Scotland Debate

[Slab]

Because the things you want aren't just normal things any country can expect. You're wanting to cherry pick on the ideal bits for you, and expect rUK to fall in to line and give you what you want....

But surely everyone can see that this is simply a negotiation jump off point (in tandem with the BT 'you're getting naff all' standpoint)

Until the yes/no is decided neither side has/will spell stuff out (mostly because it is unknown until negotiations are underway)

This whole referendum is a giant game of staring out your opponent and with hours to go BT are blinking like mado's (in reality they were daft not to see it coming)

When the dust settles I think we'll end up with a Devo Max 'Lite' outcome, but it must be obvious that any additional powers would never even have been on the table if Yes hadn't cherry picked what they wanted in the first place

Can you imagine:
Salmond: we're gonna have a referendum for independence
Cameron: Ok
Salmond: if we win we want the £, some military, the oil etc etc
Cameron: but you realise there's zero chance of a currency union & there's no much oil left
Salmond: fair enough we wont bother then...
Cameron: cool :whoo:

 

[Adi2Dassler]

No it doesn't?

If you're not having the debt, you don't get the assets. Ergo, the valuers come in, value the assets in Scotland that belong to the UK, and you can buy it off us.

I don't see how you could argue both that the debt isn't yours, but that the assets are. I understand the debt part, as the treasury agreed that, but the assets that were built with UK money, and you can't keep them for nothing.

Apologies, I'm not following.

So UK built assets in Scotland, can you give me maybe 2 examples?

 

[FairwayDodger]

Apologies, I'm not following.

So UK built assets in Scotland, can you give me maybe 2 examples?

Trident!

 

[CheltenhamHacker]

Apologies, I'm not following.

So UK built assets in Scotland, can you give me maybe 2 examples?

Any of the military bases, for a start.

As Holyrood was paid for by UK money, you can buy that back off us.

The Edinburgh trams.

There is a hell of a lot paid for by UK money, whether or not it came from Westminster or Holyrood. It was all from the same, big pot. Ergo, if iScot wants them, why wouldn't they have to pay for them? The creation of these assets is part of the debt that they're leaving behind.

 

[Adi2Dassler]

Any of the military bases, for a start.

As Holyrood was paid for by UK money, you can buy that back off us.

The Edinburgh trams.

There is a hell of a lot paid for by UK money, whether or not it came from Westminster or Holyrood. It was all from the same, big pot. Ergo, if iScot wants them, why wouldn't they have to pay for them? The creation of these assets is part of the debt that they're leaving behind.

An interesting interpretation.So to clarify, you are of the opinion that Holyrood,Edinburgh trams, any military base and effectively anything built by the public sector is the property of The UK.Do you think that hospitals, police uniforms and fire engines are also property of The UK?

And consider that everyone in Scotland has also contributed financially to the UK pot.Isn't it logical that we've funded these things ourselves?Or do you still think they all belong to The UK?

 

[Stuey01]

An interesting interpretation.So to clarify, you are of the opinion that Holyrood,Edinburgh trams, any military base and effectively anything built by the public sector is the property of The UK.Do you think that hospitals, police uniforms and fire engines are also property of The UK?

And consider that everyone in Scotland has also contributed financially to the UK pot.Isn't it logical that we've funded these things ourselves?Or do you still think they all belong to The UK?

They belong the whole of the UK, as they were funded out of the big pot. As does the debt. Scotland has contributed to the whole of the UK so it should get its share of the assets, but also the debt. Taking one without the other is what is illogical.


Edited for typos, stupid phone autocorrect...

 

[Adi2Dassler]

They belong the hole of the UK, as they were funding out of the big pot. As does the debt. Scotland has contributed to the whole of the UK so it should get its share of the assets, but also the debt. Taking one without the other is what is illogical.

Is the £ an asset?

 

[CheltenhamHacker]

An interesting interpretation.So to clarify, you are of the opinion that Holyrood,Edinburgh trams, any military base and effectively anything built by the public sector is the property of The UK.Do you think that hospitals, police uniforms and fire engines are also property of The UK?

And consider that everyone in Scotland has also contributed financially to the UK pot.Isn't it logical that we've funded these things ourselves?Or do you still think they all belong to The UK?

Of course you funded them yourselves, as part of UK. But you're leaving the debt remember.

I see that it's an interesting interpretation, but I think it's more logical than assuming you get all of the assets and none of the debt?

And yes, I think all of those things are property of the UK. Clearly, in my opinion, there should be a figure of £XXX to "buy" them off us.

Considering iScot is proclaiming itself as a more fair, just, equal (etc) society, I don't see how this could be argued with.

Clearly the fairest thing to do would be to take the share of the debt, and keep the assets in the country. Oh, and start a new currency.

 

[CheltenhamHacker]

Is the £ an asset?

The £ is money, which is a mechanism

I see where you're going with this, but I can't see how you can divide up an asset such as the £. It's the mechanism behind everything, and you either control it, or you don't....

The asset/liability side of the £ is the debt.

 

[Adi2Dassler]

Of course you funded them yourselves, as part of UK. But you're leaving the debt remember.

I see that it's an interesting interpretation, but I think it's more logical than assuming you get all of the assets and none of the debt?

And yes, I think all of those things are property of the UK. Clearly, in my opinion, there should be a figure of £XXX to "buy" them off us.

Considering iScot is proclaiming itself as a more fair, just, equal (etc) society, I don't see how this could be argued with.

Clearly the fairest thing to do would be to take the share of the debt, and keep the assets in the country. Oh, and start a new currency.

So how much debt should we take?

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Of course it brings a degree of chaos to rUK.you live in Surrey, yes? Your MP is summoned to Westminster to endorse giving Scotland continuing Barnett payments, increased levels of autonomy and spending and he's expected to vote for that?Who pays?you lot do.Will that MP get reelected if he votes aye? No he doesn't.

I fail to see how a CU affects anyone adversely?

It does appear that in promising these 'new powers' for a NO - Westminster have made a rod for their own back that could be a lot more painful - and painful to sell to the UK electorate outside Scotland - than CU would be.

 

[CheltenhamHacker]

So how much debt should we take?

However much we can get away with giving you

There will be all sorts of different ways to look at this. Population being just one of them.

 

[CheltenhamHacker]

It does appear that in promising these 'new powers' for a NO - Westminster have made a rod for their own back that could be a lot more painful - and painful to sell to the UK electorate outside Scotland - than CU would be.

I think it's a perfect opportunity actually. They can use this to take a look at the whole political structure in the UK and change it to dit the modern world better!

 

[ger147]

The £ is money, which is a mechanism

I see where you're going with this, but I can't see how you can divide up an asset such as the £. It's the mechanism behind everything, and you either control it, or you don't....

The asset/liability side of the £ is the debt.

The reserves of the UK's central bank are a UK asset so Scotland should get a share of those if we're going down the road of sharing everything out fairly.

 

[Adi2Dassler]

However much we can get away with giving you

There will be all sorts of different ways to look at this. Population being just one of them.

Ha!

So use population, 9%. Do we get 9% of all the assets?

https://twitter.com/AssetScotland

 

[CheltenhamHacker]

Ha!

So use population, 9%. Do we get 9% of all the assets?

https://twitter.com/AssetScotland

We work out what the assets in iScot are worth first. Then I imagine there would be a balancing figure.

If you want 9% of the assets in the UK, then we are owed 91% of the assets in iScot.

You can't have everything in iScot, and then 9% of the rest of the UK as well.

 

[CheltenhamHacker]

The reserves of the UK's central bank are a UK asset so Scotland should get a share of those if we're going down the road of sharing everything out fairly.

Can't argue with that logic.


See how much hassle all of this is? may as well just stay part ofthe union, much easier

 

[Adi2Dassler]

We work out what the assets in iScot are worth first. Then I imagine there would be a balancing figure.

If you want 9% of the assets in the UK, then we are owed 91% of the assets in iScot.

You can't have everything in iScot, and then 9% of the rest of the UK as well.

Reasonable. Are you including fish/oil/waves/wind and water in your assets of Scotland? This could be a wee bit complicated!

 

[CheltenhamHacker]

Reasonable. Are you including fish/oil/waves/wind and water in your assets of Scotland? This could be a wee bit complicated!

As an accountant, I will certainly try and value them, but it could cost you a hell of a lot (but it's fine, tell me what you want the answer to be, and I will get that for you!)

I do see what you mean though about how complicated it could get, it's just one of the many reasons I don't think a YES would work. Salmond keeps going on about how we would be best mates, ideal neighbours etc etc, but in these sort of negotiations, one or both parties ALWAYS ends up feeling hard done by, which doesn't exactly lead to idea relationships.

 

[ger147]

Can't argue with that logic.


See how much hassle all of this is? may as well just stay part ofthe union, much easier

It's only a hassle because our system unfortunately means politicians get to sort it out. I reckon ordinary folk could sort it out over a long weekend in Berwick Upon Tweed.