SNP Referendum Nonsense

[the_r_sole]

the question is not, do you support alex salmond or the snp

the EU have said they would be willing to open discussion before the vote, the UK government have stopped that happening, why?
If two out of the three are willing to discuss it, why would the UK government refuse?

 

[the_r_sole]

I'm not the rest of the UK, so I can't really answer that.



Negotiations will only be required if both countries desire a formal currency union.

and why would the rUK not want a currency union in the short term?
that would be cutting off your nose to spite your face (or costing businesses a load of money for no real reason at all) - there is not a chance that they would refuse negotiations

 

[Schlong&Stable]

the question is not, do you support alex salmond or the snp

the EU have said they would be willing to open discussion before the vote, the UK government have stopped that happening, why?
If two out of the three are willing to discuss it, why would the UK government refuse?

Because there is no mandate for the discussion to occur! The UK government are the current representation for the Scottish people, why would they start negotiating when there is no evidence the Scottish people want it? A negotiation is also tacit approval of secession, so it will not happen.

If your allies are fighting a war, you don't start peace negotiations behind their back. It's a complete betrayal of your allies.

 

[Stretch]

and why would the rUK not want a currency union in the short term?
that would be cutting off your nose to spite your face (or costing businesses a load of money for no real reason at all) - there is not a chance that they would refuse negotiations

If currency unions are so remarkable, why do most sovereign nations float their own independent currency, and why have most shared currencies met with so many problems?

In the short term Scotland would have to use the pound. It needs a currency, and it wouldn't' be practical to set one up over night.

That's not the same as a currency union, where the currency is maintained with joint interests and liabilities.

It's not cutting of your nose to spite you face. It's about accepting there's a cost to splitting a country in two, and moving on.

 

[the_r_sole]

Because there is no mandate for the discussion to occur! The UK government are the current representation for the Scottish people, why would they start negotiating when there is no evidence the Scottish people want it? A negotiation is also tacit approval of secession, so it will not happen.

so that they could inform the voters of what they are voting for or not voting for, it's fairly simple.
the UK government have allowed the referendum to happen, so why not discuss some of the potential outcomes, it would be a much, much better for the vote if there was some discussion between the sides - the no campaign have jumped on the currency/eu issues but are unwilling to have meaningful discussion with the actual decision makers, when it has been made clear, there is potential to do that - it seems they are deliberately keeping voters in the dark in the hope that the fear of the unknown will sway the vote which is a very dirty tactic (but not unexpected of politicians)
All anyone is asking for is clarity on the position of both sides for BOTH potential outcomes

 

[Schlong&Stable]

Even if that IS true (which I don't accept it to be), what of it? It's for the SNP to prove their case, not the Unionists. If they SNP cannot prove what will happen after secession, then maybe you SHOULD be afraid.

 

[the_r_sole]

If currency unions are so remarkable, why do most sovereign nations float their own independent currency, and why have most shared currencies met with so many problems?

In the short term Scotland would have to use the pound. It needs a currency, and it wouldn't' be practical to set one up over night.

That's not the same as a currency union, where the currency is maintained with joint interests and liabilities.

It's not cutting of your nose to spite you face. It's about accepting their's a cost to splitting a country in two, and moving on.

the currency union is a political issue which can be discussed when/if Scotland votes for independence, maybe it will be the will of the Scottish voters, maybe it won't - however as a short term solution it is viable and necessary, negotiations will come further down the line so why are we being told that it's not going to happen, won't work etc etc - the point is that it could happen and could be successful

 

[the_r_sole]

Even if that IS true (which I don't accept it to be), what of it? It's for the SNP to prove their case, not the Unionists. If they SNP cannot prove what will happen after secession, then maybe you SHOULD be afraid.

and if the unionist can't/won't tell us what will happen after the vote, should we not be equally afraid?

 

[grumpysculler]

that would be cutting off your nose to spite your face (or costing businesses a load of money for no real reason at all)

You do realise that these negotiations will involve politicians?

 

[Tefal]

the currency union is a political issue which can be discussed when/if Scotland votes for independence, maybe it will be the will of the Scottish voters, maybe it won't - however as a short term solution it is viable and necessary, negotiations will come further down the line so why are we being told that it's not going to happen, won't work etc etc - the point is that it could happen and could be successful

put it this way though, no UK government is going to ever set our financial policy at a detriment to the country to help out the Scottish if they need them different. It would be political suicide.

So always the rates/ny financial decisions will be made purely on the UKs needs Scotland would have to lump it if they needed rates to go down but the uk wanted them up or vis versa.

 

[the_r_sole]

You do realise that these negotiations will involve politicians?

haha

 

[grumpysculler]

and if the unionist can't/won't tell us what will happen after the vote, should we not be equally afraid?

Well, lets see. At a guess, we'll stay in Europe (subject to a possible referendum) with our existing opt-outs, we'll still be in NATO. We keep Sterling as a currency and keep both devolved and national parliaments. The UK spending plans continue and we have a general election in 2015 which may or may not change this. We can also get on with realising the benefits of the Scotland Act 2012.

 

[the_r_sole]

put it this way though, no UK government is going to ever set our financial policy at a detriment to the country to help out the Scottish if they need them different. It would be political suicide.

So always the rates/ny financial decisions will be made purely on the UKs needs Scotland would have to lump it if they needed rates to go down but the uk wanted them up or vis versa.

exactly it will only work if it is advantageous for both, I am not convinced it is a long term solution and would depend greatly on the terms, as I said short term it works but then we have general elections on both sides where there would be a lot of decision making to be done, even more so if rUK decides to vote itself out of the EU, at that point it may be in Scotlands interest to have it's own pound/adopt the euro etc - but at least it would be decided by Scotland - if we stay with the union it is possible that we get out of the EU even if the people of Scotland didn't vote that way

 

[the_r_sole]

At a guess,

thanks for confirming my point

 

[Tefal]

exactly it will only work if it is advantageous for both, I am not convinced it is a long term solution and would depend greatly on the terms, as I said short term it works but then we have general elections on both sides where there would be a lot of decision making to be done, even more so if rUK decides to vote itself out of the EU, at that point it may be in Scotlands interest to have it's own pound/adopt the euro etc - but at least it would be decided by Scotland - if we stay with the union it is possible that we get out of the EU even if the people of Scotland didn't vote that way

well if you join the EU you will be forced to use the euro.

also interestingly wouldn't Scotland be utterly ****ed during the time it takes to negotiate entry into the EU because of all the costs suddenly inflicted upon it's trade as they'd no longer be members of the free trade block. which would put the Scottish government in a position of needing to get membership/an agreement as soon as possible, which puts them i na terrible position as the other states could just drag it out as long as they like to get favorable terms and or make an example in the case of Spain and others.

 

[the_r_sole]

well if you join the EU you will be forced to use the euro.

also interestingly wouldn't Scotland be utterly ****ed during the time it takes to negotiate entry into the EU because of all the costs suddenly inflicted upon it's trade as they'd no longer be members of the free trade block. which would put the Scottish government in a position of needing to get membership/an agreement as soon as possible, which puts them i na terrible position as the other states could just drag it out as long as they like to get favorable terms and or make an example in the case of Spain and others.

apparently the proposed time for negotiations on entry is achievable (both sides have agreed on that single point!) and there are two different routes proposed, one of which does not require using the euro - we also wouldn't be required to adopt the euro immediately in any case

 

[Tefal]

apparently the proposed time for negotiations on entry is achievable (both sides have agreed on that single point!) and there are two different routes proposed, one of which does not require using the euro - we also wouldn't be required to adopt the euro immediately in any case

well the second one isn't an option full stop, Spain have said so, so that's out.

also the time for entry takes as long as it takes for everyone to agree, it could be dragged out for decades if some states wanted to.

but that doesn't cover the issue of what will happen to businesses that are going to be affected by not having access to free trade? think they'll stay an hope for entry before the leeway time runs out or think they'll bail south of the border early?

 

[Schlong&Stable]

and if the unionist can't/won't tell us what will happen after the vote, should we not be equally afraid?

You honestly make me want to pull my hair out because your argument is so circular and stupid.

Scotland (as part of the UK) is currently a member of the EU, voting NO at the election will not change this.

Scotland (as part of the UK) is currently a member of NATO, voting NO at the election will not change this.

Scotland (as part of the UK) currently uses Pound Sterling, voting NO at the election will not change this.

etc.​

It's if you vote YES that things are changing and there will therefore be uncertainty.

 

[the_r_sole]

well the second one isn't an option full stop, Spain have said so, so that's out.

also the time for entry takes as long as it takes for everyone to agree, it could be dragged out for decades if some states wanted to.

but that doesn't cover the issue of what will happen to businesses that are going to be affected by not having access to free trade? think they'll stay an hope for entry before the leeway time runs out or think they'll bail south of the border early?

the second option is not out - it hasn't been negotiated yet, a sound bite from someone with a clear agenda isn't an actual decision, it would be silly to rule something out until an actual formal decision has been made
who has said that business won't have access to free trade? surely that would only ever happen if we were refused entry to the EU (also what will happen if we stay in the union and get voted out of the EU) could end up in exactly the same situation

 

[the_r_sole]

You honestly make me want to pull my hair out because your argument is so circular and stupid.

Scotland (as part of the UK) is currently a member of the EU, voting NO at the election will not change this. .​

incorrect with upcoming UK referendum - no guarantees here

Scotland (as part of the UK) is currently a member of NATO, voting NO at the election will not change this. .

will voting yes change this?

Scotland (as part of the UK) currently uses Pound Sterling, voting NO at the election will not change this.
.

again, no guarantee this will change either


If that is the full extent of the argument I would assume everyone will be voting for independence!
I'm glad you think my argument is stupid and circular, because so far you haven't been able to address it with any facts which really reflects well on your own argument

All I am asking for - as someone with a vote in this - is for the debate to be allowed to happen with both sides debating positives and negatives for each case - that would allow people to understand what they are voting for

there have been all sorts of hints from the no campaign about what would happen with a no vote, but lets have an discussion about it - for example will the Barnett formula be scraped as is on the table currently - confirmation on that would surely have a massive impact on the referendum​