise of getting an RBS drone like Wilson to write this report is actually absurd.

Edited May 27, 2018 by Detournement

[HeartsOfficialMoaner]

After we leave the UK Andrew Wilson wants us to have a frictionless free trade with the UK as well as us being a member of the EU? 

This sounds like the cake and eat it thing, I did not think that this was possible, this is what the Tories are asking for? 

Am I reading it wrong?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-44271370

[Baxter Parp]

15 hours ago, Detournement said:

The economic structures that Wilson proposes aren't all that different from what has been  forced on Greece.

Which ones and how do they relate to Greece, precisely?

[BallochSonsFan]

On 26/05/2018 at 17:01, AUFC90 said:

We shall see. A deflated currency for a high export country like Scotland is actually a good thing. For the UK ? Not so much.

 

Do you honestly think that the BOE and and finacial institutions are not going to give protection and will actually intentionally give the markets the absolute shitters? Did the crash not teach you anything? The UK even bailed Ireland out in no time to avoid the jitters. The same Ireland which beats the UK in just about every economic indicator. Its all interlinked and currency will sort itself out. We'll piggy back the pound ,just like every other country that has went independent, until we float or own. To be honest all the growth commission will succeed in doing is giving all the nawbags an excuse to mention pound sterling every day for the next 5 years.

 

Under this fantasy arrangement dreamed up since the previous vote? Absolutely they would.

BoE would do whatever it felt was necessary to protect the rUK economy. If that meant screwing iScotland's economy over then why would they care? Their responsibility would be to manage the currency for the benefit of rUK.

[Detournement]

The document talks about selling off government assets, budget reviews and fiscal discipline. These are all for euphemisms for austerity. The document talks about  "independent" agencies who will make the forecasts which the Scottish government will have to act within. No prizes for guessing which section of Scottish society will dominate these independent agencies. The same agencies will decide if/when we can create our own currency.

The comparison to Greece is clear. It is the imposition of long term austerity for the benefit of the financial sector with no monetary levers to provide flexibility and being subject to the whims of a central bank with zero consideration for the well being of your population.

It is obviously the case that we could gain independence and then tell Blairite SNPers to get to f**k and vote in a forward thinking government. The issue here is less the economy of an independent Scotland than the SNP's bizarre decision to narrow their arguments for an independent Scotland to an economic ideology that died ten years ago. If the SNP have to defend this report it makes it impossible for them to build any positive case for independence.

[BallochSonsFan]

Interesting to read today's papers. Even the pro-indy Scottish Sun is roundly turning on the document and drumming up every pro-independence "expert" they can to try to discredit it.

[Baxter Parp]

1 minute ago, Detournement said:

The document talks about selling off government assets, budget reviews and fiscal discipline. These are all for euphemisms for austerity. The document talks about  "independent" agencies who will make the forecasts which the Scottish government will have to act within. No prizes for guessing which section of Scottish society will dominate these independent agencies. The same agencies will decide if/when we can create our own currency.

Euphemisms and guesses are not facts.

[Peppino Impastato]

22 minutes ago, BallochSonsFan said:

Under this fantasy arrangement dreamed up since the previous vote? Absolutely they would.

BoE would do whatever it felt was necessary to protect the rUK economy. If that meant screwing iScotland's economy over then why would they care? Their responsibility would be to manage the currency for the benefit of rUK.

And how is that any different from being part of the UK for the last 300 years?  Do you seriously believe that's not how things are now?

[BallochSonsFan]

53 minutes ago, Peppino Impastato said:

And how is that any different from being part of the UK for the last 300 years?  Do you seriously believe that's not how things are now?

So your argument for independence is to give up any control over the economy and to leave it to a foreign central bank?

How things are right now? Central bank tries to manage the economy for the UK. It isnt run purely for England, Wales or N.I. It's run for the UK. You might not like it but Scotland is still part of the UK. Dreaming up some perceived grievance that the UK's central bank should somehow be prioritising one part of the UK over another or that it acts against the interests of Scotland is just lazy.

Under this barking mad plan set out in the report? Scotland would have zero control over interest rates, currency liquidity or - unless it also set up a lender of last resort - capital protection. It couldn't realistically sell bonds or gilts as without the proper backing of a central bank that controlled currency at a domestic level, it would be a basket case of an investment.

The last referendum failed. A big part of that was the economic plans that appeared to be written down on a fag packet. The latest report does nothing to address the concerns that a lot of people had that an independent Scotland would have no control over currency unless it set up it's own currency from day 1 - an impractical solution.  The SNP and it's supporters have always been really poor at building consensus. If an independence referendum is ever going to win the eventually your side needs to cotton on to the fact that you actually need to put together a cohesive economic plan.

Alternatively you could abandon any notion of unicorns and rainbows and flat out admit that for a significant period of time an independent Scotland would be in the financial grubber, but at least it would satisfy the romantic notion of independence. You either have a romantic argument or a sensible economic one - this report seems to apply magic thinking to economic reality in the hope that enough people will be fooled into letter their heart rule their head.

The previous referendum failed because the case for independence, removing romanticism, was absolute fantasy. It's time to either address that properly or admit that it't nothing but tears, snotters and blind faith.

[Lurkst]

1 hour ago, BallochSonsFan said:

Interesting to read today's papers. Even the pro-indy Scottish Sun is roundly turning on the document and drumming up every pro-independence "expert" they can to try to discredit it.

Been a while since the Sun was pro-indy. Less Unionist than others certainly.

 

[Detournement]

The Sun are not pro Indy. They support the SNP up here to hurt Labour on a UK level.

All Murdoch output whether it be Fox News, the Times, Sunday Times or regional varities of the Sun are designed to produce the same outcome.

[AyrExile]

1 hour ago, BallochSonsFan said:

Interesting to read today's papers. Even the pro-indy Scottish Sun is roundly turning on the document and drumming up every pro-independence "expert" they can to try to discredit it.

The civil war mention in today’s sun is surely misleading? Can’t find too much disharmony within our echo chamber so it’s all looking good for 2019...

[Peppino Impastato]

31 minutes ago, BallochSonsFan said:

So your argument for independence is to give up any control over the economy and to leave it to a foreign central bank?

How things are right now? Central bank tries to manage the economy for the UK. It isnt run purely for England, Wales or N.I. It's run for the UK. You might not like it but Scotland is still part of the UK. Dreaming up some perceived grievance that the UK's central bank should somehow be prioritising one part of the UK over another or that it acts against the interests of Scotland is just lazy.

Under this barking mad plan set out in the report? Scotland would have zero control over interest rates, currency liquidity or - unless it also set up a lender of last resort - capital protection. It couldn't realistically sell bonds or gilts as without the proper backing of a central bank that controlled currency at a domestic level, it would be a basket case of an investment.

The last referendum failed. A big part of that was the economic plans that appeared to be written down on a fag packet. The latest report does nothing to address the concerns that a lot of people had that an independent Scotland would have no control over currency unless it set up it's own currency from day 1 - an impractical solution.  The SNP and it's supporters have always been really poor at building consensus. If an independence referendum is ever going to win the eventually your side needs to cotton on to the fact that you actually need to put together a cohesive economic plan.

Alternatively you could abandon any notion of unicorns and rainbows and flat out admit that for a significant period of time an independent Scotland would be in the financial grubber, but at least it would satisfy the romantic notion of independence. You either have a romantic argument or a sensible economic one - this report seems to apply magic thinking to economic reality in the hope that enough people will be fooled into letter their heart rule their head.

The previous referendum failed because the case for independence, removing romanticism, was absolute fantasy. It's time to either address that properly or admit that it't nothing but tears, snotters and blind faith.

Scotland is. 8.4% of the UK with very different needs to the rest of the UK.  The UK is not run for the benefit of 8.4% of the UK it is run for the needs of the greater London area where almost half the population lives with a hugely inflated property market, higher wages and living costs and highly developed infrastructure (partly due to Scottish oil). 

There would be literally no change to this whatsoever after independence, the bank of England and UK treasury have never in history taken a single decision that benefits Scotland to the detriment of the south east of England and never will independent or not. 

The only difference is we take control of all the other economic levers which we can never do as part of the UK.  And if you think we don't also face a decade at least of economic turmoil as part of the UK I don't know what rock you've been hiding under.

[renton]

1 hour ago, BallochSonsFan said:

So your argument for independence is to give up any control over the economy and to leave it to a foreign central bank?

How things are right now? Central bank tries to manage the economy for the UK. It isnt run purely for England, Wales or N.I. It's run for the UK. You might not like it but Scotland is still part of the UK. Dreaming up some perceived grievance that the UK's central bank should somehow be prioritising one part of the UK over another or that it acts against the interests of Scotland is just lazy.

Under this barking mad plan set out in the report? Scotland would have zero control over interest rates, currency liquidity or - unless it also set up a lender of last resort - capital protection. It couldn't realistically sell bonds or gilts as without the proper backing of a central bank that controlled currency at a domestic level, it would be a basket case of an investment.

The last referendum failed. A big part of that was the economic plans that appeared to be written down on a fag packet. The latest report does nothing to address the concerns that a lot of people had that an independent Scotland would have no control over currency unless it set up it's own currency from day 1 - an impractical solution.  The SNP and it's supporters have always been really poor at building consensus. If an independence referendum is ever going to win the eventually your side needs to cotton on to the fact that you actually need to put together a cohesive economic plan.

Alternatively you could abandon any notion of unicorns and rainbows and flat out admit that for a significant period of time an independent Scotland would be in the financial grubber, but at least it would satisfy the romantic notion of independence. You either have a romantic argument or a sensible economic one - this report seems to apply magic thinking to economic reality in the hope that enough people will be fooled into letter their heart rule their head.

The previous referendum failed because the case for independence, removing romanticism, was absolute fantasy. It's time to either address that properly or admit that it't nothing but tears, snotters and blind faith.

The report seems quite explicit about the importance of setting up a Central bank who's function would be to provide exactly that:

The BoE must technically work for the whole of the UK, but in practice it's policies and outcomes must serve the needs of London and the South east where a generation of political decision making has centred there the entire engine of the UK wide economy. So, whatever the stated aim of the BoE, the practical fact of the matter is that it is focused on delivering the best outcome for one part of the UK, not the whole. Therefore, under the Wilson plan, there probably is not a hell of a lot of difference to policy makers if they are dealing with a  BoE pre or post independence. This of course isn't the only plan available and if you are genuinely interested the Common Weal has it's own view on getting a seperate currency up and running during a stated 3 year transition period:

http://www.allofusfirst.org/library/how-to-make-a-currency-a-practical-guide/

So it's hardly as if the Wilson plan is the only show in town - it's no surprise of course that the left wing of the movement rejects an number of his recommendations, not least the fiscal discipline passages. 

Finally, it's an interesting point you raise regarding the reason for the failure of the referendum. Yes broke through in certain demographics, No had huge leads in the other.  Yes won 53/47 amongst Scots born/Scots resident, and lost 20/80 on other UK born/Scots resident and 65/35 in EU born/Scots resident. Yes also led in all age demographics up to the age of 49+. Were the economic argument about central banking and currency as central as you suggest, then I'd expect to see a wider rejection , certainly across more age demographics. It's also the case that the polls had two significant narrowing events, where yes caught up to No, and one of those, through the winter of 2013 came on the heels of Osborne and Darling's rejection of the currency union, which should've left the Yes vote in tatters. 

So did such concerns ultimately doom the Yes vote? Possibly it retarded a more complete breakthrough in those demographics it led in. On the other hand,  you can look at those demographics where you have to weight the No vote rather than count it, and you can see specific concerns around Pensions, EU membership and good ol' British feeling: Romanticism may be part of the Scottish constitutional argument, but it sure as hell isn't confined to one side, or even concentrated on the Yes side as you seem to believe. You only have to look at the No side messaging to see the twin totems of project fear on one side and Churchillian rhetoric on the other.

 

[Detournement]

"ring fenced retail entities operating in Scotland"

Which would surely see the majority of financial services f**k off to London (or Frankfurt or Paris or Dublin).

I agree with the Commonweal assessment, there is no reason why a currency can't be set up to kick in after a transition period. Applying MMT principles will probably see us being invaded by NATO but it's worth a go anway.

Another part of the document that I find absurd is the desire to expand the work force. Automation hasn't really kicked in yet we are already overwhelmed by completely pointless, unproductive non jobs. The focus going forward has to be a reduction in unproductive work and an emphasis on increasing the rewards of socially essential jobs.

[renton]

2 minutes ago, Detournement said:

"ring fenced retail entities operating in Scotland"

Which would surely see the majority of financial services f**k off to London (or Frankfurt or Paris or Dublin).

I agree with the Commonweal assessment, there is no reason why a currency can't be set up to kick in after a transition period. Applying MMT principles will probably see us being invaded by NATO but it's worth a go anway.

Another part of the document that I find absurd is the desire to expand the work force. Automation hasn't really kicked in yet we are already overwhelmed by completely pointless, unproductive non jobs. The focus going forward has to be a reduction in unproductive work and an emphasis on increasing the rewards of socially essential jobs.

On that first part I figured it was a way of saying we're only responsible for those operations that take place in Scotland - which is exactly how it already works but to spike opposition guns from bringing out the whole "how would Scotland bail out RBS" again  - answer being of course, that like 2008 different localities would deal with those parts of RBS as they are exposed to.

As to the financial services fucking off, well they already have to most practical purposes. Certainly in terms of their HQs.  Gogarburn is largely a ghost town and Lloyd's is literally a plaque on the mound. That's before you factor in Brexit which looks likely to happen before another Indy vote, or at least the Financial Services will have allowed for the likely outcome by then and made their decision. They may already have fucked off to Franfurt and Paris by then which is a bigger problem for the City of London than for Edinburgh.

Automation was brought up, but only in so far as to state that it was outside of the report's scope. I agree that full scale automation has the capacity for transforming the way the human race behaves, but we aren't there yet, and wandering off to talk about radical upheavals of the social order is definitely not what Wilson was going for.

[Baxter Parp]

14 minutes ago, Detournement said:

Another part of the document that I find absurd is the desire to expand the work force. Automation hasn't really kicked in yet we are already overwhelmed by completely pointless, unproductive non jobs. The focus going forward has to be a reduction in unproductive work and an emphasis on increasing the rewards of socially essential jobs.

The two aren't mutually exclusive.  An independent country can do both.