RugbyRebels

Donny osmond wrote:Sorry, couldnt help it...

http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/politics/ ... 3020658754

Most sensible and educated post of the day. Other than the flat earth stuff, obviously.

Mellsblue wrote:

Digby wrote:

Mellsblue wrote: You can explain it as many different ways as you want, I still won't think it's a valid comparison.

Unless everyone gets the currency rates which suits them individually there'll be winners and losers. Though Greece has messed up way beyond just the situation with its currency.

Interestingly we could see the Greece car crash coming a long way off, also interestingly we're heading the same way.

I fully understand your position but I still don't think it's a valid comparison.

Yep. If you look purely at the numbers we are in as bad a position as Greece. Luckily, being able to control our own interest rates and money prin....sorry quantitative easing, along with a history of paying our debts means we are just about muddling along.

I'm not worried if you agree, I'm just going with your note I could state my case as many different ways as I want, so we'll be at this for a while.

And we've muddled along for now. But we haven't reached the pinch points Greece has on number of workers Vs number of pensioners, we are getting there though and no one in politics is standing up with any sensible plan as they want votes instead of making hard decisions. Broadly we either need to carry on with lots of immigrants, probably increase the rate, and hope that offsets enough, or we need to massively reduce pensions, or maybe both.

Digby wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

Digby wrote:
Unless everyone gets the currency rates which suits them individually there'll be winners and losers. Though Greece has messed up way beyond just the situation with its currency.

Interestingly we could see the Greece car crash coming a long way off, also interestingly we're heading the same way.

I fully understand your position but I still don't think it's a valid comparison.

Yep. If you look purely at the numbers we are in as bad a position as Greece. Luckily, being able to control our own interest rates and money prin....sorry quantitative easing, along with a history of paying our debts means we are just about muddling along.

I'm not worried if you agree, I'm just going with your note I could state my case as many different ways as I want, so we'll be at this for a while.

You are Rowan and I claim my £5.

Still no announcement from snp on their plans for iScot joining some other more acceptable union post independence.

Before the last ref they did consider EEA/EFTA and rejected it at the time. Indeed they produced a paper called "Scotland in the EU" from which the below screen shots are taken. If EEA/EFTA is a route to go down, there will be some answers needed, if not necessarily given.

They said absolutely explicitly on radio 4 yesterday that their policy is to be in the EU .

Ah ok well thats good to know

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:They said absolutely explicitly on radio 4 yesterday that their policy is to be in the EU .

What program was that on?

Mellsblue wrote:

Digby wrote:

Mellsblue wrote: I fully understand your position but I still don't think it's a valid comparison.

Yep. If you look purely at the numbers we are in as bad a position as Greece. Luckily, being able to control our own interest rates and money prin....sorry quantitative easing, along with a history of paying our debts means we are just about muddling along.

I'm not worried if you agree, I'm just going with your note I could state my case as many different ways as I want, so we'll be at this for a while.

You are Rowan and I claim my £5.

I was about to say I feel unclean, but maybe that's just getting back from a run and being in need of a shower

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:They said absolutely explicitly on radio 4 yesterday that their policy is to be in the EU .

Someone should tell their foreign affairs spokesman at WM...

https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/ne ... o-join-eu/

Donny osmond wrote:

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:They said absolutely explicitly on radio 4 yesterday that their policy is to be in the EU .

Someone should tell their foreign affairs spokesman at WM...

https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/ne ... o-join-eu/

I think you're misunderstanding what he said. He was saying that they would mainatin continuous membership of EFTA, not that their aim was merely to join EFTA. If there's any headline in that it's the surreptitious dropping of the idea that they'd manage to maintain continuous membership of the EU.

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

Donny osmond wrote:

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:
That would be stupid as you effectively end up a prisoner with no say which is what independence is supposed to be a move away from.

I am somewhat surprised that everyone seems to be ignoring the possibility that rather a lot of those Scottish "leave" votes might have been cast precisely in order to get a second independence referendum.

On your 1st para... the only thing that matters is moving away from England.

On your 2nd para... everyone is well aware that there was a good deal of voting for leave in order to push indy. At least 1 WM snp mp has publicly admitted it, and there are rumoured to be several more in the same boat.

That may be commonly known amongst SNP people, or north of the border, but it's completely absent from any discussion I've seen in media down here, where people talk about the great risk to Sturgeon of being too European because a fair few Nats voted leave.

Based on nothing other than a gut feeling, my guess would be that most in favour of an independent Scotland and Brexit, would likely see the former outweigh the latter if it came down to a second Indy ref.

That may be utter bollocks.

Edinburgh in Exile wrote:

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

Donny osmond wrote:
On your 1st para... the only thing that matters is moving away from England.

On your 2nd para... everyone is well aware that there was a good deal of voting for leave in order to push indy. At least 1 WM snp mp has publicly admitted it, and there are rumoured to be several more in the same boat.

That may be commonly known amongst SNP people, or north of the border, but it's completely absent from any discussion I've seen in media down here, where people talk about the great risk to Sturgeon of being too European because a fair few Nats voted leave.

Based on nothing other than a gut feeling, my guess would be that most in favour of an independent Scotland and Brexit, would likely see the former outweigh the latter if it came down to a second Indy ref.

That may be utter bollocks.

It almost certainly is, as it's my gut feeling too.

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

Donny osmond wrote:

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:They said absolutely explicitly on radio 4 yesterday that their policy is to be in the EU .

Someone should tell their foreign affairs spokesman at WM...

https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/ne ... o-join-eu/

I think you're misunderstanding what he said. He was saying that they would mainatin continuous membership of EFTA, not that their aim was merely to join EFTA. If there's any headline in that it's the surreptitious dropping of the idea that they'd manage to maintain continuous membership of the EU.

My impression was that EFTA is seen as a starting point only. I think EuU membership is the final aim, but efta membership would require less diplomacy in the short term.

Sandydragon wrote:

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

Donny osmond wrote: Someone should tell their foreign affairs spokesman at WM...

https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/ne ... o-join-eu/

I think you're misunderstanding what he said. He was saying that they would mainatin continuous membership of EFTA, not that their aim was merely to join EFTA. If there's any headline in that it's the surreptitious dropping of the idea that they'd manage to maintain continuous membership of the EU.

My impression was that EFTA is seen as a starting point only. I think EuU membership is the final aim, but efta membership would require less diplomacy in the short term.

Exactly.

Sandydragon wrote:

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

Donny osmond wrote: Someone should tell their foreign affairs spokesman at WM...

https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/ne ... o-join-eu/

I think you're misunderstanding what he said. He was saying that they would mainatin continuous membership of EFTA, not that their aim was merely to join EFTA. If there's any headline in that it's the surreptitious dropping of the idea that they'd manage to maintain continuous membership of the EU.

My impression was that EFTA is seen as a starting point only. I think EuU membership is the final aim, but efta membership would require less diplomacy in the short term.

EFTA membership would suit me fine. The Norway model ticks most of the boxes without most of the downsides. That applies whether we're talking about an independent Scotland or the UK.

Whilst EFTA brings obligations without any real influence, I think that if it were offered, a fair rew brexiteers would take that. It would reassure those concerned over the loss of sovereignty and probably provide a majority the other way. Sadly that option won't suit the Tory right who just want a complete break and who are effectively calling the shots.

Didnt see it but seemingly Elsie has just been on sky news stating that iScot would apply for EU membership, so that seems to put that one to bed. One of the big questions now is whether the million Scots who voted to leave the EU will support independence or not.

Donny osmond wrote:Didnt see it but seemingly Elsie has just been on sky news stating that iScot would apply for EU membership, so that seems to put that one to bed. One of the big questions now is whether the million Scots who voted to leave the EU will support independence or not.

I'm pretty confident that the vast majority of those Scots who voted to leave the EU would (and did) vote to remain in the UK anyway. As I said before, most of the ones I know are the kind of Union Flag waving little Britishers that I detest. Some of them are even,...... English

Sandydragon wrote:Whilst EFTA brings obligations without any real influence, I think that if it were offered, a fair rew brexiteers would take that. It would reassure those concerned over the loss of sovereignty and probably provide a majority the other way. Sadly that option won't suit the Tory right who just want a complete break and who are effectively calling the shots.

You get even less sovereignty as a member of EFTA than a a member of the EU.

Didnt Baz vote to leave?

Anyway, wasn't actually looking for this but came across it anyway...

If I'm reading it properly, and there's every chance that I'm not, page 2 seems to suggest that 27% of Scots who voted to leave the EU are indy supporters.

http://cloud.tapatalk.com/s/58ceff51f12 ... ebsite.pdf

Ummm not sure that link will work... trying another one...

http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cu ... ebsite.pdf

Donny osmond wrote:Didnt Baz vote to leave?

I have no idea.
I'm sure that there are plenty other people I know who voted to leave, but have chosen not to (a) openly admit it and (b) constantly drone on about snowflakes, pausing only to share dubious shit on Facebook.

Stones of granite wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:
I think you're misunderstanding what he said. He was saying that they would mainatin continuous membership of EFTA, not that their aim was merely to join EFTA. If there's any headline in that it's the surreptitious dropping of the idea that they'd manage to maintain continuous membership of the EU.

My impression was that EFTA is seen as a starting point only. I think EuU membership is the final aim, but efta membership would require less diplomacy in the short term.

EFTA membership would suit me fine. The Norway model ticks most of the boxes without most of the downsides. That applies whether we're talking about an independent Scotland or the UK.

What downsides do you think you avoid by the Norway model? It seems to me you get all thedownsides with no upside.

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

Stones of granite wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:
My impression was that EFTA is seen as a starting point only. I think EuU membership is the final aim, but efta membership would require less diplomacy in the short term.

EFTA membership would suit me fine. The Norway model ticks most of the boxes without most of the downsides. That applies whether we're talking about an independent Scotland or the UK.

What downsides do you think you avoid by the Norway model? It seems to me you get all thedownsides with no upside.

If my understanding is correct (and it may not be), the downsides that could be avoided by an independent Scotland joining EFTA (EEA) rather than full EU membership are:
1. We would retain the ability to make trade agreements with non-EU countries. This would prevent trading issues with a fully brexited rUK.
2. We would not be forced into joining the Euro. Although, on reflection, the Euro does seem to work for the vast majority of member countries.
3. Membership cost would probably be significantly lower
4. We would not be bound by the Common Fisheries Policy, which would have the double advantage of placating the Fishing lobby while simultaneously showing the Spanish the stink-finger.

Stones of granite wrote: 1. We would retain the ability to make trade agreements with non-EU countries. This would prevent trading issues with a fully brexited rUK.

Sort of, EFTA doesn't have a common trade policy, rather each member agrees the framework in advance of each round of talks, and then once they've agreed the boundaries they negotiate one common agreement with whatever nation/block they're then dealing with. So you'd have sovereignty at the point of agreeing on parameters for trade talks ahead of the actual talks, but tbh one might easily have to accept some things one didn't like, though that's going to happen at some point in any set of such negotiations.

What it might mean for trade with the UK wouldn't be clear in advance

It really boils my p the way all those anti Brexit Scots
keeping going on about Scotland staying in the EU. Scotland
is not and has never been in the EU. All treaties, agreements etc
were signed by The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern
Ireland Scotland does not appear in any of them as it does not
exist as an independent entity.