Why would you make the Bawbie money supply subject to the rUK government?

That debt would only be repayable when the rUK repays it. That does not mean when the rUK rolls it over as part of its debt management programme: that means when it actually in net terms repays it, and until then Scotland cannot be expected to make payment towards something the rUK is not doing;

So, rUK follows a different economic policy than Scotland. That means debt management will be different. But if rUK repays debt then so must Scotland. Which subjects Bawbie money supply to rUK decisions.

Note this also works the other way around. Say that Scotland does better than rUK. But it’s not allowed to pay off that debt……actually, the very fact that Snippa’s not even thought of that shows how unlikely he think that is.

13 thoughts on “Why would you make the Bawbie money supply subject to the rUK government?”

  1. As usual he is talking drivel. When rUK rolls over its debt, 9% of the payment should come from Scotland, funded by Scottish borrowing. This should continue until Scotland has paid 9% of the UK National Debt at the time of independence.

  2. …the very fact that Snippa’s not even thought of that shows how unlikely he think that is

    I’m not sure that that’s a fair conclusion you’ve reached there.

  3. Candidly, it’s astonishifying how little all this Joxit talk corresponds to reality, including painful recent experience.

    Ritchie, and to a slightly lesser extent the SNP, talk as if RUK either wouldn’t have a say in any “independence” settlement, or would magically somehow be extravagantly benevolent for auld lang syne. As if this was a polite game of Bridge, when it’s more like a drunken knife fight in a piss-soaked back alley in Easterhouse.

    We voted to leave the EU four years ago, and are still fighting a low-grade civil cold war to make that actually happen in practice. What’s to stop Westminster doing the same thing to Scotland? They could easily spin this out for years of bad-faith negotiations and then demand a “confirmatory” referendum at the end of it. And why wouldn’t they? There’s literally hundreds of billions of pounds and – more importantly – senior civil service jobs at stake.

    The SNP’s best play was “Independence in Europe”, the idea they could limbo dance out from under the Union and stay in the EU, so nothing would actually change.

    That ball’s burst now, so what’s Plan B? Seems to be based on the lyrics to The Never-ending Story:

    Reach the stars
    Fly a fantasy
    Dream a dream
    And what you see will be

    Except Nicola’s not as charmingly feminine as Limahl, so it doesn’t really work.

  4. Surely the haggis fuckers will be paying the interest on their share of the UK debt? Although I guess that will be a tiny sum compared with the interest charged on new loans to the People’s Republic of Jockistan.

  5. Bloke in North Dorset

    I may have misunderstood something here but AIUI rolled over debt is new debt at new interest rates. The new interest rates will be set by the market based on the state of the economy at that time.

    So, if Scotland’s economy is doing better than rUK the new interest rate will be slightly higher than it would have been if rUK ecomoy was performing as well as Scotland’s. Would Scotland really be happy to pay that higher interest?

    Conversely, and more likely, rUK economy will be much stronger than Scotland’s so we’ll ending paying a more in higher than need be interest rates. At which point a large “you fucking what?” will be heard from rUK and politicians will pretty sharpish tell Scotland to eff off and take their share of the debt with them.

  6. A pendant writes: it’s Bawbee.

    What’s to stop Westminster doing the same thing to Scotland? They could easily spin this out for years of bad-faith negotiations and then demand a “confirmatory” referendum at the end of it.

    The fact that we can’t wait to get rid of the moaning Minnies and save ourselves £10 billion a year in handouts?

  7. Chris – incentives tho, t’in’tit.

    Incentives to save the public purse = ~zero

    Incentives to protect the interests of the CBI, the civil service, big landowners, etc. = lots

    Scotland being a loss-making operation for the Exchequer and a profitable business for various powerful vested interests aren’t mutually exclusivary. The taxpayer took a bath on EU membership, no?

  8. Steve,

    England and Wales could declare independence from the United Fruitloop of Jockistan and That Bit of Ireland No One Wants, which would then be the “successor state” and stay in the EU.

    Would solve an awful lot of problems, so much that I’d say it’s even worth delaying Brexit day to make it happen.

  9. I’d argue that the Southern Irish would love Northern Ireland. They just don’t want the Northern Irish with it.

    So no doubt they’d imitate Syria’s Assad and simply boot all the Northern Irish over the sea to England. The same way they got rid of their unwanted hooligans when Rome finally dumped the place about 1500 years ago.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *