thorbotnic
-
Posts
253 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Tartan Army Message Board News
Media Demo
Posts posted by thorbotnic
-
-
It was a daft idea in1999 and it's an even dafter idea now.
Aye, I agree. But its a bit hypocritical to attack labour for inconsistency on it when the SNP has been precisely as inconsistent, too...
-
Context fella, Scotland was in a VERY different place in 99...
Right - for both SNP and labour. They've both changed their policies.
-
Labour slates the SNPs "penny for Scotland" campaign. 1999
Labour want a 1p increase in income tax in Scotland. 2016
Ridiculous random joke party. #deadinmay
1999: SNP supports "penny for Scotland"
2016: SNP criticises Labour plan for 1p tax rise
-
Nope, didn't work
-
His comedy turn in Robin Hood Prince of Theives took a very average film and turned it into a classic. One of many great roles he played, but always the one that comes to mind first for me.
Pointing at young woman: "You, my room 10.30"
Pauses, points at second woman: "You, 10.45"
Pauses: Bring a friend"
"I'll cut your heart out... With a SPOON"
-
There is no difference.
The propaganda put out about North Korea and Kim is laughable at times. We were all told he had his girlfriend shot a while back. That was until she showed up in a band on tour on TV. They just make it up as they go.
There's no difference? Seriously?
-
Regardless of resources, im not sure. The geographical situation is definutely part of the reason why North Korea has held its ground but if it was an oil rich world economy altering nation I'm quite sure they would have been eating McDonalds a long time ago.
Iran probably isn't far off.
The geographical location of North Korea is the only reason Korea is split at all - as Donny said, the UN forces were up to the Yalu river when China came to Kim's rescue during the war. That couldn't have happened if Korea was anywhere else.
If North Korea had been wise enough to follow China's lead they would indeed be eating McDonald's today, and enjoying a massively higher standard of living.
-
It doesn't, mate. All it does it alter one of the different definitions of 'money supply' (which varies according to individual countries). Money supply has no direct correlation to any currency's value. Only demand can strengthen a currency.
In the simplest terms, because it is a major exporter (similar to Australia, Japan and Canada). Such economies have huge money flows because buyers have to buy in the currency of that country. The world buys a lot of food and livestock from NZ. So essentially, the eight major currencies are the largest exporters or the most stable economies (UK, USA, Euro, Swiss).
Currency (unlike the stock markets) is an auction market. Price will only move to wherever the next available limit order (an existing offer to buy or sell) is available and can be filled. By that I mean if the current price is 2.27 (NZ) and someone wants to buy £100m of NZ dollars the price will move to wherever that order can be fully filled (eg: £15m sitting at 2.27, £30m at 2.28, £15m at 2.29 and £40m at 2.30 - the price will go to 2.30). That is why when there are big orders to be filled prices move sharply. And this is also why central banks will be reluctant to chase their currency if it's falling rapidly (or rising rapidly). The Swiss and Japanese used to do it regularly but it's not really done much now as they know they are fighting fire. If there economy ois otherwise stable, it's largely pointless.
Currenty is primarily to facilitate global trade - only approx 18% of the market is speculative. I know that doesn't fit in with many people's narrative but them's the facts. And while many people might see the $1 trillion of speculative trade per day as nasty, bad men gambling you might want to have a think about what rate you'd get for your holiday money or your new Honda if that liquidity wasn't there.
I should have said 'all other things being equal'. Converting bank deposits to cash reduces money supply; cet par this will cause a currency to rise in value.
-
The other thing to note is most currencies are kept afloat through an alchemical mix of bullshit and unicorns. The GBP for example is horrendously leveraged. It doesn't take many folk trying to get their money out the banks for the confidence trick that is currency to be exposed.
Not sure how a currency could be leveraged? People taking their money out of banks reduces the amount of money in circulation, which strengthens a currency's value.
-
That is like saying one person is in the marriage. Until you leave the marriage. Then you're not any more.... ehhh in the marriage? Aye good luck with that in court.
edit: We are not some junior partner to you where you own the pound and where we need your permission to use it it. (sorry touchscreen edit nightmare)International law isn't, for some reason, actually the same as divorce law.
-
The currency issue deserves a thread of its own but sharing the pound was the correct approach going into the referendum IMHO.
The problem was not that strategy, it was that it never got even a remotely fair hearing. It was a set up all the way. Of course they said no and lied about what would happen... knowing full well for the SNP to say ok then we'll do our own currency this would provide even more opportunity for scaring people...oooo new currency, 1930's germany... on and on.
The truth was and is we have as much right to use the British pound as our British partners. Or what are we then?! Partners in a union or just a cheap client state franchise. No need to answer.
You're partners in the union... Until you leave the union. Then you're not any more.
-
Scotland having a lower corporation tax than england is to attract investment into Scotland versus England.
We are competing with England using corporation tax to make us more attractive to them for inward investment. It is pretty obvious shit when you think about it.
Is competition not a core tory ethos?
But suddenly undercutting your competition is a 'race to the bottom'. Hmmm have any of these clowns studied economics.
Scotland is on the economic periphery of Europe. To offer a few points off on corporation tax for coming here makes a lot of sense.
I understand the arguments about nations undercutting each other on taxes to the benefit of corporations but we can certainly shave off a few percent versus England.
They don't like this idea.
Another reason why rUK would never agree to share GBP with iScotland.
-
Splash out on 1:1 lessons. Memorise vocab in your spare time. Think about things you'd like to be able to say and write them down in English to discuss with your tutor. Get a male tutor if at all possible to get the stresses right. If you're ever in the country youre learning the language of, refuse point blank to speak English.
-
He doesn't claim to be Scottish. He even said when first called up that he "didn't feel very Scottish".
Next!
Well he does claim to be Scottish, cos he represents the Scottish national team.
-
Don't know if he actually claims to be Scottish. Mind you, I don't know whether McGeady and McCarthy actually claim to be Irish either - anyway, they obviously backed the right horse.
Edit: I'm pretty sure Morrison's father isn't Scottish - think it's a Scottish granny case?
His dad's from Darlington. Went to school with my dad.
-
If there's folk who are born in England, spend their whole lives in England, have 2 English parents and mostly English grandparents, yet claim to be Scottish, i'd be pretty amazed.
James Morrison.
-
Almost had a bust up with the other half about this tonight. Over an hour trying to explain it to her but she didn't get it.
She isn't Stocky, is she?
-
but the very Union, is just about to destroy it..
. who knows if there would be a premium or not if we ruled our own country, but the very Union, you love, the one who said we will be stronger and better off under is about to bring in plans to reduce the wages of Scottish workers.
you can only presume what would heve happened before or if there had nt been a union, no one knows,
what we do know however is the union at the moment is planning on reducing the wages of Scottish workers..
better together my arse...
Well I can tell you whether there'd be a premium or not if Scotland were independent: there wouldn't. Scottish retail / Sunday salaries may be higher overall, but that's not the argument.
So the only way that this premium CAN exist is if there's a Union. That doesn't mean there definitely will be a premium as long as there's a Union.
I'm no unionist, by the way, buy if I were this argument would be identical.
-
Nope, you're misrepresenting what I am saying. I was referring to this.
Which is your assumption that wages in an independent Scotland would automatically be lower.
If you look at this dispassionately it's an entirely logical assumption in this case.
-
the reason that USDAW, the shop workers union, ASKED the snp to oppose was because they think the wages in England will be diluted and therefore the wages in Scotland will be diluted as well. The Sunday premium will be lost. no more double or time and a half.
The union (UK, not USDAW) WILL cause wages in Scotland to be lower is the logic of todays announcement,... how u see it the other way shows us , you havent really grasped what its about.
The snp gain here, because it causes more division in the chattering/ruling classes in England, it pisses the tories off again, hopefully they will realise that better together is a load of shite....from both sides...
Why do Scottish workers get a Sunday premium, despite there being no restrictions on Sunday working in Scotland?
The current system in England and Wales puts a premium on Sunday work in those countries, and workers in Scotland benefit because they're governed by UK-wide company policies. The SNP is acting to reinforce this effect, but it can only work if there's a Union. Otherwise why would Scottish workers receive a Sunday premium?
-
Not at all. What evidence do you have that wages would be lower? Answer, none whatsoever as its a hypothetical. Wages could be lower, higher or the same. The difference is that they would relative to conditions in the Scottish not UK market.
Well you'd assume the Sunday premium would be lost, as it exists because companies apply UK-wide policies on the basis of what they have to do in England and Wales.
so yes, in this case I think it's fair to say wages would be lower.
-
In England, it's currently stores over a certain size that are restricted to only opening for six hours on a Sunday. These are almost exclusively large chain stores and supermarkets. These companies have pay, benefits and conditions that are set on a UK level and so any changes to those UK wide policies that for example Asda make as a result of this legislation will apply to employees in Scotland as well.
If Scotland were independent then Asda Scotland would have pay, benefits and conditions that reflect the realities of the Scottish market, not the UK. Do you think that someone who works in Asda in Belfast gets paid the same as someone who works for Asda in Dublin*
*ive no idea whether there is an Asda in either Belfast or Dublin.
Workers in Scotland who work Sundays get better conditions because of legislation that restricts Sunday working in England and Wales - companies having a UK wide policy that's based on the E and W situation. Right.
So if Scotland were independent this dividend would be lost, and Scottish workers would be paid the going Scottish rate, which is lower. Effectively SNP is saying Union benefits Scottish Sunday workers.
-
SNP position makes no sense here. They're opposing introducing the same liberalised Sunday trading laws in rUK as in Scotland, on the grounds that Sunday pay in Scotland would be damaged... Well what would have happened here if Scotland were independent and Scottish MPs had no influence at Westminster?!
-
Only going to weaken further.
Easter Rising 1916
in Anything Goes - Other topics not covered elsewhere
Posted