buyerbeware Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-26245684 WTF are these backed on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
okaycuckoo Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 http://www.bbc.co.uk...litics-26245684 WTF are these backed on. Oil revenue. Wales will back theirs with coal. England will rely on bio-fuel from the squeezed middle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Spaniard Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 Assuming independence, then why not issue their own debt-free, persistently circulating currency? http://www.positivemoney.org/2014/02/scottish-currency-5-lessons-design-flaws-pound-sterling/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AThirdWay Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-26245684 WTF are these backed on. Pathetic, isn't it? Westminster has granted us dispensation to borrow money. Originally it would be from the National Loans Fund, God forbid that Scotland is allowed to issue bonds, with Holyrood given limited room to move on taxes to pay these loans back. We have a massive stooshy over keeping the pound, with this very person telling us that we would not be able to borrow at the preferential rates that the UK gets, and the next week he tells us we can issue bonds. He must think we're zipped up at the back! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TheBlueCat Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 Pathetic, isn't it? Westminster has granted us dispensation to borrow money. Originally it would be from the National Loans Fund, God forbid that Scotland is allowed to issue bonds, with Holyrood given limited room to move on taxes to pay these loans back. We have a massive stooshy over keeping the pound, with this very person telling us that we would not be able to borrow at the preferential rates that the UK gets, and the next week he tells us we can issue bonds. He must think we're zipped up at the back! I don't anything odd here. Many countries issue bonds in currencies other than their own - e.g. Argentina, Russia etc. The interest they pay will be based on their own credit worthiness rather than that of the other country. These are just like muni bonds in the US or provincial debt in Canada. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ah-so Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 Pathetic, isn't it? Westminster has granted us dispensation to borrow money. Originally it would be from the National Loans Fund, God forbid that Scotland is allowed to issue bonds, with Holyrood given limited room to move on taxes to pay these loans back. We have a massive stooshy over keeping the pound, with this very person telling us that we would not be able to borrow at the preferential rates that the UK gets, and the next week he tells us we can issue bonds. He must think we're zipped up at the back! If the Scottish government has a better ability to repay than the UK government it will actually be cheaper to borrow, not more. That would teach those English toffs! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swissy_fit Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 I don't anything odd here. Many countries issue bonds in currencies other than their own - e.g. Argentina, Russia etc. The interest they pay will be based on their own credit worthiness rather than that of the other country. These are just like muni bonds in the US or provincial debt in Canada. Yeah that's how I see it. It's a bigger deal if scotland issues bonds while in the union IMO, although I guess that can be seen as being like municipal bonds in the US. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cashinmattress Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 I don't anything odd here. Many countries issue bonds in currencies other than their own - e.g. Argentina, Russia etc. The interest they pay will be based on their own credit worthiness rather than that of the other country. These are just like muni bonds in the US or provincial debt in Canada. Canada has a federal income tax, and all provinces have regional income taxes. Alberta for example is a very oil rich province with the lowest income tax. What is odd is your argument because is not valid in regards to Scotland, which is NOT a country by definition. It fails the country definition by the most significant means test; it is not sovereign. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartinE Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 What is odd is your argument because is not valid in regards to Scotland, which is NOT a country by definition. Might want to try google. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cashinmattress Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 (edited) Might want to try google. England is not a country either by definition. Nor is Wales. You might want to try researching things in advance of making such quips. Edited February 20, 2014 by cashinmattress Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartinE Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 (edited) Honestly - 3 words in google - feel free to copy paste: "definition of country". Eg: http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20061121181335AA63kzK Edited February 20, 2014 by MartinE Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie_George Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TheBlueCat Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 Canada has a federal income tax, and all provinces have regional income taxes. Alberta for example is a very oil rich province with the lowest income tax. What is odd is your argument because is not valid in regards to Scotland, which is NOT a country by definition. It fails the country definition by the most significant means test; it is not sovereign. There's no reason the issuer needs to be a separate country for the argument to work. It's very common for US cities to issue bonds for example. The UK is strangely restrictive when it comes to powers devolved from Westminster, allowing Scotland to borrow in its own right is just a step towards the norm as far as I can see. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nationalist Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 There's no reason the issuer needs to be a separate country for the argument to work. It's very common for US cities to issue bonds for example. The UK is strangely restrictive when it comes to powers devolved from Westminster, allowing Scotland to borrow in its own right is just a step towards the norm as far as I can see. Historically HMG has always taken the view that since it can borrow more cheaply than anyone else it should do all the borrowing for subordinate entities. (This attitude has the pleasing side effect that HMG completely controls the flow of money.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AThirdWay Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 I don't anything odd here. Many countries issue bonds in currencies other than their own - e.g. Argentina, Russia etc. The interest they pay will be based on their own credit worthiness rather than that of the other country. These are just like muni bonds in the US or provincial debt in Canada. You miss the point, or more likely I didn't make it clear enough! There is already a mechanism on the table to allow Holyrood to borrow. The issuance of bonds has already been acknowledged as likely to be a more expensive option, but now it's being thrown into the mix. Why would Holyrood take up the more expensive option? How does it benefit Osborne/Alexander if Holyrood opts for the sensible option? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AThirdWay Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 "I expect you to die, Scottish Bond...." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TheBlueCat Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 You miss the point, or more likely I didn't make it clear enough! There is already a mechanism on the table to allow Holyrood to borrow. The issuance of bonds has already been acknowledged as likely to be a more expensive option, but now it's being thrown into the mix. Why would Holyrood take up the more expensive option? How does it benefit Osborne/Alexander if Holyrood opts for the sensible option? Borrowing is a natural extension of tax raising powers and devolved authority. I thought that's what you wanted? Coming running back to daddy crying 'wah, wah, those nasty bond buyers won't lend me money cheaply, please do it for me' doesn't exactly strike me as the actions of a country wanting to find its own way in the world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AThirdWay Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 Borrowing is a natural extension of tax raising powers and devolved authority. I thought that's what you wanted? Coming running back to daddy crying 'wah, wah, those nasty bond buyers won't lend me money cheaply, please do it for me' doesn't exactly strike me as the actions of a country wanting to find its own way in the world. It is what we want, but not with the limited tax raising powers that are on the table. Thanks for the suggest phrases, I'll now add "too childish" to the "too dumb, too poor, too stupid" litany. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.