I'd like to make tuition fees free, renationalise the rail industry, remove the private sector from the NHS and education by completely reforming both etc. I don't have a spare trillion quid though so I'm not suggesting it's possible.
Quote from: stone on September 15, 2014, 05:50:01 pmIs that not saying that a currency union can only work when there is full fiscal, banking and political union? Basically saying that countries in a currency union need to be tied at the hip just as closely as Scotland and England are now?What about looking at examples that do work - Germany and the Netherlands. Both countries have the same currency, are not fiscally integrated and you could argue that Germany holds the position of central bank (since it's the largest shareholder). A lot of trade happens between the two countries and, wait for it, both economies are doing well, unemployment is similar. I'm still massively baffled by the currency issue. The more I read the less clear it gets. When you have a panel of 6 "world leading economics experts" all disagreeing with each other, who do you believe?? http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/2/e635505a-328f-11e4-a5a2-00144feabdc0.html#axzz3CpPW56UO
Is that not saying that a currency union can only work when there is full fiscal, banking and political union? Basically saying that countries in a currency union need to be tied at the hip just as closely as Scotland and England are now?
Fultonius and Stewart - I think you've made my point quite eloquently. Only looking at the upsides of independence.Stewart, you should read this link on the NHS in scotland. http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2014/09/salmonds-nhs-claims-have-been-shredded-ifsDespite having less need to cut spending than the rest of the UK, spending on the NHS in Scotland fell by 1%, when it rose in the rest of the UK. This decision was entirely yours. Plus, if you vote no you will have the same power to run the NHS how you like, a promise to retain the Barnett formula, and more powers to raise extra money via income tax. The benefit to the NHS of independence is basically nil.
Stu, are you saying we shouldn't highlight what we think are positive aspects of independence because doing so only makes your point so eloquently that we are only 'looking at the upsides of independence'?... the majority of yes voters are well informed, critical of Alex Salmond and aspire to a system of government that is more accountable, honest and socially inclusive.
Is this move reflective of a well-thought-out policy - which you say is lacking in the independence movement - or do you think, as it seems to me, that it's a haphazard approach and a hastily cobbled together measure which could have profound implications for the rest of the UK?
Quote from: petejh on September 16, 2014, 06:45:32 pmIs this move reflective of a well-thought-out policy - which you say is lacking in the independence movement - or do you think, as it seems to me, that it's a haphazard approach and a hastily cobbled together measure which could have profound implications for the rest of the UK?Fuck no. It's some back of a fag packet list of concessions that the politicians in Westminster thought they wouldn't have to make, combined with some stuff the scots would have got under a no vote anyway. However, it does offer some of the advantages of independence with fewer of the risks, so may appeal to the undecideds. I guess the big risk is the party leaders making promises their MPs won't keep...
BTW, this thread has opened my eyes a bit the NHS. My position was maybe not so well thought through.
A view from someone who was a yes but is now a no.http://wakeupscotland.wordpress.com/2014/09/15/ewan-morrison-yes-why-i-joined-yes-and-why-i-changed-to-no/