Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

Sunday, 21st September 2008

Dine for £10 and get a Free Glass of Rioja

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.


Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.


Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Takeover 'may tip economy of Scotland into turmoil'

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 19 September 2008
SCOTLAND'S economy could be devastated by the Lloyds TSB takeover of HBOS, Alex Salmond said last night, after bank bosses refused to rule out compulsory redundancies.

The First Minister's warning came as the Financial Services Authority (FSA) slapped a temporary ban on short-selling financial stocks – the speculative trading some claim contributed to the sudden demise of HBOS.

Sources close to Alistair Darling, the Chancellor, said there would probably have been a Northern Rock-style run on HBOS had the tie-up not been accelerated and agreed.

Yesterday, the US investment bank Morgan Stanley scrambled to find a buyer as its shares tumbled a further 35 per cent, while central banks pumped in £100 billion of liquidity to calm panicked markets.

Meanwhile, the potential of a further mortgage-rate rise loomed as the cost of wholesale funding went up. One of the key inter-bank lending rates, the three-month Libor, increased to 5.98 per cent, up from 5.7 per cent at the end of last week.

The Lloyds/HBOS bank will probably have its global headquarters in London, Eric Daniels, who will be its chief executive, said yesterday. But he insisted it would retain a formidable presence north of the Border.

That did not convince Mr Salmond, who warned that the whole of the Scottish economy could be plunged into "turmoil". The First Minister has insisted for the past few months that the Scottish economy has proved more resilient than the rest of the UK to the effects of the economic slowdown.

But despite encouraging unemployment figures, he conceded for the first time that the financial sector was in serious trouble and the rest of the economy could go the same way.

He said: "Only yesterday, unemployment in Scotland reached a serious low, but the rest of the economy in Scotland will follow the financial sector, which is in turmoil."

Mr Salmond, a former economist, added: "It's important, not just for the Scottish economy, but mixed economies across the western world."

David Alexander, the owner of the Edinburgh property firm DJ Alexander, said the bank deal was "bad news for Edinburgh and bad news for Scotland". The implications would be huge for "the man on the street" and impinge upon all areas of the economy, from property to retailers.

"I think there will be a number of job losses immediately – not just in the banking sector, but the businesses which deal with them, from the cleaning lady to the firms who supply corporate toys," he said.

He warned that no-one knew where the global financial turmoil would end – something Mr Daniels had admitted earlier.

Ron Hewitt, the chief executive of Edinburgh Chamber of Commerce, did not subscribe to Mr Salmond's negative take on the economy, but was worried the £12 billion takeover meant there was a question mark over the nation's banking sector.

"The fact one of Scotland's great institutions has been brought down so rapidly does not look good," he said.

In its announcement to the stock market yesterday, Lloyds was keen to reassure doubters the history of Scotland's oldest bank would not be erased.

It said the Edinburgh base would remain as its Scottish headquarters, and the bank's annual general meetings would still be held there. The bank's notes will also remain.

Lloyds' "management focus" was to keep jobs in Scotland, where HBOS has 17,000 employees. There has been speculation that up to 40,000 jobs could be lost, but this figure was described by Lloyds TSB as being "on the high side".

Mr Salmond has already lambasted the "spivs and speculators" whose short selling is said to have sent HBOS shares into freefall earlier this week.

Last night, the FSA followed Russia and the US in temporarily outlawing the practice, under which traders sell shares they do not yet own at a knockdown price. The UK ban became active from midnight last night.

Hector Sants, the FSA chief executive, said short selling was not wholly to blame for the financial turmoil, but it was "exacerbating the situation and there are certainly times when we feel the quality of markets is very severely adversely affected".

A spokesman for the First Minister applauded the FSA for taking action, but said it should have been taken earlier.

"If only this action had been taken sooner, and the authorities defended such institutions, it is likely that we would be looking at HBOS remaining an independent bank and that we would not be facing the current situation, with all the uncertainty to people's jobs and livelihoods," he said.

Meanwhile, a senior Treasury source insisted there had been little choice but to push ahead with the takeover.

Andy Hornby, the chief executive of HBOS, whose future is unclear, said:

"The share price movement in the last few days was very concerning. But customer reaction has been very restrained."

Mr Daniels said the government had helped to arrange the takeover deal, but it had not been "a brokered marriage".

The spokesman for the Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, denied that the PM had lobbied Lloyds TSB to minimise job losses in Scotland.

He said: "Absolutely not. This was a commercial decision taken by Lloyds."

US Treasury ponders taking on all bad debt to revive economy

WALL Street recorded its best day in six years yesterday as a furious late rally followed reports the United States government was considering a comprehensive solution to the global financial crisis.

Responding to the week's unprecedented upheaval in the financial system, Henry Paulson, the US treasury secretary, mooted a proposal that would create a means of dealing with the billions of dollars of bad debt still clogging the financial system, a congressional aide said.

The idea has been compared to the "Resolution Trust" formed in 1989 to fix the savings and loan industry collapse.

An index of financial stocks jumped 11.7 per cent.

The Dow Jones industrial average jumped 3.86 per cent, to 11,019.69, while the Standard & Poor's 500 Index climbed 4.33 per cent, to 1,206.51. The technology-heavy Nasdaq Composite Index surged 4.78 per cent, to 2,199.10.

For all three, it was the biggest one-day percentage gain since October 2002 – when the last bull market was born.

Earlier yesterday, international central banks, including the Bank of England, European Central Bank and the US Federal Reserve, pumped $180 billion (£99.01 billion) into money markets to counter the worst financial upheaval since the Great Depression of the 1930s.

The move was aimed at boosting waning confidence that governments can stop the crisis from spinning out of control and at getting banks worldwide to open their ever-tightening purse strings.

Banks have been increasingly reluctant to lend to each other as distrust has spread throughout the financial system.

The FTSE 100 index closed down 32.4 points. The confirmation of the merger caused HBOS to rally towards the 232p a share offer price, up 17 per cent, or 25.5p, at 172.6p.

Lloyds shares fell however, ending the day down 15 per cent, or 42.25p, at 237.5p.

Meanwhile, the Council of Mortgage Lenders yesterday released figures which showed that new lending was down 36 per cent on last year at £21.8 billion.

However, there was better news from the high street last month, with retail sales up by 1.2 per cent.

In Russia, stock exchanges were closed for a second day as Dmitry Medvedev, the president, pledged a £10.98 billion injection into markets to stem plummeting share prices – and quash fears of a repeat of the country's 1998 financial collapse.

Asia markets continued to plummet overnight.


It's a tight squeeze as chairman rolls up in a 'golf cart'

AS ONE of the biggest names in UK banking, Sir Victor Blank clearly has matters of substance weighing on his mind rather than style.

The chairman of Lloyds TSB, who is charged with overseeing the transition of HBOS and Lloyds TSB into a new £30 billion British superbank, rolled up for a press conference in an £8,895 G-Wiz that is little bigger than an enclosed golf cart.

No chauffeur for this City grandee; not even one of the black Lincolns that ferried the most powerful figures in American banking and finance to an emergency meeting at the offices of the New York Federal Reserve following the Lehman Brothers collapse.

So is Sir Victor simply trying to flash his green credentials in a bright red car that can run for 35 miles after it is plugged into the mains?

Or is there more to be read into it, such as the fact the G-Wiz is made in India from plastics by the company Reva in Bangalore?

It is ironic that, for the past two years, Lloyds TSB has outsourced its human resources operations out of a centre in India.

And in May, the bank announced plans to move 450 IT jobs to India, with further areas of the IT division's 2,400-strong workforce expected to follow suit in future.

Emily Pykett

The full article contains 1523 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 18 September 2008 11:50 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Halifax Bank of Scotland

Angus Ogg,

18/09/2008 22:10:46

Can some City Spiv, not borrow Alasdair Darling, short sell him, and have him go quickly bust.

Maybe George Osborne plc., or John Swinney Ltd., can ride to the rescue and bail out Alasdair Darling and rename him Nigel Lamont. Both are badgers of the same clan. Both bu66ered up the UK economy.

Trams, prams, jams & bams,

19/09/2008 00:11:30

How do you do that?


Trams, prams, jams & bams,

19/09/2008 00:11:57

How do you do that?


Trams, prams, jams & bams,

19/09/2008 00:12:09
*Please enter your comment*

Trams, prams, jams & bams,

19/09/2008 00:12:24
*Please enter your comment*

The Answer,

Glasgow 19/09/2008 00:14:12
scotchland compaired to the S East

Population aged 16 +

6,649,000 S East
4,183,000 Scotland

Economically active Males

2,372,000 S East
1,394.000 Scotland

Males in Employment

2,262,000 S East
1,335,000 Scotland

Change over 1 year

Aged 16+

62,000 S East
25,000 Scotland

Economically active Males

50,000 S East
-13,000 Scotland

Males in Employment

47,000 S East
-2,000 Scotland

Labour market statistics Sep 2008, page 35

Conan the Librarian™,

19/09/2008 00:30:38
So there are minus 13,000 thousand "males" err, not economically active in Scotland?

Be a wee bit more attentive with your cut and paste in future, there's a good unionist.

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 19/09/2008 01:00:25

Well for us, it is a historical week! no-matter the outcome,...

A potential Baby/Babies, and a once was Potentially good Bank, that now have NO Potentials,

'Yeah' Life Sucks at times! :((


Yok Finney,

Ross-shire 19/09/2008 01:25:57
Where there's turmoil there's brass. Out wi the old and let's start a new bank primarly for scottish business customers on bullet-proof trustee terms. Its headquarters go in scenic Strathspay so you can always find your CEO by the river. If requested I will design this central newtonmoric facility for the regeneration of the scottish economy.


19/09/2008 01:29:25

"That did not convince Mr Salmond, who warned that the whole of the Scottish economy could be plunged into "turmoil". The First Minister has insisted for the past few months that the Scottish economy has proved more resilient than the rest of the UK to the effects of the economic slowdown."

The Blessed Alex does let his rhetoric run away with him at times. Of course Scotland will be affected by the world financial situation! I would start to believe in miracles if it wasn't.

Just because some SNP punter, like Salmond, says that Scotland is, (a)different, (b)unique, or (c)special does not necessarily make it so. Scotland is not immune to the events that affect the rest of the world.



Hong Kong 19/09/2008 02:26:23
#10, quite agree. Alex Salmon is a big fish in a tiny pond (excuse the pun). When he deserted the Scottish parliament to take his seat in Westminster he was insignificant, an absolute nobody during his time there. Once he sniffed power back home, he ran from the body that represented 65m people, grabbed it and suddenly became somebody..... to 4.5m people!

It's important to realise nationalists (racists?) that when the crisis has any significance, or real scale, Mr Fish is completely powerless.

This is a British company being rescued by another British company, the same that rescued Scottish Widows when it too was badly managed.

Mr Fish can rant and rave all he likes, but he knows when he wakes in the wee small hours, he's powerless to have any impact on British business and that it's the hated folk South of the border who've rescused, yet again, another famous Scottish institution that's gone to the wall.


19/09/2008 03:27:46
If the rescuing out of a single bank is going to tip Scotland into turmoil, then what hope for independence?


19/09/2008 03:46:36

12 Royster,

"If the rescuing out of a single bank is going to tip Scotland into turmoil, then what hope for independence?"

Scottish independence is just as ethereal and fragile as the profits of HBOS.

the_figures_are _fudged,

Galashiels 19/09/2008 03:47:49
Half the mortgages in Scotland have just been bought over.

People this is bad news.

I am starting to wonder if Bean didn't deliberately allow this to happen.

HBOS was not a bank headed for disaster. Yet Bean and his FSA watched it being screwed from £10 down to 88p over a year and did .......... absolutely nothing.

So now we can throw away the rulebook on competition to create a superbank that would a week ago been illegal.

And Scotland loses several thousand jobs.

Union dividend anyone ?

End to boom and bust anyone ?

Stability anyone ?

Sierra Foothills Scot,

Diamond Springs 19/09/2008 03:56:48
#11. ChinaBear

Your posts would be more credible if you would forgo juvenile name-calling.

Sierra Foothills Scot,

Diamond Springs 19/09/2008 04:00:20
#12 Royster -

The USA, Russia, many other countries and indeed the UK are all in financial turmoil right now. What hope their independence?


Yok Finney,

Ross-shire 19/09/2008 04:34:24
.. a resounding number of Scots voting for Independence!
.. creating a ripple across this resonant Universe (for it's an all resonant cosmos from quark to super-galactic)

Government of the people, for the people, by the people has not been abandoned or forsaken on the bluemarble planet!

"Whether Barack Obama or John McCain is the next President, the United States Government has no right to deny the citizens of our country or the rest of the world the benefit of very advanced and pollution free energy technologies, which have been developed at our expense but never used for our collective good. I know that these technologies exist because I have actually, physically invented, developed and worked with them. By grace, I have survived long enough to tell you about and even physically demonstrate several technologies before representatives of the corruption confiscated them."

"We need to act like loving, intelligent beings. We have to be politically, physically and even spiritually assertive. If we do this, we can send a message to the rest of the universe that there is intelligent life on Earth."

-- Astro-physicist Adam Trombly

(the failed economics called corporate globalisation which is scuppering "the West" is not the only game in town)


19/09/2008 04:47:07
1) Scotland is not immune from what is going on elsewhere.

2) Ediburgh is not immune from what's going on elsewhere.

3) Banking is not 'a job for life'

3) Despite what Wee Eck thinks, this is not an Englih conspiracy against the Scots.

4) Could it be Wee Eck doesn't like an English Bank coming to the rescue of HBOS?


19/09/2008 04:48:15
#17. Are you David Icke by any chance? #16. I don't think we can describe as economic turmoil. There is a run on the markets but next week that'll probably be over. UK house prices will fall because they have been going up for 10 years.


WEST HILLS 19/09/2008 04:51:01
just another reason for independence.
Scottish government could outlaw selling short.
not wait for the dips down south
casey purvis

Sierra Foothills Scot,

Diamond Springs 19/09/2008 04:55:14
#19 Royster – So why did you imply in #12 that Scotland is in turmoil? Next week whatever Scotland is in now will probably be over?


Murrieta CA: for more McCain 19/09/2008 05:08:28
Alex Salmond Ur SNP leader sounds like our evil Pres. Bush.

Salmond repeatedly told the Scots (u dudes) the Scottish economy has proved more resilient than the rest of the UK to the effects of the economic slowdown."
Like give me a break dudes.

Here is Pres Bush telling the American a people American people our economy is fundamentally sound.

Like give me a break dudes.

Enter McCain who says quote " the American economy is fundamentally sound.

These 3 politicians all got it wrong.

But the difference it the US is a giant, and Scotland is a province in the UK.

The US can weather any financial storm, we just print more money. Scotland can't do that.

Suck it up dudes. Independence in a global economy is dinosaur thinking.


Yok Finney,

Ross-shire 19/09/2008 05:09:50
.. going on elsewhere

"The corporate boys would rather change the subject to the economy instead but alas they have destroyed that too. We the People can’t ignore the news about the environment or it’s stepchild, the economy. Every week another town is laid to waste, another factory is closed, another ten thousand mortgages are foreclosed, another bridge to the future collapsed."

"The same corporate oligarchy, which has laid waste to so much of our world would rather not accurately report all the fires, floods, tornadoes, hurricanes or all the cities and towns ruined by climate deteriorization."

"We actually need to implement the long withheld solutions of zero point vacuum fluctuation and hydro-oxy gas based technologies."

Boy Wonder,

19/09/2008 05:58:45
How does this affect Eck's plans for our independence with such a large part of Scotland's econimic engine, no longer in Scottish hands or located in Scotland?


Livingston 19/09/2008 06:01:41
Ah yes, the Union dividend. Others call it carpetbaggerism.


Guildford 19/09/2008 06:09:27
Anyone with a brain can see this has nothing to do with Scotland not being able to be independent - it's not independent now and where is/was the benefit???? The Scottish bank was one of the first destroyed by the London spivs - thanks for the show of brotherhood, togetherness & unionism!!!......


Guildford 19/09/2008 06:12:37
The unionists are soft naive - they just accept that what anybody from outside Scotland does must be better than what Scots can do for themselves. Here we go again!
Thanks for the 'union dividend' lads!!!!!!


Scotland 19/09/2008 06:28:44

That will be the scenario within the union of course.
An Independent Scotland would of course not be in such a precarious position with its Norwegian style Oil fund and the fact that it wouldnt have to try and get by on a Barnett formula income.
And yet another union benefit rears its ugly head.


Scotland 19/09/2008 06:30:44

Scotland doesnt have control of any of its assets so even if we lost a large part we still would be better of getting control of the rest wouldnt we? but the loss of the BOS is not a "large" part at all is it?

Keyboard supporter,

19/09/2008 06:31:14
C'mon now Alex - ride to the rescue on your wonder horse named "Independence". Another eunuch politician - same as the rest of them. Situation caused by unbridled greed and recklessness by the banks and acquiescent politicians.

God help Scotland if finance goes down the tubes!


Scotland 19/09/2008 06:33:18

Exactly and they will fall far harder down South and will that end the English economy? should England then seek to join a union with a much larger country than itself for financial security?


Scotland 19/09/2008 06:35:18

Would we no be far more "immune" if we had full fiscal control rather than having to ride it out under a Barnett formula income?


19/09/2008 07:01:52
What annoys me is not the loss of the BofS. That was lost with the Halifax anschlüss. What annoys me is the scum who are lining up, absolutely tingling with glee, telling us that this is what would happen in an indepndent Scottish state!

I've got news for you vermin! This happened under the Brit State! Perhaps you can now tell us that this is part of being in the Union and is good for us?

It's about time we realised that this unionist cancer within us needs to be excised!

Saor Alba!


Scotland 19/09/2008 07:06:50

Isnt the US independent then?

Heed thi baw,

19/09/2008 07:08:30
Alex Salmond sticks his nose into these situations as he claims he is acting in the interests of all Scots. He's not - he merely uses these situations to gain political capital, at the misfortunes of others.

HBOS is an international co. that historically decided to list on the London Stock Exchange, where it could obtain the greatest share capital to expand the company.

What is Salmond claiming he would have done differently under an independent Scotland that would have saved HBOS? Answer - sod all.

Evan Owen,

Snowdonia 19/09/2008 07:09:44
What Scottish economy?


Scotland 19/09/2008 07:11:33

A "British" business put in turmoil by "British" speculators and sold off by a "British" government.
Oh to be "British"


Scotland 19/09/2008 07:14:18

And did the UK government no gain political capital by allowing HBOS to be taken over by Lloyds of London in spite of the obvious competition advantage this is going to give the now massively large outsized bank in the UK? No other UK bank is going to be able to compete with this monster.
Now tell me this doesnt suit the UK government in these trying constitutional times.

John S,

19/09/2008 07:15:29
Norway is a safe economic haven.
In the present financial storm, economic analysts describe Norway as a safe haven."Norway's sovereign global fund gives us room to manoeuvre.
Aftenposten -17 Sep 2008


Scotland 19/09/2008 07:21:56

"What is Salmond claiming he would have done differently under an independent Scotland that would have saved HBOS? Answer - sod all."

Oh right the option to financially bail it out or nationalise it wouldnt have been there at all of course?

The only reason he can do b*gger all about it is because we are drowning in this so called union.


Federation, not separation 19/09/2008 07:47:20
Once again England comes to Scotland's rescue.

It's the scenario that began with the Act of Union.

It's embarrassing, but who will rescue us after independence? Alex? If he is so smart then why didn't he jump about warning us all BEFORE these terrible events?

I'm afraid the SNP remains part of the problem, not the solution.

Federation is the only sensible way forward


19/09/2008 07:47:44

OK BoxOfSpanners.

Suppose you were in charge and you took the "option to financially bail it out or nationalise it".

Well done. You've just spent £12bn of taxpayers money.

Which taxes do you increase to pay for it?

Which services do you cut to pay for it?

What do you say to the shareholders you've just wiped out?

Why is that better to allow a private company to buy it with THEIR money and leave the shareholders with something?

Vote UKIP,

19/09/2008 07:48:32

Dave from Barra ©,

Western Isles 19/09/2008 07:53:02
Rules @41

Um, that would be the EU then as we would adopt the Euro and do what other EU countries are doing in thier own crisis. And that would be EU countries that are not part of some other superficial "union". The European Central Bank would be the mechanism instead of the Bank of England.


Scotland 19/09/2008 07:55:23

What taxes were raised to pay for the Northern Rock?
Which services were cut as a direct result?
What times your appointment with your shrink?


Dave from Barra ©,

Western Isles 19/09/2008 07:55:35
The European Central Bank Rules. Being part of the much larger European Union would be better than being part of this current superficial one.

I see now why Westminster is sooooo keen to keep Scotland part of her wee empire. Without us, her standing in the EU would be reduced to that of recalcitrant schoolboy.


19/09/2008 07:57:20
#44. Great, then we'd have a currency issued by a non-sovereign state. Hardly a recipe for stability in the long-term is it?

Dave from Barra ©,

Western Isles 19/09/2008 07:58:25
Sovereignity means stability? Eh? You think the European Union will collapse? When will America collapse?


Scotland 19/09/2008 07:59:07

We already have that in Scotland or havent you noticed all of the Bank of England notes floating about?
Better send the kids to their granny.


19/09/2008 08:01:58
#46. You mean with 1/10th of the UK's population, Scotland's position in the EU would be a fraction of what it is now as part of the UK. Anyway, typical of SNP to trust any nation apart from those people south of the border. Quite pathetic really. Scotland has just been helped by the Union without which the bank would have failed totally.

PJ Walker,

East Lothian 19/09/2008 08:02:56
Hornby to be given £2 million and a job.

He'd better be careful where he parks his Mercedes

Janis B,

london 19/09/2008 08:04:19

Lloyds of London Poster (35) ? Not sure what they have to do with a HBOS takeover. Lloyds of London are all to do with Insurance.

Interesting articles in both today's Times & Daily Mail,re. this merger, Scottish jobs to be protected over & above English ones..... union benefit I suppose.

Dave from Barra ©,

Western Isles 19/09/2008 08:05:26

Yes, it would be a proportional standing. We would be slightly higher than Luxembourg but lower than say France but the important thing is we would have direct representation on things that matter to us such as fishing (we have over 60% of the coast line) CAP, oil and the likes.


19/09/2008 08:05:33
45 Spanners

NR was nationalised and the shareholders are being WIPED OUT.

Do you think that would have been a better outcome for HBOS?

Yes or no, plank.


19/09/2008 08:18:06
"Andy Hornby, the chief executive of HBOS, whose future is unclear, said:"

Thank you very much for the £2million in shares Lloyds TSB. (BBC news this morning)

Why are we rewarding mismanagement with pay-outs like this?


19/09/2008 08:20:15
No 33 MIKEY "What annoys me is the scum who are lining up, absolutely tingling with glee, telling us that this is what would happen in an independent Scottish state!.......I've got news for you vermin! This happened under the Brit State! Perhaps you can now tell us that this is part of being in the Union and is good for us? It's about time we realised that this unionist cancer within us needs to be excised! Saor Alba!"



Scotland 19/09/2008 08:22:19

So what taxes were raised and what services were cut to bail out Northern Rock?
And didnt I make the point that shareholders speculate with their money? they take a gamble knowing full well it could go either way. Their choice their gamble.
They could just as easily have invested their money in shares or bonds or even just put it in the bank as savings.
So dont use yer phoney sympathy for share holders to support yer obsession with posting anti Scottish independence sentiments.

Yok Finney,

Ross-shire 19/09/2008 08:24:07
-- What Scottish economy?

Farming's likely our best Industry. It's modern, well run and supplies quality produce. Just don't eat the chicken or factory salmon. There's a good export trade in the rigorously inspected seed markets. It works for the bigger lowland units, but doesn't employ many people. I hefty subsidy always makes things gang wi a swing. Though upland sheep are in big decline and there's a lack of interest for retraining and new jobs.

You can rebuild a manufacturing sector after a typical rigged financial collapse. If there was one. So we'd starting from stratch like enterprising Americans once did in the 19th century and that I'd venture means coming our the EU as much as poss and putting up some tariffs. We'd need more and better technical colleges.

Aberdeen has plenty oil-tech that should would move into the marine renewables field exept the men o the North have a' gane gyte (maybe drunk on oil and golf drink and pole-dancing) as the song goes. The central belt gets building these new EU super-carriers.

China's securing essential colonies for food and raw materials. Instead of exporting most goods they could just as easily distribute them amongst their own folk.

I'd nationalise everything in Scotland then lease-out parcels of land for private enterprise. For as the banksters are speaking: pain, suffering and crunch treatment is good for everyone and what the Market demands.


19/09/2008 08:26:59
57 Spanners

"So dont use yer phoney sympathy for share holders to support yer obsession with posting anti Scottish independence sentiments."

I'm not.

I've just been asking you since yesterday why you think nationalisation of HBOS would have been a better option.

You either buy out at the market price - which would cost £12bn - or you buy out at zero (or close to it) - as was done with Rock.

Which option are you proposing?

How would this have been better?

Dave from Barra ©,

19/09/2008 08:27:38

In Scotland

Farming brings in around £2.5 billion pa
Whisky brings in around £2.2 billion pa
Oil brings in around £5.5 billion pa
Tourisn brings in between £2 and 5 billion pa
Financial services brought us to our knees.


19/09/2008 08:29:30
#48. No I don't... but it hardly has a 300-year track record of stability does it? Who'd have said HBOS would collapse in a day? What if Russia starts to have a go at the Baltic states again? Can't see NATO or the other EU states riding to the rescue; can you?


Scotland 19/09/2008 08:30:22

How many times do I have to answer that question and how many different ways do you have to be told?
My answer was nationalisation and you asked how much taxes would have to be raised and what services have to be cut in order to buy it and I asked what taxes were raised and what services were cut in order for the UK bank to be able to afford to buy out Northern Rock and I am still waiting for an answer.
A simple sorry I have phuqed up again will suffice.


19/09/2008 08:31:01

should read UK government not UK bank.

John S,

19/09/2008 08:34:31
#50 I cannot follow you when you said Scotland's position in the EU would be a fraction of what it is now as part of the UK.
Scotland has 7 soon to be 6 seats (2009) in the EU parliament,an independent Scotland would have 12-14 seats in the EU parliament and as a full member of the EU this would include veto rights. It would be the same for the UK or whatever name the rest adopted they would have 72 seats (2009)and as a full member of the EU they would also have veto rights.


19/09/2008 08:36:47
62 Spanners

So, to be crystal clear, you are advocating a Northern Rock style nationalisation at zero or close to it?

Shareholder wipeout?

"Yes" will suffice.


Scotland 19/09/2008 08:37:07

Scotland has no place in the EU no representation and no status as a nation how can it be a fraction of what it is now under Independence when a fraction of zero is zero idiot boy?


Scotland 19/09/2008 08:47:07

What I have argued and said from post one is that the Scottish government should always have had the option open to them to nationalise or buy out the bank if its in Scotlands interests.
A Scottish government should be in a position to run interference with any threat to its financial institutions by whatever means necessary.
Now it cannae get anymore crystal clearer than that can it?
You have also made your position crystal clear and consise. You are obsessively against Scottish independence and will lie argue twist and turn in order to express this obsession.
So now we both know where we stand and so does everybody else reading this.

Shareholder wipeout? are you advocating that shareholders should be given priority consideration over all other factors? including workers losing their jobs?


Moscow 19/09/2008 08:49:15
Seems a lot of people on here have a problem understanding the facts.

HBOS was a solid financial institution whose demise was brought about by short trading. They had no problems in raising finance.

Short trading was today suspended to prevent the same situation with other institutions...everyone understand now?

FSA stating HBOS was stable.government saying Lloyds saved HBOS and then stating that tading has to be cleaned up..stinks of incompetence and short-sightedness..short trading fears have been raised for at least 3 years.

Government has been caught and as a consequence of not having it's finger on the button Scotland will lose a lot of jobs and expertise..

Sickening to read the glee unionists have taken this as proof of either the union coming to the aid of Scotland OR proof that Scotland could not be independent.

A lot of people on these boards have demosnstrated that they would rather see Scotland on it's nees and take great joy in the fact so long as they remain in th union...the servility of it is chilling.


Scotland 19/09/2008 08:49:27

Now how much were our taxes raised by and what services were cut in order to allow the UK government to buy out Northern Rock?

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 19/09/2008 08:52:14
#41 "Once again England comes to Scotland's rescue. "

Your usual Scotland-hating drivel. The situation is rather akin to me mugging you and beating you to a bloody broken pulp in an alleyway, then "rescuing" you by calling an ambulance with the mobile phone I nicked out of your pocket.

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 19/09/2008 08:55:38
#35 "What is Salmond claiming he would have done differently under an independent Scotland that would have saved HBOS?"

He'd have banned short-selling on banks, which is what he was calling for before the FSA did it. The result is on the front page of The Times this morning"

"FTSE soars as bank vultures forced into retreat

FSA ban on traders short-selling sends HBOS shares surging over 50% as London market opens nearly 300 points higher"

Dave from Barra ©,

Western Isles 19/09/2008 09:00:42

HBOS (or BOSH as it should be) at a 22% share in the American sub-prime market. Thats over a fith of it's interests placed in a collapsed market.

BOSH also were in talks with Lloyds about this as far back as June this year. This got leaked and the traders had a field day short selling them to corruption.

Heed thi baw,

19/09/2008 09:03:02

You're extremely niaive and gullible.

How can Salmond ban short selling of a company that is listed on the London Stock Exchange?

Salmond revels in division and confrontation. Bottom line is he is a racist and a bigot.

Glasgow Expat,

Desert 19/09/2008 09:03:57
I am proud to be a short selling spiv. Without the likes of us there is no balance in the markets, which just adds to the problems down the road after another "long only" bubble is allowed to develop. All this means is a slow painfull death of stock markets now rather than a quick clean kill.


Scotland 19/09/2008 09:07:30

What planet are you on? he isnt the only one who expressed his disgust at the London spivs and he isnt the only one complaining about it either. And now legislation has been put in place to prevent a repeat.
Bottom line is you are an ignoramous.


19/09/2008 09:09:33

Yes good idea phuq off lick yer wounds and prepare youself for the next anti Scottish headline.

Venerable Bede,

19/09/2008 09:09:54
#69 suchaparcelofrogues - good question. I always wonder how governments "find" this money for these things. I somehow don't think Labour is far-sighted enough to have a contingency fund (at least, not one that extends beyond an illegal war-chest).


19/09/2008 09:12:43
67 Spanners

Still not clear I'm afraid:

"the Scottish government should always have had the option open to them to nationalise or buy out the bank"

"Nationalise" or "buy out"? Which is it? I assume the first means at zero, the second is at market price. Which costs.

To answer the question about N Rock, we don't yet know what it will cost us. The nationalisation was at zero or close to it (we don't even know the answer to that yet) and we're all on the hook for its liabilities. Depending on how things go there could be an eventual bill for billions.

And there's already been a cash cost. Because NR is now state-owned, the national debt is that bit bigger and so gilt rates are bit higher.

"You have also made your position crystal clear and consise. You are obsessively against Scottish independence and will lie argue twist and turn in order to express this obsession."

Really? I've said this is a bad situation, but a nationalised or bust HBOS would be a lot worse. In this case I do not think "independence" would have made one iota of a difference either way.

By the way, I've finally recognised your style, BoxofSpanners.

Hello, Jackie love, how have you been? Still got the old neurological problems, clearly.

Heed thi baw,

19/09/2008 09:15:16

Aye very good. You make it sound as if he had powers to ban short selling. All he's done is jump on the political bandwagon, much like he did with Chris Hoy. Salmond is all words and no substance.

Richard Taylor,

Aberdeen 19/09/2008 09:16:07
#11 I might have listened, until I noticed you're posting from...OH, HONG KONG!!!!! PHOOEY!!!


19/09/2008 09:24:13
71 "Rev" Campbell

I hate to break it to you, but it's like this.

Suppose Scotland became "independent" a few years ago.

Suppose there was a separate "Edinburgh Stock Exchange".

There is not one scintilla of a possibility that a company like HBOS - or RBS, or Standard Life, or British Energy, or Scottish & Southern - would be listed on.

They would all be listed in London, because big companies want to be listed on big, liquid exchanges.

So Prime Minister / President Salmond could scream and shout as much as he would like, but he would have no control over whether shorting was allowed on the LSE or not.

And he won't in the future either, no matter what.

Back to the psalms again, Padre.


Scotland 19/09/2008 09:38:43

Well they did find the money for the Iraq and Afganistan invasions so unless the money came from foreign sourses then we are obviously paying too much in taxes and for public services.


19/09/2008 09:38:58
42 sm 753

Your questions regarding a scenario of "nationalisation" of HBOS are even more pertinent to Northern Rock - with a twist.

You've spent considerably more than you would on nationalising HBOS to nationalise Northern Rock so the questions are:

Given that you've already plundered the pension funds which taxes do you increase to pay for it?

Given that you've already taxed people to the hilt which services will be cut to pay for it?

What do you say to the share-holders you've wiped out?

Why is it better to nationalise it rather than allow a private company to buy it with THEIR money and leave the share-holders with something?

What happened to the Northern Rock money, i.e. tax-payers' money, stashed away with Granite in the Channel Islands?

As Granite is a registered charity, for the benefit of Down's Syndrome sufferers, how much money have they paid to the charity?

Two further questions:

Given that Darling was "aware of the problems facing HBOS" after two earlier incidents of "short-selling" why did he only address this problem after the deal brokered by his government was done?

Given that they were aware "weeks ago" of the problem did the UK government pursue all alternatives before breaking their own guide-lines to let this merger go ahead?


Scotland 19/09/2008 09:41:05

Either the point is having the options as opposed to having no options at all I bet its clear enough to everybody else not looking to save face after making a tool of themselves.

We dont even know if the deal with HBOS will go through either yet as the share holders still have to decide but it hasnt stopped you expressing your sentiments has it?


Edinburgh 19/09/2008 09:43:21
The short selling theory has been overdone re HBOS. It's not the short sellers that has brought it to its knees (see

What brought HBOS to its knees is inept, inexperienced management with insufficient experience in running a bank and in getting the right controls in place for its risk profile. Asda Hornby turns out to be clueless after all, and they simply lent too much money to too many risky projects with too few deposits backing it up and now they have to renew money market funding they find themselves unable to borrow it.

Short sellers are a red herring here, honestly.


Scotland 19/09/2008 09:44:02

So we are back to nationalising it as a better option then arent we?


19/09/2008 09:45:19
73 & 79 heed thi baw

We would like to see your evidence that Salmond is a racist and a bigot?

Incidentally, Salmond could not join Chris Hoy on a "political band-wagon" - he was on a bike!

PS Have you got one??


19/09/2008 09:59:16

Jackie Spanners

You've still not made clear whether you would "nationalise" or "buy out".

Not that it matters.

Even if there were an independent Scotland today with its own Stock Exchange, HBOS would still have been listed in London.

So President Salmond wouldn't be able to nationalise, it, buy it out or do anything anyway.

And that will be true, for ever and ever amen, because NO large "Scottish" firm will ever choose to be listed anywhere than London.

Which - again - demonstrates the futility of the "independence" argument.


Venerable Bede,

19/09/2008 09:59:22
Quoting alphaville is like quoting the eternally demented guenevere/kimba troll.


Scotland 19/09/2008 10:05:09

Yes of course and it was really foolish of the USA to fight a war of Independence without having its own national bank in place and having all of its finance run from London.
It really didnt turn out well for them at all did it?
You really are a f*ckwit.


Ottawa, Canada 19/09/2008 10:10:47
Charles Linskaill

Good morning to you and your dear young wife.

With what you both had to endure this week one can only surmise that, once you have reached rock bottom, one can only go UP!

Chin up, old chap, and things WILL get better.

22 Galactic Cannibal

You, by your usually intemperate posting, have insulted many Scots by referring to their proud homeland as a "province in the UK."

Have you learned NOTHING by reading many of the postings in these threads? Get with the programme and smarten up or we will continue to consider you to be a wingnut.


19/09/2008 10:11:17
83 Brownlie dear boy

Northern Rock:

"Why is it better to nationalise it rather than allow a private company to buy it with THEIR money and leave the share-holders with something?"

Because as I recall, the private buyers (Branson etc) were only proposing to take NR on the basis of putting very little of their own capital in and still getting a huge guarantee. Which would have been a shockingly bad deal.

So the choices were nationalisation or immediate closure and bankruptcy.

"What happened to the Northern Rock money, i.e. tax-payers' money, stashed away with Granite in the Channel Islands?"

Is there any? Again as I recall NR never received any actual cash, it has only had guarantees so far. The shareholders have got nothing to date.

"As Granite is a registered charity, for the benefit of Down's Syndrome sufferers, how much money have they paid to the charity?"

No idea. Ask Applegarth. And jail him, if he broke the law.

"Given that Darling was "aware of the problems facing HBOS" after two earlier incidents of "short-selling" why did he only address this problem after the deal brokered by his government was done?

Given that they were aware "weeks ago" of the problem did the UK government pursue all alternatives before breaking their own guide-lines to let this merger go ahead?"

Well as others have said (e.g. on Newsnight last night) it is by no means clear that shorting had all that much to do with it, despite all the yammering and bleating on the subject.

And private companies are supposed to sort their own problems out, as far as possible. HMG is only SUPPOSED to get involved at the last minute.

Judging the difference between "the last minute" and "too late" is the tricky bit, of course. It does look to me like HMG etc got this one "more right" than they did with N Rock.



Edinburgh 19/09/2008 10:12:53
#89 - the figures quoted by Alphaville speak for themselves I think.

The fact is that the market hates a company in trouble, and we should look to HBOS management and staff for the explanation of why they were in such dire straits and not the market.



Dundee 19/09/2008 10:14:09
Royster and Hi thi Baw - good comments

And why all the newspapers so shy... about the fact that Alex Salmond was Chief Economist for Royal Bank of Scotland from 1980-87, his main claim to expertise? Just as well he does not want to go back to it, if his expertise amounts to saying yesterday ’he conceded for the first time that the financial sector was in serious trouble and the rest of the economy could go the same way.’ When they have been writing in the financial press three years ago, OECD was saying British house price sector and financial sector living off it 10-20% overvalued.

The Answer.. what’s with the statistics on MALE employment? Wake up, it’s the 21st century… women work too. Would not like to have you telling anybody about running a modern economy.


Yes, but the main battle for listing is London/Frankfurt now. Germany was luke warm towards neo-liberalism all along.


19/09/2008 10:17:56
I did read somewhere that Alex Salmond was a qualified economist and as such he should be fully aware of the negative impact on markets by using the word 'turmiol'.


Edinburgh 19/09/2008 10:19:38
I cannot belive everyone is claiming to be so surprised by all this. HBOS has been respnsible for some questionable lending practices over recent years now they have been caught with their pants down (so to speak).

Lloyds were critisised not too long ago for being too cautious with their lending practices if only HBOS (and the rest) had done then same this country would not be in quite so much of a mess.

The idea that Scotland was somehow immune to any negative effects of this so called "credit crunch" was naive at best and at worst a downright lie. If these muppets had not lent to any amount to any moron with a pulse we would not be in this position now....


19/09/2008 10:32:48

92 sm753

I'm not a dear boy any more - I gave that up ages ago!

I'm surprised that some-one as knowledgeable as your good self does not know how much NR money went to Granite.

At present the charity has received NO money.

Ahem, if "shorting" had nothing to do with it why the action from midnight last night. As the market rallied following the action - recommended by Salmond and seized on by the UK Gov - why was this action not taken sooner?

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 19/09/2008 10:35:45
#81 "There is not one scintilla of a possibility that a company like HBOS - or RBS, or Standard Life, or British Energy, or Scottish & Southern - would be listed on [a Scottish stock exchange]."

Once again your breathtaking ability to present idle speculation as concrete fact shames us all. HBOS, if what you and others tell us about their vulnerable state is true, might very well have wanted to be on a Scottish SE where short-selling of banks was banned. They might not be the only ones, either.


19/09/2008 10:36:09
95 sweet

Using the word 'turmiol' would certainly cause confusion but you're quite right. On the other hand he's been making every effort to boost Scotland's prospects otherwise.


19/09/2008 10:40:04
If short-traders hadn't played such a major part in all this, why then has short-trading been banned.

Lets not be naive - and remember Soros.


19/09/2008 10:41:34
#81, sm753.

complete garbage! You know absolutely zilch about finance! If what you said was true, instead of lying through your unionist teeth, you'd perhaps like to explain why the Irish banks are listed on the ISEQ and nor the LSE?


Scotland 19/09/2008 10:46:25

Spot on if companies only listed with the biggest exchanges then they would all be listed in the far east and none of em would be on the LSE.
He is so full of sh*t he has to be being paid to post this garbage.


Jakarta 19/09/2008 11:05:06
I think a lot of people are irrationally blaming the short selling for HBOS demise. The short selling is a symptom not the disease. The disease was relying on Capital Markets as your primary source of funding the mortgages they where selling rather than customers deposits. This was compounded by lending money to people who where not credit worthy and not demanding any sort of down payment during a housing bubble.

If you look at all the Banks in Trouble, Northern Rock, Bradford and Bingley, Alliance and Leicester and HBOS they all followed the same failed funding model.


Scotland 19/09/2008 11:06:18
Hail Alex, the new Che Guvara of Scotland! - lets all get the T shirts printed with his face grinning at us. All talk and no action of course, a typical opportunist who has no intention, (even if he could) of directly tackling the anarchy of the banks and the corrupt system that they represent.


Scotland 19/09/2008 11:09:56

I have no doubt that the problem is a combination of short selling, bad management, poor government, global instability and of course constitutional crises.
The argument is over how much or the ratio is due to one of the concerns over the others.


Scotland 19/09/2008 11:11:35

Hail Sedov the new cyber troll account.
Just because we need another one.

W U Merchant,

Aberdeen 19/09/2008 11:19:41
The people who can tip our economy into turmoil are opportunists (ie spivs) like Salmond. A disgrace to Scotland.

W U Merchant,

Aberdeen 19/09/2008 11:21:29

An excellent post Sedov. Why doesn't Salmond promise to nationalise the banks in the Independent Scottish Socialist Republic?


Panama 19/09/2008 11:23:52
If Scotland had an independent Government it would undoubtedly have bought HBOS - a snip at £12bn (2 years oil money!). It might even have let the Halifax part go to LloydsTSB and kept the BoS part. That is the price of the Union for Scots - we don't have any power and the UK Gov don't care about the Scots or their economy. Alex could ask the oil rich Norwegians to buy the BoS bit with an arrangement to sell it back to Scotland once independence is achieved, which looks likely now in 2010 or maybe even 2009 judging by ongoing developments and the likelihood of a UK general election possibly this November and an SNP romp in Scotland. Bring it on! All you unionist/britnats must be quaking in yer bits!

Glasgow Expat,

Desert 19/09/2008 11:24:07
What the idiots do not understand is that banning short selling INCREASES volatility and can result in faster falls in share prices! People must now use options to hedge their risk and that causes a build up of a long position by the market makers who eventually have to dump all their stock. Maybe they'll ban options next and decree that we all must be bullish and optimistic all the time. Denial is not just a river in africa.


Scotland 19/09/2008 11:24:25

He hasnt promised not to.


19/09/2008 11:26:47
108 WUM

Congratulations, you've excelled even your usual tedious and stupid remarks.

Give us the benefit of your infinite wisdom and tell us what action should have been taken.


Scotland 19/09/2008 11:27:15

Funnily enough share prices have risen dramatically since the announcement in fact because of the announcement pity you cant erase your comments after you commit them eh?

Ian G,

EDINBURGH 19/09/2008 11:27:32
Scotland small country Five Million people.

Switzerland small country Five Million people.

One in a weak Union.
One strong and Independent.

One failed at banking when taken over and run by Englishmen.
One a success! Because its still Independent.
And run by the Swiss.


Scotland 19/09/2008 11:28:02

Come on he doesnt call himself wind up merchant for nothing its a troll.

Border Scot,

19/09/2008 11:28:53
Northern Rock was a much smaller bank than HBOS. The UK government's income is far greater than the income an independent Scotland would have. To nationalise HBOS would have cost billions and billions of pounds. It just could not be done without huge sacrifices being made by the Scottish people as a whole and to pretend otherwise is just plain dishonest.

The fact is that when economic and financial turmoil strikes, the big countries can do something about it, the little ones just have to hope they can ride out the storm. Has anyone noticed what is happening in Ireland at the moment?

And as for Scotland joining the Euro. That would immediately make the price of Scottish goods in by far our single most important market significantly more expensive. And in an economic downturn that would be one sure fire way of ensuring that many, many Scottish jobs would be lost.

Of course, this does not mean Scotland could not be a viable independent country. It could. But nationalists are once again being dishonest about the full consequences of independence. Nothing ever changes.

Glasgow Expat,

Desert 19/09/2008 11:30:24
113 - I am not talking about today which is obviously a short covering rally. I am talking about over the next few weeks or months if the ban stays in place.

Border Scot,

19/09/2008 11:31:35
#109 - Two years oil money down the drain. So what happens to all the other things Scotland needs to spend on for those two years? No pensions for two years? Or no NHS for two years? Where would the cuts have been made.

And how would the Scottish government nationalise a company that was floated on a foreign stock exchange?

Border Scot,

19/09/2008 11:32:28
#114 - Clearly you have not been looking too closely at what has been happening to Swiss banks recently.

Glasgow Expat,

Desert 19/09/2008 11:36:39
and 113 - pity you can't understand the context of how free markets work eh?


19/09/2008 11:38:43
115 parcel

Damn, I would never have guessed but I could not resist the opportunity to call him tedious and stupid.

If he does not call himself that for nothing how much does he get paid then?


Scotland 19/09/2008 11:39:43

obviously more than he's worth.


Scotland 19/09/2008 11:40:33

Well I know enough to realise they are not "free" markets how about you?


19/09/2008 11:40:41
119 BS

Are Swiss banks in trouble? which ones?


Scotland 19/09/2008 11:41:32

I have noticed that none of em have been taken over by the Germans or French.


19/09/2008 11:44:17
122 parcel

Not that I would know myself, but I always thought wind-ups were supposed to be subtle so that the "victim" is not aware of it. WUM is about as subtle as a brick through a window.

Border Scot,

19/09/2008 11:44:50
#124 -

No banks are immune from what is happening at the moment, the nationality of who runs them is completely irrelevant.

Border Scot,

19/09/2008 11:46:37
#124 - there is this as well:

Glasgow Expat,

Desert 19/09/2008 11:47:50
123 - well at least we agree on that then.


19/09/2008 11:48:31

No take-overs from friendly neighbouring countries then?


Scotland 19/09/2008 11:49:26

Unless you live in a country experiancing a constitutional crises at the same time then it becomes very very relevant doesnt it?


Scotland 19/09/2008 11:52:27
#106 Yes, as the saying goes - it takes all kinds to make a world - so I will take your words as a compliment.

Border Scot,

19/09/2008 11:57:36
#130 - HBOS and Lloyds are based in the same country. I am sure there have been many occasions on which Swiss banks have bought other Swiss banks.

Border Scot,

19/09/2008 11:58:36
#127 - Not really. And we do not live in such a country anyway.


19/09/2008 12:02:47
128 Border Scot

What are the odds on Brown/Darling getting lucrative directorships with Lloyds/Halifax on a - slightly more than a - quid pro quo basis when the inevitable happens. Surely any bank would benefit from their prudence, 'insider' knowledge and their business acumen. A little bit of dithering and "fiddling while Rome burns" is of small consequence.


19/09/2008 12:05:29
133 Border Scot

Oh really! If it is the same country how come you live on a border?

Patrick O'Reilly,

Coatbridge 19/09/2008 12:09:21
Salmond's false indignation is sickening. He knew all about the merger talks and, being a "qualified economist", he knew exactly what the consequences would be. A disgrace to Scotland.

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 19/09/2008 12:09:27
#136 LOL

anony mouse,

ayrshire 19/09/2008 12:10:49
So from what I read here everything would have been different if Scotland was independent because Alex Salmond would have banned short selling. Yea?

The only thing I don't get about this is that HBOS is listed on the LONDON stock Exchange. Could someone then explain to me how Alex Salmond in Scotland would have been able to ban short selling in an English Stock Exchange?


Scotland 19/09/2008 12:14:54

Point already made and answered read the blogs.


Scotland 19/09/2008 12:16:27

No they are based within the same union of countries not the same country.
Didnt you go School?


Scotland 19/09/2008 12:18:02

I like it. Wont see many more comments with this logon account probably get highland mighty up next.

anony mouse,

19/09/2008 12:19:05
Sorry but I dont see this having been answered at all. Please reply specifically stating exactly how this could be done.
In an independant Scotland Salmond would only have the power to ban short selling in a stock exchange that was within Scottish Government control. So unless HBOS had been listed on a Scottish Stock Exchange he would have been completely powerless to use this particular mechanism surely?

Border Scot,

19/09/2008 12:20:40
#136 - Yup, it's a strange one. Isn't it great living in the UK?

139 - Would you have been happy for HBOS to be nationalised? What cuts would you have favoured to pay for it?

Border Scot,

19/09/2008 12:21:42
#143 - You are 100% correct.

Border Scot,

19/09/2008 12:22:49
#141 - Two countries that form a bigger country. We all hold UK passports.


19/09/2008 12:26:19
144 Border Scot

Cuts in MPs' expenses, cuts in MPs' fiddles, cuts in illegal invasions, cuts in weapons of mass destruction, cuts in spin doctors, cuts in political corruption, cuts in MPs with lucrative directorships, cuts in exorbitant politicians pensions. etc etc.

anony mouse,

19/09/2008 12:27:22
Anyone? Someone?
Could someone answer the question I posed in #139 and #143?


Scotland 19/09/2008 12:28:40

In otherwords yer too lazy to look.
Too many trolls go over the same ground time and time again just to ruin the blog or annoy folk its an old tired ploy.
Try something new.

anony mouse,

19/09/2008 12:30:07
I am hardly a troll as I have rarely ever been on here. How about just answering my question rather than being rude. Its a very simple question.


Scotland 19/09/2008 12:32:43

Again with the same old tired repeated arguement brought up under your other logon troll accounts.
Lose the arguement destroy the blog same ol same ol.


Scotland 19/09/2008 12:33:37

Not under this account logon of course SM.

Border Scot,

19/09/2008 12:33:40
#147 - in other words, you cannot answer the question

Border Scot,

19/09/2008 12:35:26
#151 - What argument are you talking about? I don't think I have lost an argument about either my nationality or the wisdom of nationalising HBOS. But maybe you can explain how I have.


Scotland 19/09/2008 12:39:20

No I choose not to answer it AGAIN to the same troll with a new logon if you really are interested in an answer then its on the blogs in black and black.

Border Scot,

19/09/2008 12:39:31
#149 - Why not summarise? Why not just admit that you are wrong?

Here are two facts for you:

1. HBOS could not have been nationalised because it is listed on the LSE.

2. An independent Scotland could not have made short selling on the LSE illegal.

Border Scot,

19/09/2008 12:40:21
#155 - Give us a link to the answer then.


Scotland 19/09/2008 12:41:58

Want and arguement? contribute something new.


Scotland 19/09/2008 12:42:49
157 see 158.
Or not your choice.


Scotland 19/09/2008 12:43:48

Northen Rock was listed on the LSE.

anony mouse,

19/09/2008 12:44:54
I also would be really interested in the details of the answer as the suggestion that an independent Scottish Giv could have stooped short selling of stocks on the London stock exchange seems to defy logic.

Border Scot - is suchaparcelof always so rude in his/her responses? I came on here genuinely inetested in some debate and all I have had from him/her so far is abuse.


Scotland 19/09/2008 12:46:07

The LSE is British what would it be if Britain no longer existed?

anony mouse,

19/09/2008 12:46:33
apologies for my spelling in my last post.


Scotland 19/09/2008 12:49:45

Doesnt Scotland have a share in the British owned LSE?


Moscow 19/09/2008 12:51:13

You are talking about hypothetical questions based on a hypothetical assumption of the position of Scottish companies trading on the LSE that is why.



Scotland 19/09/2008 12:51:27

Oh you didnt automatically assume that the LSE was English owned did you? wouldnt that throw your whole arguement under all of your logons oot the windae then?

anony mouse,

19/09/2008 12:51:42
The LSE is indeeed technically british at present.
Once Scotland was independant it would be an English/Welsh stock exchange - although companies would be able to choose to be listed there. No doubt big companies like HBOS would still have chosen to be listed there given the size of the LSE.
All of which brings me back to my question for which you have still failed to provide an answer.

If you think the question has been answered already then just post the ost numbers and I will happily read them. I have read through the posts here though and don't see anything that answers my original question.

IO repeat - how could an indendent Scotland regulate ban or control short selling of stocks in a Scottish company which was listed on the London stock exchange?
Simple question really. I would appreciate if you could avoid abuse or name calling when responding.


Scotland 19/09/2008 12:52:37
I wonder which logon we will get up next?


Moscow 19/09/2008 12:53:59

As with Northern Rock an independent Scotland could do what it wanted to protect it's interests whereas at the moment it is powerless...that is the difference.

No-one is saying that takeovers would not happen but they could be managed and legislated for in sucha way that the Scotland got the best deal.

Llloys can do what it likes at the moment, no come-back from a toothless Scottish parliament.


Judique 19/09/2008 12:54:11
Where was Charles Munro this time!

anony mouse,

19/09/2008 12:55:49
Sorry but the issue of Londnn Stock exchange ownership ios a complete red herring. it is not state assets. It is a private company which is regulated by the country within which it operates.
its ownership woudl of course continue to include all range of people. However after Scottish independence the London stock exchange woudl continue to be in London and would be regulated by the English/Welsh government.
So please answer the question - how would an independent government regulate or ban shorting of Scottish stocks which were listed on the Londonn Stock Exchange. If you think this would be possible please tell me exactly how this cold be done.


Scotland 19/09/2008 12:55:50

Wishful thinking in place of facts again eh?
And if companies based their share floating wishes on size then they would all float in the far east not london.
So all you have is trying to present wishful thinking as facts again.


Moscow 19/09/2008 12:56:22

You point seems to be that an independent Scotland would not have legislative powers over the LSE. Fairly obvious i would have though to figure that one out.

You next point will be that Scotland could therfore not prevented this...right?

Liberal for life,

Dunblane 19/09/2008 12:56:58
In effect governements can't really control the markets but they can only hope to influence them.

I'm afraid this HBOS development shows how insignificant a so called "independent" Scotland is in global terms. Its time for many to review their own nationalistic beliefs and stop allowing their hearts to rule their heads. United we stand, divided we fall.


Scotland 19/09/2008 12:57:04

Really then how come the Government managed to nationalise Northern Rock while it was registered within the LSE?

Jo Larkinson,

19/09/2008 12:57:35
How effective is banning short-selling anyway? I'm no expert but there seem to be many other methods of speculating such as the writing of call options, buying put options, selling futures, i.e. people can still back a falling price.

I still feel that HBOS is not safe. Let's face it it wasn't a well run bank and now its reputation is shattered. If the Lloyds-TSB deal does not got through it would be left a wonded animal; too big to fail it could become Northern Rock 2 and NR looks now like it might be run down and sold off as a rump of its former self.

Depressing! Perhaps the best thing would be for the deal to go through (no "done" deal) and, eventually, the Bank of Scotland gets spun off on its own or gets a sympathetic merger/acquisition.


Scotland 19/09/2008 12:59:09

I was wondering what the new troll logon was going to be.

anony mouse,

19/09/2008 12:59:25
Nevsky~ at last at least you are someone whjo is prepared to try to put forward an argument rather tan just accuse people fo being trolls. thanks for the response.
A Scottish gov certainly could do what it wanted - within its borders. it would have no control over shorting of stocks in Scottish companies which were listed on the London stock exchange though would it?


Scotland 19/09/2008 13:00:27

No his point was no government would have legislative powers over any company within the LSE but that obviously has been proven false hasnt it?


Moscow 19/09/2008 13:02:25

'I'm afraid this HBOS development shows how insignificant a so called "independent" Scotland is in global terms'

How does Norway, Sweden, Denmark and every other European nation manage to survive if thy too are small and therefore 'insignificant'.

Embarassing to hear any Scot making this argument.



Scotland 19/09/2008 13:04:58

But the Scottish Government would have just as much legislative control over the LSE as an English government unless some sort of deal is thrashed out during the UK breakup negociations wouldnt it?
Lets face it if a UK government can use legislative powers over companies in the LSE then the componant parts of this Government would have the same powers.

You are back to assuming the LSE can only be affected by and English government or more obviously you cant see a difference between a UK government and an English government.
An easy mistake to make but one which has shot down your point.


Moscow 19/09/2008 13:07:41

No it wouldn't, assuming that they were on the LSE that is.

But the fact is that a non-independent Scotland has no power to do anything regarding this takeover or mimimise the impact; an independent Scotland would, that is of far greater importance than the question you are asking.

anony mouse,

19/09/2008 13:07:48
As you acknowledge its fairly obvious that an independent Scottish government could have done nothing to prevent short selling of HBOS because it is listed in the LSE.
Why did it take so long to get soomeone to acknowledge this basic bit of logic....


19/09/2008 13:08:23
153 Border Scot

Are you blind? You asked for cuts and I offered you cuts - I could have offered you more. The money spend on weapons which will never be used should suffice.

Do you think that all the things I suggested cutting are of supreme benefit to this beleagured country?

anony mouse,

19/09/2008 13:10:59
your answer is incoherent. You are suggesting that in a broken up UK the Scottish government would retain some regulatory authority over the London Stock Exchange? That is laughable.

Border Scot,

19/09/2008 13:11:09
#181 - The Scottish government would not be able to exert any control over the way in which the LSE was regulated because the LSE would be situated in a foreign country. In exactly the same way, the Scottsh government - like the UK government now - would have no control over any American stock exchange, or German one etc etc.

The Scottish government could ask the English FSA to take certain action, it would then be up to the English FSA to decide whether it would do so or not.

The plain fact is that the government of an independent Scotland could not force the LSE, the NYSE or any other exchange to do anything. The only exchanges that it would have any control over would be those based in Scotland.


Moscow 19/09/2008 13:11:53

Why did you ask the question if you could figure it out for yourself?

I am not sure of what point you are making?

Border Scot,

19/09/2008 13:12:01
#182 - What could an independent Scottish government have done?

Border Scot,

19/09/2008 13:13:40
#184 - While the cuts you suggest may or may not be desirable they would go very little way towards helping an independent Scottish government nationalise HBOS.


Scotland 19/09/2008 13:13:53

Why not if a UK government can?
What is the UK government if it isnt a combination of Scotland and Englands Parliaments?
explain why an Independent Scottish government cannot legislate to companies within the LSE?
who can?


19/09/2008 13:14:00
174 Liberal for life

Sadly for you not quite as insignificant as the party to which you've committed your life. Did you notice you're 4% down in the UK Polls? Is this an indication that you should return to your constituencies and prepare for government?

Andy Mac,

19/09/2008 13:15:27

A couple of simple yes-no questions:

(1) Were the Irish racists?
(2) Were the Norwegians racists?
(3) Are those in South Ossesia, Montenegro racist?

(4) When the UK wants to stand back from the EU are they racist?

(5)Is the only non-racist person he or she who believes in a single world government (a prospect I would find quite chilling).


19/09/2008 13:17:39
173. You really love a loser! Now stop trying to destroy the union between England and Scotland,if you are a British citizen you should be ashamed of yourself,if you are a rusky,go play spies with the KGB.

It's life but not as we know it,

The Oort Clouds 19/09/2008 13:18:20
I bet "honourable members" like the PM and cabinet butt kissers were short selling like crazy yesterday knowing this was coming.


Scotland 19/09/2008 13:19:32
How about you border scot or whoever
explain why and Independent Scottish government couldnt legislate companies within the LSE?


Scotland 19/09/2008 13:22:07
Sorry BS I didnt realise you were too busy posting as ugly george on the other blog.

anony mouse,

19/09/2008 13:24:02
To suggest that an independent Scottish government would have any regulatory authority over the London Stcck exchange is to suggest that a foreign government would allow another government to regulate its stock exchange. This is incoherent drivel. Would the NYSE let Scotland have a say in its regulation?
Scotalnd technically as a part of the UK has a part in decisions about regulating all sorts of thinsg in England at present. That doesnt mean any of this regulatory power over matters in England would transfer to an independent Scotland.
If you think it would then would you be hapy for it to work the other way round?
After all by your logic because England have current regulatory authority over Scottish oil then they would continue to have some regulatory influence over this post independence. You should engage brain before typing.

Andy Mac,

19/09/2008 13:24:23
193 wrote:
"If you are a British citizen you should be ashamed of yourself..."

Indeed, because it follows that you are a racist. Presumably a British Citizen doesn't want to be ruled from Brussels, France or anywhere else, right?

Racists then. So the unionist logic would appear to run...


Moscow 19/09/2008 13:26:16
188# Border Scot:

How about competative tax advantages for setting up and maintaining administrative offices in Scotland. There is just one glaringly obvious difference between indepndence and dependence. The first is pro-active the other...well we lose 25000 jobs under the union.


19/09/2008 13:27:08
#173 "Now stop trying to destroy the union between England and Scotland,if you are a British citizen...".

Brown is doing an excellent job of this on his own. Most Scots are Scots first, British last or not at all. Expect UK Gen Election in November, SNP romp home in Scotland, Independence next year, thank you very much. New Scottish Passport, creation of new Scottish National Bank, start rebuilding the economy etc. Bring it on.

"Hoots" Fandango,

19/09/2008 13:27:24
8 Charles and the baby saga

"A potential Baby/Babies, and a once was Potentially good Bank, that now have NO Potentials"

Possibly some short selling in the sper­­m bank?

Border Scot,

19/09/2008 13:28:05
#195 - Short selling on the LSE would be a matter for the English FSA, just as short selling in the US is a matter for US financial services authorities. Of course, if the Scottish Parliament wanted to pass legislation banning short selling on the LSE or the NYSE or anywhere else in the world, it could. But such legislation would be unenforceable and the Scottish parliament would be a global laughing stock.

Your point is so ridiculous, I think you might be having a little joke with us.

Andy Mac,

19/09/2008 13:28:34
Westminster bailed out Northern Rock.
An independent Holyrood could have bailed out HBOS.

Where's the Union Dividend?

A great Scots institution left high and dry by the BIG FISH in the BIG Westminster POND.


19/09/2008 13:29:04
198. Your logic is wacko! and i'm not trying to destroy the union.

Border Scot,

19/09/2008 13:29:51
#199 - That wouldnot have stopped HBOS listing onthe London Stock Exchange.

Compettive tax rates are great, but they mean cuts in government spending. Where would you cut?

Border Scot,

19/09/2008 13:31:31
#203 - How could an independent Scotland have bailed out HBOS? Do you have any idea how much it would have cost?

The British government controls a G8 economy and has the income to match. Northern Rock is tiny compared to HBOS.

Venerable Bede,

19/09/2008 13:31:40
193 Guenevere - you really got shocking brain damage in that car crash, didn't you? Please, stop being retarded and go back to basket weaving you fishy-flapped troll.

Lia, "I'll never walk again and you Scots get more better health care than us, paid for by us English! FACT" You dullard wretch.


19/09/2008 13:32:38
203. Are you serious,holyrood has not got the money for such a rescue.


Scotland 19/09/2008 13:33:21

If a UK government can regulate the LSE then the componant parts of the UK government has the same legislitive powers Independently sitting elsewhere or not unless legislation is introduced to say different.
You know it and I know it so cut the cr*p.
The NYSE cant be legislated to by the UK government can it?
Britain isnt England it is England Scotland NI and Wales lest you forget again.


Moscow 19/09/2008 13:34:59
205# Border Scot:


You believe that tax from a new company based in scotland would lead to government spending cuts?

Attracting 'new' business with lower rates than London would lead to a cut in public sending how exactly? I believe in would lead to an increase in the public purse from both corporate tax and the tax paid by workers or am i missing something here?


Erskine 19/09/2008 13:35:27
For the benefit of the soon to be unemployed labour spiv commentators and others of dubious vintage the support of Brown and co for this fraud amount to nothing less than economic warfare on the Scottish people.
Nevertheless for those familiar with post(English) imperial history it was the norm in most countries (e.g. India , China, South Africa etc) that the majority if not all their banking sector was owned and controlled by England. Within a few years this situation was reversed and local ownership and control of banking was the norm. This is not a difficult thing to achieve as the government controlled element of the economy is usually been 30- 50 percent and putting the income of this through a locally controlled bank will rapidly lead to its becoming the largest bank in the country. With Scotland’s surplus revenues from oil and other sources a Scottish futures trust would lead to Scottish banks taking increasing interest and control of overseas institutions, although whether they would wish to invest in likely increasingly worthless English stock is debatable.


Moscow 19/09/2008 13:36:54
Border Scot:

Norther Rock was nationalised..not bought out. You do not buy out banks to the last are aware of this i presume?


Scotland 19/09/2008 13:37:58

Could an Independent England have bailed out HBOS?

Heed thi baw,

19/09/2008 13:38:59
If Salmond is so close to Scottish banking and in his capacity as Scottish First Minister, why didn't he broker a deal to save this Scottish financial institution? As ex Chief Economist of RBS, you would have expected he has senior enough contacts within the industry that would have constantly updated him on developments. At least Gordo Brown did something to save HBOS - Salmond did the square root of nothing.


Scotland 19/09/2008 13:39:07

It cant have been nationalised it was registered with the LSE I have that on good authority.


19/09/2008 13:39:19
189 Border Scot

I'm not sure if living on the border between two different countries has left you confused.

You original statement was what cuts should have been made in order to nationalise HBOS. Unless I'm mistaken the only Government who could have nationalised HBOS yesterday was the present UK Government.

I, therefore, pointed out to you the cuts the UK Government could have made in order to fund that.

You now change tack and suggest that these cuts - which only the UK Government could make - would be of little help to an independent Scottish Government.

It may surprise you to know that there was no independent Scottish Government yesterday.


Moscow 19/09/2008 13:39:32

£68 billion..England would be bankrupt and a laughing stock all over the world. Their economy is just too small ;-)


19/09/2008 13:40:46
207.Wondered when you would show up,pleased to see i'm winding your handle up! you are nothing but a loud mouthed Irrelavance,your only means of responce is to use personal insults,what a sad individual you are.


Scotland 19/09/2008 13:42:50
Maybe its because of legislitive issues that companies float their shares within their own national exchanges and not the biggest ones eh?
Of course Scotland will always be different.

Border Scot,

19/09/2008 13:43:30
#210 - You would not be lowering the rate of CT just for new businesses though would you? You would be doing it for all businesses, meaning that those now paying would pay less. Your gamble would be that the revenues from new business would outweigh the loss of revenues from established businesses. If lower CTs inevitably led to higher tax takes all countries would have very low CT rates. But they do not.

Ireland does have lower CTs than Scotland, but does not have an NHS or a cradle to grave welfare system. Ireland has made its choice. Scotland would have to as well.

Border Scot,

19/09/2008 13:44:43
#213 - Probably not. Neither could the UK. That's how big HBOS is.

Venerable Bede,

19/09/2008 13:45:31
I would argue that it is sadder that you pretend to be maxi, lia (the original troll name), guenevere, kimba, india, etc etc, and have also created identities for each one (the lawyer, the teaching assistant, the fishmonger, etc) and going on and on about Scotland from your seat in Stockton. That is pathetically sad...that is your reality.

It must be bloody awful being you.

anony mouse,

19/09/2008 13:46:14
When you are in a hole you should really stop digging.
In summary what you are suggesting is that AFTER independence Scotland will be able to regulate the London Stock Exchange?
That must be some good sh*t your smoking my friend.


Scotland 19/09/2008 13:46:28

But HBOS was in trouble therefore the government could have got it for a steal. Especially by blocking the Lloyds offer on competition regulation grounds eh?

Border Scot,

19/09/2008 13:46:32
#216 - Sorry I misunderstood you. I thought you were proposing that an independent Scottish government could have nationalised HBOS. Like me, you clearly believe that such a hypothesis is ridiculous. So we agree.

Border Scot,

19/09/2008 13:47:38
#211 - That's right. And there will be fresh strawberry jam for tea every night and we will all live until we are 100 and it will never rain anymore and the English will become our slaves. Meanwhile in the real world ....

anony mouse,

19/09/2008 13:48:54
Companies don't always float in their own countries. This is sometimes why they move HQ and why they choose to float elsewhere. Companies do frequently choose to float on the largest exchanges. Some companies trade on more than one exchange.


19/09/2008 13:49:40
217. You are a moron. England is richer than you think. please note: Bank of England to pump billions into money markets

Published Date: 18 September 2008
THE Bank of England today said it would pump $40bn (£22.3bn) into money markets as part of a co-ordinated move by major central banks. The Bank of England said: "These measures, together with other actions taken in the last few days are designed to improve the liquidity conditions in global financial markets.

Border Scot,

19/09/2008 13:50:16
#217 - England would remain a G8 economy without Scotland. But England would not have been able to buy HBOS. So for anyone to suggest that an independent Scotand could is utterly absurd.

I think we are finding some consensus here.


Scotland 19/09/2008 13:50:46

I will remember that if I ever find myself in one you of course are with the school of thought that if you keep digging you will pop out eventually eh?

Why not? it has legislitive control over it in the UK it would have to give up that legislitive control willingly. And besides who says Scottish companies will float on the LSE as I said before companies tend to stay within their own borders to float their shares not go over to the biggest or else everybody would float their shares in Asia wouldnt they?

Border Scot,

19/09/2008 13:51:34
#227 - I believe that the LSE attracts a higher percentage of non-national companies than any other stock exchange.

Liberal for life,

Dunblane 19/09/2008 13:53:01
#180 - OK I'll give you Denmark but it is more of the exception than the rule. As far as being embarassed by having to face the reality of the situation then I suppose its guilty as charged but that doesn't stop me from wanting the best for Scotland, which in my opinion means remaining an integral part of the UK.

As for Norway see-

and for Sweden see-

Heed thi baw,

19/09/2008 13:53:31
#87 Brownlie

a racist - a person with a prejudiced belief that one race is superior to others.

a bigot - a prejudiced person who is intolerant of any opinions differing from his own.

Both descriptions perfectly describe Salmond.


Erskine 19/09/2008 13:53:59
Border Scot
The lifespan of labour spivs can be measured in months. Meantime in the realworld ...the truth will out on this fraud. The truth seeks out through darkness and illusion.


Scotland 19/09/2008 13:54:22

Dont be an idiot. England having a bigger population and bigger spending commitments wouldnt have the spare cash available.
Scotland on the other hand is a small country with small needs and large resourses and would have more than enough spare cash left over.
Its not how much you take in its how much you take in compared to how much you have to spend.
An independent Scotland would have a far better ratio of income to spending than England could ever hope for. Especially if it insists on keeping Trident and fighting all over the world.

Border Scot,

19/09/2008 13:54:33
#230 - You float where you believe you can have access to most cash. A Scottish exchange would be composed of small local companies and dual listed bigger players. Rather like the Scandinvian ones.


Scotland 19/09/2008 13:55:52

And what would that percentage be?


19/09/2008 13:55:57
I see in my absence the delightful Jackie Priest the BoxOfSpanners, Darien and the "Rev" Campbell have still utterly failed to answer the question:

- how exactly would Scottish "independence" have changed the HBOS situation?

Is anyone seriously arguing that HBOS would have been listed anywhere other than London?

Meaning that no government in Edinburgh would have any influence over the way its shares were traded. Or any means of nationalising it. (Other than by sending troops into the branches and physically expropriating them. BoxOfSpanners would probably support that.)

Looking to the future, even supposing an "independent" Scotland and an "Edinburgh Stock Exchange", does anyone seriously think the likes of RBS, SL, BE, SSE and the like would ever shift their listings from London?

So Edinburgh would never, ever have the powers over trading and nationalisation of the country's biggest companies which you seem to want. At least now we have some input into how the LSE runs. After "independence" we would have none.

It's the same story on the currency.

So what is the point of "independence" again?


Scotland 19/09/2008 13:56:26

And where are these companies conducting their businesses? let me guess London?


19/09/2008 13:56:41

Note for Mikey at 101:

The Irish banks are listed in Dublin because there was an exchange there in 1922, and they've stayed there for largely political reasons.

Now there isn't an exchange in Edinburgh any more. You could create one, but why would anyone move listing from London?

Note for BoxOfSpanners at 102:

As of October 2007, London was the 4th biggest exchange by capitalisation, behind only New York, Tokyo and NASDAQ. By turnover (a good measure of liquidity) it was 3rd, with nearly double the turnover of Tokyo.

You were saying something about “far eastern exchanges”, were you?


Scotland 19/09/2008 13:57:11

So why dont the all float in Asia thats where the most cash is?


Scotland 19/09/2008 13:59:15

4th isnt 1st 2nd nor even 3rd so why by your accounts isnt everybody listed with the first biggest and richest? Oh and Irish companies are political and not run on business interests is that right?
What a tool.


Moscow 19/09/2008 14:00:21
220# Border Scot:

'Your gamble would be that the revenues from new business would outweigh the loss of revenues from established businesses'

No. What loss? New business is new money? What has this got to do with the NHS?

How would the country loose revenue from established businesses? The tax benefits would be for new business who wished to situate here, therefore new money contributing to the public purse.


Venerable Bede,

19/09/2008 14:00:46
#231 - yup, and AIM is like a discount bucket shop that is overweight with miners and oil companies. London is the preeminent financial centre and has been for almost 2 years. No amount of "independence" can change this, but it doesn't really matter anyway. Independence is not about financial markets anyway - they more or less look after themselves ~ and how.

Border Scot,

19/09/2008 14:01:58
#241 -The cash goes to London


Moscow 19/09/2008 14:02:54
240 sm#

'The Irish banks are listed in Dublin because there was an exchange there in 1922, and they've stayed there for largely political reasons'

Hahahaha..what insight you have...largely for political reasons indeed.


Scotland 19/09/2008 14:03:05

Tourist spending?

Liberal for life,

Dunblane 19/09/2008 14:03:15
#191 - if you believe these sample opinion polls you will believe anything, like so called "independence" as a panacea for all Scotlands ails. Politics is about real people voting in real elections and time after time the LibDems poll higher that any rating gathered prior to an election. Thats the reality, so GET REAL for a change!

anony mouse,

19/09/2008 14:03:35
You seem a bit illiterate in finance and business. I will respond to your post in exactly the way you responded to me when I first posted here in this thread - go look it up you moronic troll.


Scotland 19/09/2008 14:03:55

Like I said before he makes it up as he goes along no matter what logon he uses.

Border Scot,

19/09/2008 14:04:12
#243 - Oh right, you would discriminate against existing businesses. And just how will that help them to compete?


Panama 19/09/2008 14:04:24
#238 "So what is the point of "independence" again?"

Its so we don't have to put up with muppets like you and all the other britnat unionist little englanders.

Venerable Bede,

19/09/2008 14:05:10
#228 - you are the retard - the bank of england doesn't own that money, in fact, it is the is money they owe. They raise their money through the bond markets and pay it back. That is why they are given a credit rating by moodys etc. You have no understanding of anythint, much less how the debt and equity markets operate, so, do shut up you fishy-flapped retard.


Scotland 19/09/2008 14:06:05

Relative to who? no anybody on this blog.

Heed thi baw,

19/09/2008 14:08:48

You love Scotland so much, you decided to live in Panama. You must be Sean Connery's love child. With any luck immigration won't let you back in.

anony mouse,

19/09/2008 14:09:33
Here - just to save you looking it up - of the around 14 major Irish financial institutions 7 are listed on the London Stock Exchange.


Scotland 19/09/2008 14:10:06

Where are they based?


19/09/2008 14:11:10
253. You are all nice and brave mouthing your abuse on these threads,pity your not man enough to say them to my face.


Scotland 19/09/2008 14:11:53
I love how some folk on here have the resourses to come up with facts and figures at the tip of a hat and some of that info cant be found on a single web page either.

"Hoots" Fandango,

19/09/2008 14:12:06
"England is richer than you think. please note: Bank of England to pump billions into money markets."

You really are a prize cretin kimba. The Bank of England is a UK bank. Their web page says,


You really are quite ignorant aren't you?


19/09/2008 14:12:44
253. Either put-up or shut-up!


19/09/2008 14:13:23
225 Border Scot

No you did not misunderstand me. You posed the question as to what cuts should have been made to pay for nationalising HBOS to prevent the merger yesterday and you were given the answer.

If I believe something I will print it and I did not print any such belief. Neither you nor I know what resources would be available to an independent Scottish Government so I'm afraid I'll have to respectfully decline to agree with you on that either.


Scotland 19/09/2008 14:13:25

True and some of their assets belong to Scotland Wales and NI including the gold reserves.


Moscow 19/09/2008 14:13:28
251 Border Scot#

Attracting a large manufacturing company who can provide a 1000 jobs or anyone else does not discriminate, it contributes to the national ecomony; the money from which can then be used in any way the government sees fit which includes aiding indigenous businesses.

Is all this complicated for you?

"Hoots" Fandango,

19/09/2008 14:13:30
Heid the bawba­g

"a racist - a person with a prejudiced belief that one race is superior to others.

a bigot - a prejudiced person who is intolerant of any opinions differing from his own.

Both descriptions perfectly describe Salmond."

Don't tell his English wife then.



19/09/2008 14:14:39
260. When will you comprehend,I AM KIMS MOTHER.


Moscow 19/09/2008 14:17:16
255# heid the Baw;

You seem to like referring to Sean Connery a lot. So why not do a little research and find out exactly the tax he has paid in this country as well as the money he has pumped into scotland along with his support and promotion of the country and his charities.

hat have you even done or contributed to your country apart from talking it down, nothing i am guessing.

anony mouse,

19/09/2008 14:18:27
Correction its six out of fourteen. And here it is for you all on the one page so mummy doesn't have to look it up for you.

1) ACCBank - (subsidiary of Rabobank)

2) Allied Irish Banks (AIB)[1] - (Quoted on ISE & LSE)

3) Anglo Irish Bank - (Quoted on ISE & LSE)

4) Bank of Ireland[1] - (Quoted on ISE & LSE)

5) Bank of Scotland (Ireland) - (subsidiary of HBOS, quoted on LSE)

6) EBS Building Society

7) FBD Insurance - (Quoted on ISE)

8) First Active (subsidiary of Ulster Bank)

9) First Trust Bank (Northern Ireland subsidiary of Allied Irish Banks)

10) IIB Bank (subsidiary of KBC Bank).

11) Irish Life and Permanent - (Quoted on ISE & LSE)

12) Irish Nationwide Building Society

13) National Irish Bank and Northern Bank(subsidiaries of Danske Bank, quoted on Copenhagen Stock Exchange)

14) Ulster Bank - (Subsidiary of Royal Bank of Scotland, quoted on LSE)

"Hoots" Fandango,

19/09/2008 14:18:45

Fish flapped thickoid who fools nobody.

Venerable Bede,

19/09/2008 14:19:56
266 - guenevere - these multiple personalities you have built for yourself are pathetic.

You are mind-blowingly dumb. I'm done with work for the day and Jerry Kyle or something is on in the background - I wonder who on earth these people are....its you and your family Lia/Kimba/Guenevere, isn't it? I mean that - these people really are as stupid and racist as you are, you filthy Scot-hater.


Fife 19/09/2008 14:22:31
It seems to me that HBOS was a big company on a British scale. But in terms of its impact on Scotland, its demise will be disproportionate. It was Scotland’s second biggest company and as a percentage of the Scottish Economy the Bank of Scotland’s contribution is enormous. There are no comparable UK companies that have UK wide effects as big as HBOS and RBS do in Scotland. This is not just about a few branch closures here and there.

However, I do not think that what was done to “save” it was in anyway a conspiracy against Scotland. I do believe however that if it had been the UK’s second biggest company or if the effect on the UK ecomomy was to be as much as what we now face in Scotland due to the “saving” of HBOS then more would have be done and done faster.

Unfortunately, as I have often seen, when you do things for the benefit UK PLC then the consequences for Scotland are not really considered. And when someone objects or draws attention to this obvious fact, they are castigated as being narrow nationalists or even racist.

It’s sad that we have to wait for things to be done to us before we act. Even sadder that the ones doing it are often Scots MPs andMinisters who spend a lot of the time proving to the daily mail crowd that they are thinking of Briton and not just Scotland.


19/09/2008 14:24:15
Comment Removed By Administrator


19/09/2008 14:26:35
233 thi baw heed

"Both descriptions perfectly fit Salmond" No they do not but they may fit your perception of Salmond.

However, if you wish to convince people that your perception is correct you have to give proof of the serious charge of racism or bigotry as I'm afraid we are a cynical lot on this thread and would not be prepared to take your word for it.

Venerable Bede,

19/09/2008 14:28:40
:) ...and she knows it! I tolerate her mostly, but sometimes it is worth reminding a racist that they are a racist and thay their horrible views have no place in a civilised debate. She gives English people a really bad name. In fact, she gives humans a really bad name. Monkeys would tell her to f**k off as well.


19/09/2008 14:29:37
Quickly scrolling through the comments I did not find one asking the obvious question.

How did this happen?

However one did strike a chord.

“Scotland does not have control of it’s own assets.”

Someone asked elsewhere why Salmond was not consulted on the HBOS issue, the answer is simple.

There are several layers in the UK power structure. The so-called Scottish government and the Scottish people reside in lower strata where others control the assets and resources.

Gordon the leper knows where the real power resides and that Salmond is an ineffectual windbag who would have absolutely no input or influence on the outcome, so why listen to him.

Had he been consulted all he would have done is to try to score political points.

For now, Alex Salmond may be Scotland’s best hope, but to date he has failed to layout a vision for the future of Scotland that resonates with the people.

I hear all kinds of demands but demands for the ultimate prize are muted.

Border Scot,

19/09/2008 14:30:11
#264 - No, it is not complicated, but it is far from inevitable either. But what seems pretty inevitable to me is that a tax rate which discriminates against exisiting companies will encourage the formation of nbew companies in areas where existing companies already operate. This will then result in existing companies being unable to compete, which will put them out of business or force them to cut back on jobs and other investments.

If it what you are proposing is risk-free and guaranteed to increase government tax takes I am surprised that it is not being done currently in the UK. Can you explain that?

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 19/09/2008 14:39:20
271 Sunrise
I don't think that Scotland need necessarily suffer a disproportionate effect. Most of the duplication of functions will probably be in England where both Lloyds and HBOS (under the Halifax name) have large scale operations. Lloyds does not have such a significant presence in Scotland so there is likely to be less duplication with the Bank of Scotland.

thistle do,

here n' there 19/09/2008 14:41:48
Heard a rumour that Salmond has asked financial wizard and general good egg, the venerable Vladamir Romanov, to review the defenses of RBS just in case the city sleazeballs try any of their nonsense with them. Reassuring eh!


19/09/2008 14:42:18
'A spokesman for the First Minister applauded the FSA for taking action, but said it should have been taken earlier'

If this is true then why did AS not demand this in his Newsnight interview on Tuesday before the HBOS fiasco?

The man blows hot and cold in the wind.


19/09/2008 14:43:28
275 Salem

So when Salmond was the first to ask for action from the FSA nothing happened?

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 19/09/2008 14:44:33
275 Salem
It is not a matter of Scotland having control over its own assets. HBOS was a plc and thus was owned by its shareholders who probably comprise groups and individuals from a host of different countries. The only way Scotland would have control over it would be to nationalise it but the majority of its business was conducted elsewhere in the UK under the Halifax name so how could Scotland natioanalise assets outside Scotland.


Moscow 19/09/2008 14:45:24
276# Border Scot:

I explained your first paragraph already.

Scotland could offer a competative advantage which we at present cannot so in the UK where are you going to situate to be nearer to your markets in a country with the same rates? London or Auchtermuchty?

As for your last paragraph, have a look at how many companies have based their European HQs in Ireland over the past 10 that to Scotland, we have NONE that i know of.



19/09/2008 14:47:40
279 Calvinist

The UK Government claim that they were aware of the problems weeks ago so why did they not persuade the FSA to take action earlier?

If you saw the Newsnight interview you could not help, whatever your polical affiliation, by Salmond's sensible approach.

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 19/09/2008 14:50:32
280 Brownlie
This is not now a significant issue. If Alex Salmond's version of events is correct, he tells us that HBOS was a sound company that was forced into a cheap takeover by short selling. If this is the case, the shareholders of HBOS can reject the takeover and now that short selling has been stopped there is nothing to stop them doing so and allowing HBOS to carry on trading as it did. The issue of when the ban on short selling was introduced is, therefore a red herring.

Robert Mason,

Larkhall 19/09/2008 14:56:38

Ugly, spot on. Salmond is putting self and party above the national interest yet again. Disgraceful.

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 19/09/2008 15:00:11
283 Brownlie
You talked about Alex Salmond's "sensible approach" Time will tell if that proves to be the case but he has placed his credibility at risk. As I said in post 284, if his version of events is correct we are asked to believe that HBOS is being forced into a takeover over at a knock-down price. If he is correct then the shareholders would surely reject the takeover as a bad deal now that short selling cannot take place. Also, if this is such a bad deal then why does another bank (UK or overseas) step in with a better, hostile offer - something they are free to do. If neither of these events occur then Alex Salmond has obviously been either mistaken or false in his description of the situation.

Matt there,

Somewhere 19/09/2008 15:02:20
"SCOTLAND'S economy could be devastated by the Lloyds TSB takeover of HBOS, Alex Salmond said last night, after bank bosses refused to rule out compulsory redundancies."

So, this take over after leaks (from whom??) which might damage the SNP government. What a coincidence!


19/09/2008 15:05:27
# 287

You don't think Lloyds TSB weren't given a wee sweetener by Mr Brown to complete the deal do you? He was the facilitator and they're a breed used to bribery. Plus, of course, a wee reciprocated bit of pocket money to labour party funds? Maybe yes, maybe no, I doubt if we'll ever find out for some years.


19/09/2008 15:06:14
Sorry that should have been for # 286


Moscow 19/09/2008 15:08:44
The shareholders should reject the offer, simple as that. HBOS is sound and the share price will recover.

'Ugly, spot on. Salmond is putting self and party above the national interest yet again. Disgraceful'

Really? Whereas Brown has done NOTHING to secure Scottish jobs (as Westminster keeps stating to avoid an Englsh backlash)..Salmond is cancelling his trip to the Ryder Cup and meeting with all the heads of the banks to do everything he can...where is Brown...hiding again no doubt the coward that he is.

Preparing his speech to creep and crawl and remain head of Westminster..pathetic!



19/09/2008 15:11:19
# 281 Ugly George

I wasn’t referring to the assets of HBOS specifically but rather no control of assets and resources in a broader sense if you know what I mean.

The assets and resources of Scotland are controlled, managed and run from outside. The vast majority of the Scottish people in private sector jobs are at the mercy of external influences. Influences that can affect their daily lives at a moment’s notice, like the folks who will lose their jobs as a result of this fiasco.

Someone asked if the RBS could they be the next shoe to drop.

Personally I’m surprised they weren’t the first shoe to drop!

In his personal quest to conquer the world of high finance by playing with the big boys, Frederick the Great Goodwin has overloaded RBS will all kinds of problems that in time will come home to roost.


19/09/2008 15:11:34
284 Ugly
George, If he was wrong why have the FSA taken the action he recommended and why have the UK Government and serious financial analysts concurred?

Has it affected the market today. I would suggest that it has.

Border Scot,

19/09/2008 15:11:45
#282 - And Ireland does not have a free at the point of contact NHS or a cradle to grave welfare system. Scotland does.

I am not arguing against lower Corporation Tax. I am arguing for a fully transpaent discussion of the consequences of introducing such a rate. The chances are, especially in times of economic difficulty, that you will lower your overall tax take. That either means higher personal taxes or less spending and, therefore, cuts.

Heed thi baw,

19/09/2008 15:16:31

What difference does that make?

Hitler married Eva Braun - and still desimmated Germany and the rest of Europe.


As for Connery, he is a tax exile who has advocated giving women a good slap. He is hardly a good role model for a country that purports to be forward thinking is he? Says alot about Salmond and the SNP.


Moscow 19/09/2008 15:19:34

NHS is a completely different question so i am not sure why you are introducing it.

You would be lowering your tax take from a higher base though (in the case of this ever happening).

Better this than lowering your tax take from an economy with little or no inward investment.


Scotland 19/09/2008 15:21:10
Its comforting to know we have the new Che Guvara of Scotland -oor Alex to keep international capital on the straight and narrow. I am going into the T shirt business myself - yes I know it may be a bad time - replacing the icon of Che with Alex -grinning down on us aganst a backdrop of a yellow and black tartan. They are selling at £12.00 in todays money and I am not making much profit thanks to a sharp run on company shares by Easter Road Spivs - see my web site on


Moscow 19/09/2008 15:21:30

Not aare that Sean has killed anyone though, unlike Brown and Blair, exemplary role models i am sure you will agree.


19/09/2008 15:24:03
286 Ugly George

Do you know how RBS and HBOS shares are doing today??

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 19/09/2008 15:24:39
292 Brownlie
I am not saying that he is right or wrong. I am saying that time and events will tell. The market today has responded to a number of factors including bail outs in the US. As far as the action taken by the FSA - this is a temporary measure to try to calm the markets. Short selling will probably be introduced at some stage in the future with new regulations. The point is not whether short selling has led to market volatility - it appears that it has. The point is whether short selling forced the takeover of HBOS which was a sound company as Alex Salmond claims. Here the evidence is much more doubtful. The short selling occurred on Monday and Tuesday. Could a £12bn takeover be set up negotiated, agreed with necessary waiver of competition rules and and concluded in a few hours in respnse to a bout of short selling - unlikely to say the least.


Moscow 19/09/2008 15:25:52

In a rare interview with Scotland's Herald newspaper, the actor – most famous for his James Bond roles – handed over evidence from his lawyers to show that, despite living in the Bahamas, he had paid more than £3.7m in tax to the UK Treasury since 1997, considerably more than the majority of his critics.

Heid the much have you paid?



19/09/2008 15:27:07
259 Jackie Spanners

Oh golly, you've rumbled me.

Yes, sm753 is really my MI5 service number, and I'm sitting here at Thames House being paid to undermine the dreadful Nats.

I didn't just guess that "Jackie Priest" and "Suchaparcelofrogues" were the same person, I knew it because of the surveillance devices inside your PC.

By the way, I wouldn't use Internet banking any more if I were you. It'll just make it easier for us when the time comes.

It's life but not as we know it,

The Oort Clouds 19/09/2008 15:27:47
I just hope this means the death of those ridiculous ads with the zombie looking man who dances and sings for Halifax but can't actually dance or sing.

It's life but not as we know it,

The Oort Clouds 19/09/2008 15:30:18
#301 Poor you - MI5 are currently recruiting for "intelligence officers" (a contradiction in terms, shurely - ed?) in London at £23,500 p.a. Not much is it for a hard job there.

The Man Who Knows,

Republic of Perth 19/09/2008 15:32:16
A fair point but who would take over from Salmond? Swinney can't get it and Nicola doesn't want it. The party won't have MacAskill. Who else?

Heed thi baw,

19/09/2008 15:32:34

I've paid tax on every penny I have earned. Has Sean? Does he pay the full tax accruing on his income to HM Treasury, or, by living abroad, only a proportion thereof?


19/09/2008 15:32:42
Now, delightful though the digression into international stock exchanges was, I take it we're all in agreement.

What could an "independent" Scotland done about HBOS?


In the future, what could an "independent" Scotland do about a similar HBOS-type situation?


Largely because, what are the chances of Scotland's major companies moving their listing to an "independent" Scottish stock exchange?


So that's cleared up, I'm off for tiffin.

(At the Thames House tearoom, naturally.)

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 19/09/2008 15:34:34
298 Brownlie
Share prices are up markedly all over the world in response to the US governments's plan to buy up all US bad debt. They are up in France, Germany, Far East as well so its a bit convoluted to say that this arose as a result of UK placing a temporary ban on short selling.
But your own desire to quote share prices illustrates the point I am making. HBOS is (even with short selling banned) at 216p - lower than LLoyds TSB offer price of 232p. So how does this tally with Alex Salmond's assertion that short selling forced HBOS to be taken over on the cheap - quite frankly it doesn't. Short selling is now not a factor and the company is still trading at less than the takeover price.


Fife 19/09/2008 15:44:31
277 Ugly George

I said it was not just about a branches closing. Although my understanding is that there are 190 Lloyds Branches in Scotland verses 320 HBOS.

My main concern is that, as much of the current decision making is done in Scotland then all the high profile skilled jobs in HBOS will go. The down stream is bad too. There are many companies that depend for a large part of their income from having an HQ here. The Contributions to Scottish life through the activities of HBOS HQed in Scotland are large, whether it's sponsorship of Sports or the Arts or the contribution that the senior staff of both HBOS and reliant companies make to the community they are part of.

I'm sure that when it comes down to it Scotland will survive, but every time we loose a power-house entity like this it cuts away at the foundations of Scottish well being and makes us more dependant on getting our allocations from London


Moscow 19/09/2008 15:46:13

I doubt your ammounts to £3.5 million so give it a break with old myths..this one is years old.

Will Tony be paying full tax on all his earnings from his lucrative foreign lecture tours?

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 19/09/2008 15:50:21
308 Sunrise
The reality was that HBOS was the smaller partner in the merger with Halifax so, even though the HQ were nominally in Edinburgh, most of the crucial decision making was made by the Halifax aspect.

Also these tings work both ways. RBS took over the (bigger) NatWest and ennlarge its Edinburgh HQ accordingly. You win some - you lose some.


19/09/2008 15:51:49
299 Ugly George

There were two concerted sessions of short-selling involving HBOS prior to the last few days. I'm not a great believer in co-incidences.

Heed thi baw,

19/09/2008 15:53:28

Why do you keep on referring to the amount Connery has paid? Of course I haven't paid £3.5mil in tax but I haven't earned £10's of millions of £'s. That is irrelevant. The question is whether he has paid his fair share in terms of Inland Revenue rules or whether he is intentionally a tax exile to reduce his tax payment to the UK. I am sure £3.5mil is correct but should it have been £5mil or £10mil? You're right about Blair but he no longer sits shoulder to shoulder with a political party, including Labour. He must be smarter than he looks.


scotland 19/09/2008 15:53:30
Further to my ad on #296, I forgot to add that I am offering extra extra large T shirts for Alex,( on tour) roadies and such like at no extra cost. thanks.


19/09/2008 15:59:52

"#301 Poor you - MI5 are currently recruiting for "intelligence officers" (a contradiction in terms, shurely - ed?) in London at £23,500 p.a."

Sounds about right. I remember in 1990 Civil Service Fast Stream entrants (including GCHQ) were getting around 10k, so if you do the math that equates to 4.86% increases over 18 years.

No-one ever joined HMG for the money.

Ugly George,

edinburgh 19/09/2008 16:13:50
311 brownlie
Short selling requires the price of a share to fall if the trader is to make a profit but a takeover pushes the price up. Why would traders short sell if they thought the company was going to be taken over. This would not make sense as they would be deliberately losing money.


19/09/2008 16:16:21
314 sm753

No-one ever joined HMG for the money.

You must be joking. What about the fine example of Sir John Bourn with his legendary expenses as a reward for ignoring the UK's inefficiences and waste of tax-payers money. You don't get to lunch at the Connaught, the Savoy and the Ritz without a seriously generous HBOS card in your pocket.

As for the Fast Stream Civil Service pay if you mean London, as their represenative, I made sure they got more than that. I'll tell you a relevant civil service story when I've got more time.

Miss H,

19/09/2008 16:17:54
11 Of course the Scottish Government is pretty much powerless in this situation. The deal was brokered by the UK Government without the Scottish Government even being informed never mind consulted. Thus a Scottish institution which predates the union vanished overnight.

Do not underestimate the backlash that will come over this.

It may be the case that HBOS have followed some risky practices, so did Northern Rock. But the loss of the Bank of Scotland means a great deal to people for reasons which may not be explicable even to themselves.

What has happened has advanced the case for Scottish independence immeasurably. Not because independence would somehow make us immune from global conditions and circumstances but because in a time of global uncertainty it becomes even more important to have control of all of the levers which are available to us to defend the national interest. By which I mean the Scottish national interest which is what Scottish people put first.


Lara Crofter,

19/09/2008 16:19:08

You're not very bright, are you? Are you this Highland Mighty/English Voice fellah I've heard so little about?

Heed thi baw,

19/09/2008 16:29:31

So what controls would the Scottish Government put in place to have prevented a LSE listed company being ravaged in this way? You seem to be implying that the SNP and an independent Scotland would have mitigated or prevented this. By doing what?

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 19/09/2008 16:37:59
317 Miss H
Something of a melodramatic approach. The UK govt did not broker the deal. All it did was waiver the competition rules so that the deal ould go ahead. What would you have preferred? HBOS to struggle on and possibly go bust. The Bank of Scotland was part of the larger conglomerate HBOS which did the vast majority of its business elsewhere in the UK under the Halifax name. Lloyds will keep the name Bank of Scotland and the Bank of Scotland will be part of a conglomerate which does the majority of its business elsewhere in the UK - the situation that exists at the moment. The bank notes will still be printed. 90% of the population wont notice any difference. The building on the mound will still be used. The overall HQ might not be there but you will find admin functions of the Bank of Scotland still there. Anyway the HQ of HBOS was only nominally in Edinburgh. Most of the big decisions of HBOS were made by the larger Halifax part.


Murrieta CA: for more WAR VOTE McCain 19/09/2008 16:43:38
34 suchaparcelofrogues,Scotland

Yep Dude, the US is independent but with 300 million people and is the world's biggest economy.

U could not compare Scotland (independent) with 5 million people and a pip squeak economy. Only way an independent Scotland could survive is by joining a union with EU .

Get real dude. My country got into a temporary financial meltdown because of GREED.

But the Fed/Treasury steps in, and pours hundreds of billions of dollars to stabilize the situation and move forward.
Scotland (independent would sink in a similar circumstance.

Have a nice day dude.



19/09/2008 16:44:12

Ooo, who's this coming to have a pop at me?

"You're not very bright, are you?"

I don't know. What in particular has led you to this conclusion?

"Are you this Highland Mighty/English Voice fellah I've heard so little about?"


Ugly George,

Edinburgh 19/09/2008 16:44:14
317 Miss H
Loads of countries in Europe lost the essential functions of their national central banks when they joined the Euro. Are they upset at not having the "levers"


MurrietaCA: for more WAR VOTE McCain 19/09/2008 16:45:09
Alex Salmond Ur SNP leader sounds like our evil Pres. Bush.

Salmond repeatedly told the Scots (u dudes) the Scottish economy has proved more resilient than the rest of the UK to the effects of the economic slowdown."
Like give me a break dudes.

Here is Pres Bush telling the American a people American people our economy is fundamentally sound.

Like give me a break dudes.

Enter McCain who says quote " the American economy is fundamentally sound.

These 3 politicians all got it wrong.

But the difference it the US is a giant, and Scotland is a province in the UK.

The US can weather any financial storm, we just print more money. Scotland can't do that.


Miss H,

19/09/2008 16:53:43
320 Why do you think that HBOS would have gone bust? It has - what? - 22, 23% of all the mortgages in the UK? Are you arguing that the UK Government have allowed it to go bust?

As I understand it the Government bailed out Northern Rock because no-one in the private sector would toucb it. LLoyds TSB clearly jumped at the chance to get its hands on HBOS. Which suggests that it was not really all that bust.

In any case these debates are a side issue to the shock that is generally felt about the whole affair. Most people know very little about the financial markets. What they have found out has disgusted them. But the city is the voice of God as far as Gordon Brown is concerned and Cameron is no different. They are tarred with the same brush.

Lara Crofter,

19/09/2008 16:54:14


Lara Crofter,

19/09/2008 16:55:30

"The UK govt did not broker the deal."

They had a hand in it, though. This will come out in the wash. And there is some very dirty washing in there.


19/09/2008 16:56:31


"No-one ever joined HMG for the money.

You must be joking. What about the fine example of Sir John Bourn with his legendary expenses as a reward for ignoring the UK's inefficiences and waste of tax-payers money. You don't get to lunch at the Connaught, the Savoy and the Ritz without a seriously generous HBOS card in your pocket."

JB is a classic example of someone making up for his lack of cash salary (relative to what he would have seen as peers) with perks.

And he seems to have been caught out.

"As for the Fast Stream Civil Service pay if you mean London, as their represenative, I made sure they got more than that."

Current Fast Stream entry pay is £24.5k.

And MI5 seem to offer a range of salaries both above and below that.

"I'll tell you a relevant civil service story when I've got more time."

Please do.

Of course you realise my tale of working for MI5 was simply a wind-up of Jackie the Boxofspanners?

Miss H,

19/09/2008 16:57:59
323 I'd be quite happy to be in the euro, so would Alex Salmond, so would the SNP. It is SNP policy to join the euro as soon as possible subject to gaining the assent of the people in a referendum so not quite clear what your point is there.

Border Scot,

19/09/2008 17:11:15
#329 - Joining the Euro would immediately make Scottish exports into England significantly more expensive. Why would you want to do that? It would put many thousands of Scottish jobs at risk. The experience of all countries joining the Euro is that it also raises prices pretty much on the day of the changeover.

It seems to me that the SNP desire to hook up with the Euro is less about what is good for the Scottish economy and more about symbolism.

Lara Crofter,

19/09/2008 17:11:51

You don't care about Scotland, do you? So why are you here?


Sauchie, Clack's 19/09/2008 17:11:51
Of course the unionists on here know that this does not affect Independence, they are using the oldest unionst electoral dodge of them all, fear, remember above all the Glenrothes by-election, any weapon will do, even an old one.

Showing such glee, as some of them have over this story and any subsequent job losses, just because to their minds it gives them a useful tool to use, shows not only how desperate they are if they think it will make a difference, but also just how low some of them have sunk.

Thank God i'm not one of them!


19/09/2008 17:12:11


So right now we have the same currency as the rest of the UK, and the MPC at the Bank of England has to take account of Scottish conditions (i.e. 9%ish of the UK) when it sets interest rates.

You, however, want to leave the UK and adopt the Euro.

So our weighting in the ECB's deliberations would be 5m out of 320m, i.e. 1.6%.

Plus we would then have a currency exchange barrier between us and our main trading partner, to wit, the rest of the UK.

Brilliant, quite brilliant.

The Union thanks you for your services.



19/09/2008 17:13:39

"You're not very bright, are you?"

I don't know. What in particular has led you to this conclusion?

Answer the question, honey.

"Hoots" Fandango,

19/09/2008 17:19:55
A bunch of know-nothing unionist fuckwits who come on here to put down Scotland. Away with the lot o' ye.

You are a disgrace. Regarding the pathetic jibes about slapping wives (can't remember what idiot posted it), well FFS. If that's all you've got then GIRUYYB.

Onward the revolution. Avanti!

"Hoots" Fandango,

19/09/2008 17:22:20

"Answer the question, honey."

What a guy! You must have won the argument 'cos you called a female poster "honey." Astounding stuff - like most of yer bawbags.

happy english,

Kent 19/09/2008 17:22:40
I think this situation has shown that Scotland would not be able to go it alone though I would love to see them with there Independence. It seems that London is getting a tighter grip on Scotland.


19/09/2008 17:29:11
There is definitely more to this than meets the eye. Short selling alone cannot account for the drop in share price experience by HBOS. This certinaly gives more weight to the pro union argument(And i'm not saying it was a Unionist conspiracy but i wouldn't rule out any possibillity). For those asking where Scotland would be now if we were independent. The answer is f****d, a bit like we are now anyway. Shame Brown didn't back a Northern Rock style Nationalisation, which would have made far more sense with HBOS than it did with NR.


19/09/2008 17:30:55

Hootsie love

You've just fallen into the first trap of anonymous forums.

How, exactly, do you know "Lara Crofter" is female?

How, exactly, do you know "sm753" isn't?

Why does it matter?

Senga Jean,

19/09/2008 17:32:38
Not only would Scotland be better Independent but recent events demonstrate that we MUST become independent if we wish a future for our families. Global matters affect different countries differently and they can take action to reduce the impact .Scotland can only watch in dismay as our neighbour carpetbags our assets.


19/09/2008 17:33:37

If Scotland went it alone we would cope fine. A few % off the rates in corporation tax and more than a few companies would quite happily trade in Euros, even if it meant taking a hit initially.

Border Scot,

19/09/2008 17:38:46
#340 - Absolute, total and unmitigated rubbish. One company based primarily in England has taken over another company based primarily in England. Our neighbour, as you put it, is carpetbagging nothing. Our neighbour has not bought HBOS.

When will nationalists start to tell the Scottish people the truth instead of hiding behind jingoistic, little Scotlander nonsense?

Border Scot,

19/09/2008 17:39:15
#341 - And where would we raise taxes or cut spending to make up for the shortfall in revenues?

"Hoots" Fandango,

19/09/2008 17:40:30

Calling somebody "love" or "dear" is pretty cheap - even from a eunuch such as yourself.

Yours etc Mr/Mrs/Miss "Hoots"

"Hoots" Fandango,

19/09/2008 17:41:42

Hmm - How can you post bawbags and be a eunuch?

(Concentrate "Hoots" - concentrate).

"Hoots" Fandango,

19/09/2008 17:42:29

When you stop stealing our stuff?



19/09/2008 17:45:25

We wouldn't have to. Given the size of Scotlands economy we would only need a few big corporations based here to make substancially more in tax than we do now. If 1 major company disappearing has ruined us, it surely argues that only a few would have to move up to give an immense boost.


Scotland 19/09/2008 17:45:47

What shortfall? do you have any figures?


Scotland 19/09/2008 17:47:26

When you spill the beans about who you work for and why you troll these blogs with yer anti SNP Scottish Independence tripe under various logon accounts.


19/09/2008 17:50:36

And little Englanders hanging onto the pound becuse it British/english is not jingoistic or symbolic?

"Joining the Euro would immediately make Scottish exports into England significantly more expensive"

Opinion? wishful thinking? or propaganda? any proof?
No of course not.


Scotland 19/09/2008 17:54:35

phuq off yer too dumb to be working for anybody but the Labour party naebody else would touch you thats why its a dead give away.

"Hoots" Fandango,

19/09/2008 17:57:20
I scroll most of his/her stuff anyway.


19/09/2008 18:37:04
Comment Removed By Administrator


Scotland 19/09/2008 18:38:00
25% of people asked were for the merger and only 31% of Lloyds customers were for it.


19/09/2008 18:41:31
328 sm 753

I don't recall what the basic was at the time but the ones I represented qualified for London Weighting allowances, shift allowances, double time on Sunday etc etc which certainly made their initial starting pay look insignificant.

"Hoots" Fandango,

19/09/2008 18:45:59
353 guenevere, lia, kimba, elizabeth the first

Aah diddums. You got my post removed. Better now?

"Hoots" Fandango,

19/09/2008 18:47:05
"A Labour MP today urged Gordon Brown to "set aside" the Glenrothes by election as she criticised a "totally unacceptable" pledge to "keep jobs in Scotland" amid threats of job cuts following Lloyds TSB's buy up of HBOS.

Linda Riordan, MP for Halifax, cried foul on behalf of her constituents after it emerged that a paragraph in the takeover announcement released to the stock exchange yesterday said that "the management focus is to keep jobs in Scotland".

The union divided.

Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 18:52:50
How frail our wee economy when we're devastated by the loss of a Bank that wasnae strong emough to compete.

Look around Scotland, my friends....

Whact businesess are going to generate wealth for us in an increasingly competitive global market?


19/09/2008 19:01:08
356. No i didn't,but some people still have common decency,for which you are sadly lacking.


19/09/2008 19:01:43

Ah yes, I remember the days of all those things: "Responsibility allowances", "call-out payments", etc etc. I think they've all gone.

I think the 24.5k includes LWA, but don't quote me.

Immaterial since I have not served HM in any capacity since 1995.

"Hoots" Fandango,

19/09/2008 19:02:23

Aye ye did hen.

"Hoots" Fandango,

19/09/2008 19:03:27

That was a quick change!


19/09/2008 19:04:57
Now, delightful though the digression into internet virtual sexism and Civil Service T&Cs was, I take it we're all in agreement.

What could an "independent" Scotland have done about HBOS?


In the future, what could an "independent" Scotland do about a similar HBOS-type situation?


Largely because, what are the chances of Scotland's major companies moving their listing to an "independent" Scottish stock exchange?



19/09/2008 19:07:00
357. LOL,there is no division in the union,only in your walter mitty world! As for Linda Riordan,she is doing what she was elected to do i.e protect her consituents.

Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 19:07:08
Hoots, 362

Let's not waste time with silly identity debates. They're futile.

Whact businesess are going to generate wealth for us in an increasingly competitive global market?



Micro chips?




19/09/2008 19:09:44
361. Not by a long chalk, are you!

Venerable Bede,

19/09/2008 19:10:27
Guenevere/Lia/Maxi/kimba, you really are a pathetic racist with the brain of a dead goldfish. Do you not realise how pathetic you look coming on here to attack scotland day after day?

Your life must be empty.


19/09/2008 19:13:25
By the way Hoots,when you grow some b=lls let me know,then you can insult me to my face,not a newspaper thread!

Venerable Bede,

19/09/2008 19:15:06
I am not insulting you - I am making a statement of fact. You must have a really low IQ, I mean, it must be 5th percentile.

Venerable Bede,

19/09/2008 19:17:43
...and as you are stupid in a very fundamental way, I will explain it to you: 5th percentile places you in the bottom 5% of the human population. You come close to being let off crimes because you are below the mental function required for responsibility.

"Hoots" Fandango,

19/09/2008 19:18:07

I've already got two. No room for more or even bigger ones. I'd have to buy new trousers - and which way would I dress?

"Hoots" Fandango,

19/09/2008 19:19:40


"Hoots" Fandango,

19/09/2008 19:20:38
Globalisation - free market economy - that's what got us into this mess.

Hamish Scott,

19/09/2008 19:24:26
"Plus we would then have a currency exchange barrier between us and our main trading partner, to wit, the rest of the UK."

But we would take away a currency exchange barrier between us and most of the rest of the EU, a far bigger market than England. When Scotland was taken over in 1707 we lost our old trading partners like France because England wouldn't let us trade with them. Some of that still exists now with restrictive procurement imposed by England on Scottish public and private bodies.


19/09/2008 19:26:16
367. I do not attack Scotland,i attack the SNP and the natz on these threads. Scotland is a wonderful place with the most friendly and welcoming people,but salmond is causing more and more anti English feelings,you,Hoots and a few more are a prime example of this.


Scotland 19/09/2008 19:28:32

Aye no doubt you would have said the same thing about Irish companies in 1915 eh?
Like I said make it up as you go along like a good little party political troll.

"Hoots" Fandango,

19/09/2008 19:30:42

Aye kimba you attack the Nats. LOL You're as sharp as a beachball.


19/09/2008 19:30:43
Come on Hoots,VB, are you both chicken,you want to insult me,at least have the decency to insult me to my face!

"Hoots" Fandango,

19/09/2008 19:35:51

Like giving you my SKYPE name? Let's know the next time you're in Aberfoyle.

Senga Jean,

19/09/2008 19:37:16
#375 You are causing me more anti-you feelings...The party is called the SNP because they fight for Scotland....your intrusive ZZZZZZZZ is there for a nasty purpose which would have delighted Dr are the strangest link...GOODBYE (till you learn respect)

"Hoots" Fandango,

19/09/2008 19:43:03
Aye Senga - she's a harpie.


19/09/2008 19:46:49
I'm in Dundee in a weeks time,are you man enough1


19/09/2008 19:49:21

Still talking are we Jackie?

How about some answers?

What could an "independent" Scotland have done about HBOS?


In the future, what could an "independent" Scotland do about a similar HBOS-type situation?


Largely because, what are the chances of Scotland's major companies moving their listing to an "independent" Scottish stock exchange?


So what's the point of "independence"?


19/09/2008 19:49:24
380. ...The party is called the SNP because they fight for Scotland. So does that mean they have to stir up anti English feelings!

Venerable Bede,

19/09/2008 19:50:46
kimba/lia, you routinely disrespect Scotland and to deny this merely adds weight to your "stupid file".

Additionally, the SNP are an entirely valid political party that alot of people in Scotland voted for. People who voted are not inherently stupid, just as you are not inherently stupid for being English. You are stupid for being you, with all of your racist remarks.

I detest racism and bigotry in all forms - you are one of those forms.

Hamish Scott,

19/09/2008 19:52:06
"380. ...The party is called the SNP because they fight for Scotland. So does that mean they have to stir up anti English feelings!"

No, that appears to be your job.

Hamish Scott,

19/09/2008 19:54:47
In short: political, cultural, military and, indeed, economic.


Scotland 19/09/2008 19:56:17

Aye no doubt you would have said the same thing about Irish companies in 1915 eh?
Like I said make it up as you go along like a good little party political troll.

Venerable Bede,

19/09/2008 19:57:09
Lia, I work in London and have no reason to meet a racist in Dundee - there are enough Scots racists in Dundee already, just as there are enough racists in London and everywhere else in the world.

You are merely one more racist.


Moscow 19/09/2008 20:02:28
383 sm#

Just out of interest wher is Gordon Brown fighting for the jobs of his consitiuents, any idea? Hiding again?


19/09/2008 20:08:08

Still talking are we Jackie?

How about some answers?

What could an "independent" Scotland have done about HBOS?


In the future, what could an "independent" Scotland do about a similar HBOS-type situation?


Largely because, what are the chances of Scotland's major companies moving their listing to an "independent" Scottish stock exchange?


So what's the point of "independence"?

"Aye no doubt you would have said the same thing about Irish companies in 1915 eh?"

Yes, they did marvellously for the next 75 years, didn't they?

And/or, are you advocating the Civil War they had?

Do tell.


Venerable Bede,

19/09/2008 20:14:46
sm753 - Are you a macro-economist? What is the optimal size for a country? Let me guess your answer - 60million, growing annually at 2%?


19/09/2008 20:20:16
385/6. So by backing the union, and supporting all our people,English,Scottish,Welsh,and those in N.I i am racist! but,tell you what,when it comes to people like you,who want to destroy this wonderful nation of ours,who haven't got the insight or forethought to see what damage you and your kind are doing to Scotland.

Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 20:22:39
I notice many here are asking questions but few if any - are answering them.

This renders the forum simply a place for rants and insults - as adult discussion appears to be beyond most here.


19/09/2008 20:23:21
...then i will do ANYTHING to stop the cancer that is the SNP!

Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 20:26:11
G, 395

I had some sympathy with your plea at #393, but....

The SNP is a political party, not a cancer.

You may disagree with their agenda....and I might too, but to describe them as a cancer is wrong.

Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 20:27:24
VB, 392

What's your view?

5M, negative growth and a reliance on agriculture and fishing?

Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 20:28:15
SM 391

You start by demanding some answers.

Have you provided any answers?


19/09/2008 20:31:46
395.When you have something that is out of control,that spreads like wild fire,that will destroy it's host,that is cancer,this applies to the SNP.

Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 20:32:04
Nev, 390

Your quest to establish Gordon Brown's efforts to save the jobs of his constituents is not best served by making a query here to a faceless, contributor who knows nothing of Gordon's actions in the last few days.

You imply that he has done little/nothing to help because that suits your narrow agenda. Deep down you'll know that he has worked long and hard to try to do the best he can for all of us.


19/09/2008 20:32:54
sorry 396

Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 20:35:24
G, 399

This is cancer:

The SNP is a political party.

Your indignant plea at 393 is undermined by your subsequent stupidity re cancer.


Scotland 19/09/2008 20:44:36

Didnt float their shares in the LSE though did they?
What was it you stupidly claimed? for political reasons wasnt it?
What a tool.


19/09/2008 20:45:30
402. There are many political parties that are out for their own ends,salmond and the snp are one,the bnp is the other,neither of these so called "political parties"have any intention of putting what is wrong with this country right,they are out to stir as much sh=t as possible and think they can come out smelling of rose water.


19/09/2008 20:48:22
Good night all.


Scotland 19/09/2008 20:48:56

Dont be daft its had every question its asked answered some of em at least twice.
Now that its made an a*se of itself it wants to troll along by just regurgetating the same p*sh over again.
It wont matter how many times it gets an answer it will only repeat the question later on.
Coincidently AM2 Highland Mighty English voice and Duncan fae Edinburgh amongst other accounts do exactly the same thing. Make what you will of that.

Hamish Scott,

19/09/2008 20:50:13
If Scotland can't make it as an independent country then who can? Huge energy and water resources, including renewable energy, in a world where conflict is increasingly driven by energy and water needs. Vast marine resources. Good population size relative to land area. Highly educated population. Unique industries in whisky (25% of UK's food and drink exports) and tourism. Independence would provide political stability and decision making on political and economic issues being made in Scotland rather than London. Of course, what it ultimately comes down to is what we make of independence. Some posters (unionists) assume we will fail, while some of us think we are as least as good at running Scotland as anyone else is, and would actually do it a lot better.


Scotland 19/09/2008 20:51:07

What will disgust me the most is if they end up smelling as bad as the Labour party or the Tories.

Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 20:51:58
G, 404

Yes, it's probably best you leave....

Disagreeing with various political parties is entirely reasonable. Referring to Scotland's most popular political party as a cancer is wrong.




Scotland 19/09/2008 20:53:03

Aye but so what we cant go it alone so there.

And that is the most honest reasonable answer to that question I have ever seen on these blogs.

Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 20:54:53
Hamish, 407

Interesting post, thanks.

A reasonable summary of the natural resources available to us, and some decent observations re their usage, truth...what will generate our wealth going forward in an independent Scotland?

Whisky? Farming? Agriculture? Fishing?

Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 20:56:55
S, 406

Lots of vitriol, and anger, and insults....but no insight.

Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 20:58:25
S 408: no insight in that post either.


Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 20:59:59
S, 403: again, various insults and anger, but no insight.

Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 21:01:31

Are you able to make any worthwhile contribution to the debate here?

Or are you just here for rants, anger, hatred, and vitriol?

Hamish Scott,

19/09/2008 21:11:57
Pax Thanks for your comments

It wasn't meant to be a comprehensive list for wealth generation but off the top of my head I could add: education in terms of foreign students either physically coming to Scotland, or attending 'virtually' and tie-ups with foreign universities (this is already happening), bio-sciences, food and drink (in addition to whisky) with high added value, Scottish broadcasting income spent in Scotland rather than London with export spin-offs, the list is potentially endless. As I said earlier, the critical factor is attitude but we also just happen to be incredibly blessed with positive factors.

Highland Property Bubble,

Inverness 19/09/2008 21:15:58
Wee Eck seems oblivious to the fact that Lloyds have basically prevented HBOS from going under as a result of the large exposure that it has to the overinflated UK property market.
He was on the radio today pushing for the headquarters of the new bank to be located in Scotland. The man is living in a land of pure fantasy I'm afraid.
Finally the fact that a politician refers to anyone as a "spiv" is absolutely hilarious.

Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 21:16:12
Hamish, 416

You know, I think our views are similar, Hamish.

We're blessed with marvellous natural resources and we've created some other positive things ourselves, but it's the attitude that is critical - as you say.

I thrashing about here trying to provoke a nationalist to provide a logical, coherent case that we ARE capable of making a go of it ourselves, in previous debates, I can see little in their posts to persuade me.

I see lots of Flower of Scotland and Braveheart....but little logic.


Scotland 19/09/2008 21:16:48

And your contribution tonight has been what exactly? under your Pax logon I mean not any of your others.

Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 21:19:16
S, 419

No answers then?

Like I said - just questons....

Are you able to make any worthwhile contribution to the debate here?

Or are you just here for rants, anger, hatred, and vitriol?


Scotland 19/09/2008 21:23:23

And repeating your post is supposed to hide the fact your just another troll logon is it?
My contribution is up there and on other blogs for all to see and judge for themselves as are yours oh sorry no there not there isnt anything up there under Pax anyway.
When are you going to use your AM2 account again?

Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 21:31:50
421: Your contribution? You mean the insults, vitriol, hatred etc etc? But no insight.


19/09/2008 21:36:06

"SM 391

You start by demanding some answers.

Have you provided any answers?"

Yes, they are provided below together with the questions.

Yes I admit, copied from previous posts.

But if it were that easy to provide alternative answers contradicting mine, where are they?

Jackie Priest SuchaBoxofSpanners, the floor is yours...
What could an "independent" Scotland have done about HBOS?


In the future, what could an "independent" Scotland do about a similar HBOS-type situation?


Largely because, what are the chances of Scotland's major companies moving their listing to an "independent" Scottish stock exchange?


So what's the point of "independence"?

Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 21:45:55
SM, 423:

that'll be a "yes" then...

Dougie Douglas,

Brisbane 19/09/2008 21:46:34
Bail-out for Northern Rock - 75 Billion

Bail-out for AIG - 80 Billion

Bail-out Freddie and Fannie - 200 Billion

Bail-out for HBOS - 0

Predicting that if a Scottish financial institution ran into trouble England-centric Brown would not bail it out - priceless

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 19/09/2008 21:47:45
Smee. The oint of independence is exactly the opposite of dependence.

I take it you wallow in dependence?

Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 21:50:44
DD, 425

Are you suggesting UK taxpayers should have spent our hard earned cash on preserving a failing Bank rather than on hospitals and schools - when a market based solution was available?


Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 21:52:11
Jock, 426

When one IS dependent, surely breaking free is not big and not clever?

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 19/09/2008 21:52:24
Look on the bright side, folks. Scotland will build something else up for Westminster to take away - another union dividend.

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 19/09/2008 21:54:12
We all flee the nest, Pax@428. You were once dependent on your parents.

Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 21:54:26
Jock, 429

What do you think it will be?

Disability money for the Glasgow malingerers who are work shy?

Venerable Bede,

19/09/2008 21:54:35
Pax, My view, (not as a macro economist) is that there is no optimal size for a country. I ask the question, because the previous poster has made comments about Scotland being too small to support itself. I just wondered what the optimal size was...there are, after all, numerous small nations on this planet who are extremely wealthy - mostly those that are well educated and have specialized. In Scotland's case, we have substantial fund management expertise. People bang on about oil, but that is just the cherry on the cake. There are many wealthy small countries without oil.

So, in my opinion, there is not optimal size. Smaller countries are more dynamic, but more exposed/have less control over "externalities". I ask Unionists, because frequently they are opposed to European "interference", yet can't see the same issue with Scotland/UK.

God, today was good...with unspivvy manouveres on les equity markets i made a killing. IT was obvious - pick a prudent bank (hsbc, rbs) and pump your money in. Yummy. Viva London, viva capitalism.

Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 21:56:13
Jock, 430

I was, Sir, but I had reason to believe I could make it on my own - and I have!

Can Scotland? I reckon Scotland IS dependent - and I am not yet persuaded we are able to go it alone successfully.

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 19/09/2008 21:59:26
Well, Pax, I have reason to believe that Scotland could make it on her own - in this interdependent world.

Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 22:00:12
VB, 432

Aye, some fair stuff there...but you faded away with some anti capitalism stuff. Irrelevant.

Size doesnt matter - it's attitude - we NEED those entrepreneurs - we NEED that capitalism.

If we bite the hand that feeds us - how do we succeed when we're on our own?

Flower of Scotland and Braveheart wont put cars on the drive.


Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 22:01:58
Jock, 434

There's the knub of it, Jock...

I have asked here and elsewhere for a nationalist to provide a credible case that we CAN make it.

Guess what? Roamin in the gloamin, Flower of Scotland, and Braveheart....but no compelling economic case.

Venerable Bede,

19/09/2008 22:04:20
I actually think letting the market decide the fate of HBOS was a very smart move. We like to think we figure it for ourselves- gives us confidence. Don't worry kids, more US banks are likely to fail, but, they will fail for their excess, not because they have been shorted to sh*t. The economy will take 2 years min. to recover, then a few ish years, after which the Lafite will be running down the gutters of old broad street.

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 19/09/2008 22:05:47
Pax, your comment at 435 gives you away. Cars in the drive? Is that how you evaluate the independence of your country?

Ask not what your country can do for you, etc.

Venerable Bede,

19/09/2008 22:08:58
435 - are you kidding me? I work in The City...spivving. Actually, I don't work in sales, but I know enough brace-wearing spivs (seriously). I absolutely agree we need more entrepreneurs - you should see the shoddy, motley eijits we get coming into our place looking for cash. I'm making my pile then will give it a shot myself.

Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 22:11:40
Au contraire, my friend Jock, 438 - I think your post 438 exposes you!

Like other failing contributors, you attribute to me a view I dont hold then try to ridicule me for it.

I seek only a credible economic case for independence.

No, not the "I love a lassie" swirling kiltie case of tartan and Embra rock...something real, tangible and logical.

You cant give - so you resort to a silly attack on me re cars on the drive.

I love Scotland dearly - as I'm sure you do - and I have no appetite for demanding an independence devoid of economic logic.


Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 22:12:57
VB, 439

No, 435 is dead serious.

I see no credible economic case.

Andrew BOD,

Aberdeenshire 19/09/2008 22:13:02

Let's go back a bit and forget hypothetical situations.

By remaining in the Union, is this Scotland's 'Union dividend'? To lose the HQ of a huge bank, to possibly lose Scotland's oldest bank, to lose a large percentage of 25,000 banking jobs, and for Edinburgh's status as a financial centre to be downgraded?

Is that a dividend or a curse?

Remember sm, the whole Scottish Parliament was unanimous in their support of retaining the Bank of Scotland and the many banking jobs at risk. They also fully supported the notion that short sellers were partly to blame for the downfall of HBOS. Indeed, Gray and Goldie were very critical of the part this kind of practice played in the whole matter.

Gordon Brown and the FSA would have known that HBOS was raising dodgy loans. Gordon Brown and the FSA knew that short-selling was damaging confidence.
Gordon Brown and the FSA presided over lax regulations allowing this to happen.

The UK Government allowed an uncompetitive takeover to happen, because that was the only thing that could have been done so late in the day. However, Brown lacked the vision to prevent this from being so serious. It was in his, and the FSA's power to reduce the risk of this occurring, or at least it's impact

There is one more thing that I am unsure about. The Chairman of Lloyds said on TV yesterday that the two banks had already been looking at the possibility of working together in the future. So was blaming short-selling a convenient excuse to get on and do it? Who knows.


Venerable Bede,

19/09/2008 22:13:56
Pax, I think that there is a marginal economic case for indpendence, ie, we may or may not be marginally wealthier if things are run well....but independence will allow the management of the country to improve substantially. I dont buy the argument of some that it will be jam every night if we are independent though. If UK gov't undergoes a radical overhaul, then I might change my mind, but gov't is currently huge and wasteful.

Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 22:14:07
VB, 437

Are you able to re-post that in English?

Venerable Bede,

19/09/2008 22:16:05
435 - you said ~I was anti-capitalist though?

Anyway, you don't just require an economic case for independence to make sense.

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 19/09/2008 22:18:29
440, Pax. Why is quoting you a ridicule?

Do you not realise that your balance sheet proof argument is as ridiculous as the song book argument. Both are extremes.

Ask what you can do for your country. Ask those citizens of the former Yugoslavia what they did for their countries when they were fighting for independence. Did they consider cars in the drives or autonomy?

Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 22:18:34
VB 443

OK.....smaller economic entity....efficiency....Westminster wasteful etc etc.

So.....spend a FORTUNE setting up parallel infrastructures for Scotland to those that already exist elsewhere?

Give up on the economies of scale thar exist in governing Britain?

Set up our own Army? Police? Civil Service? Foreign Office? Foreign Embassies? Ambassadors?

Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 22:23:19
Jock, 446

Quoting me is good - misrepresenting me with all the finesse of a tacky Reporter from The Sun tell us more about you than we need to know.

You say now that I seek Balance Sheet proof.

You're lying again. I dont.

I simply seek a credible economic case. I guess you cant provide it - hence your need to go for lies and nonsense. Ho hum.

When I ask what I can do for my country - I conclude that xxxxing it up based on Braveheart and tartan is not a great option.


Venerable Bede,

19/09/2008 22:25:03
437 - sorry. quaffing too much poo down the telegraph tonight.

Points in order:
1. Letting "the banking community" sort out HBOS was a good move for Brown. Very sensible - a Northern Rock bail-out would have been very, very damaging to the UK banking system. Hats off to Brown for engineering it.

2.I don't think the economy is out of the woods just yet. I still think some US banks might go bust - and JP Mogadon might still go the way of the Stearns'...but I suspect it will be at the retail end of the mkt that busts will occur.

3.The equity markets and UK economy will not recover for 2 years, as so little money has been lent in the last 9 months. Little will be lent to the end of this year. We will consequently see smaller brokerages going bust...or coming close.

4. In two years, this will be a fresh but fading memory, and after that the next phase of absurd exhuberence will kick in.



Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 22:25:44
VB 445

you said ~I was anti-capitalist though? WRONG - YOU'RE MISTAKEN

Anyway, you don't just require an economic case for independence to make sense. YES, THAT'S TRUE - BUT A BASIC ECONOMIC CASE IS A HELLUVA GOOD PLACE TO START - AND I AINT SEEN ONE YET!

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 19/09/2008 22:28:27
Oh dear, Pax, you are becoming a tad abusive @ 448.

You do not need a credible economic case if independence is your natural dynamic.

It seems to be the natural dynamic in the world. Wonder why you don't seem to have it?

Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 22:29:47
VB 449

thanks - that made more sense!

The balancing a competitive global economy...

Wall St imposes tape....booh hah.....the pin stripes move their greedy mits to Frankfurt and Singapore....and it's gonna get worse.

It's cyclical. We're gonna do control control control.....for a while now...

boom bust....boom bust.

Venerable Bede,

19/09/2008 22:31:05
447 - no, we don't need all of the above to such an extent. Embassys - well, I used to work abroad and would meet ambassadors - the Scandanavians share ambassadors. We could do that with the remaining UK. I don't think we need to kick sand in England's face. I also don't think that we should split for a long time...I really think we need 70% to make it permanent and that simply won't happen for 15+ years.

As for police and civil service = it is huge in Scotland - the latter too big. Army? Well, pay money to NATO, insure the shetlands from soviet attack with AIG - it'll be fine! :)

Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 22:33:02
Jock, 451 - not abusive, Sir - just plain speaking and honest.

I see you're inclined now towards independence Scotland - without any need for it to make economic sense.

I suspected that all along.

Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 22:35:57
VB, 453,

LOL! Aye, I think I've made my point and I think remains.....

Ya reckon we're gonna tell Engerlund that we want oot....but we wanna hold on to some of the infrastructures the UK has built up?

A bit like kickin oot yer wife but saying you want to borrow her CDs and DVDs for the next 10 years?

Guess what they'll say? GTF.

Venerable Bede,

19/09/2008 22:37:50
London benefited most from over regulation in NY - in fact - there is a post-mortem in itself. Sarbane Oxley has seen the demise of Merrell, Bear, Lehman....god. What a mare. I have colleagues that lost millions in shares held from previous employers this week...has tighter regulation worked? Thank god we have principle based regulation here. London is now and has been for 2 years - the worlds finance centre.

Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 22:38:21
BTW guys....when I talk to my Engerlish mates that's already their mindset....

Scottish independence? Aye....GTF then.

Andrew BOD,

Aberdeenshire 19/09/2008 22:38:30
447 The economies of scale work in a company, but not in government.

A plc needs profit to survive, a government of a large country just increases taxation and borrowing to create ever more layers of bureaucracy. And actually has.

There are many good examples of countries the size of Scotland, working very nicely, with much more transparency and government that can be affected by the people with greater ease.

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 19/09/2008 22:38:34
454, Pax. I am feeling generous tonight so I will forgive you for thinking that calling me a liar again @448 is just plain speaking and not abusive.

If I was going to be abusive towards you I would say that I thought you were a total dickheid but, as I'm being generous, I won't.

Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 22:40:24
VB 456

Aye, but London's influence is waning.....and Frankfurt and others rising.

It's like any other business...people will go to the "easy to do business" centres and greed will blossom....

Venerable Bede,

19/09/2008 22:42:36
455 - I think an amicable settlement would happen. Divorce analogies are silly. But I take your point - and Ireland/Nordic countries would perhaps be more willing. Have you ever been in a UK embassy abroad? They are often shabby at the best of times, and sometimes just damn embarrassing. They are super-expensive to run. You are right...and Scotland would do well to choose where it had representatives...I suspect the Solomon Islands could do without.

Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 22:44:29
Jock, 459

You're forgiveness is not required, Jock.

You told a lie in 446.

In 448 I said that you lied in 446.

It's perfectly straightforward.

More importantly, you are unable to provide a credible economic case for Scotland to pursue independence.

Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 22:46:02
VB 461

In truth, I just hit on Foreign Embassies as an example of a UK "asset" that Scotland would have to set up alone were we to divorce our wealthy neighbours.

Venerable Bede,

19/09/2008 22:46:41
460 - in what areas? Debt? nope. Equity? Well...London is nothing right now..but is anywhere? FX? ~No Private Equity? NO! Hedge Funds? Been to Mayfair recently? Fund management? Hmm..

Andrew BOD,

Aberdeenshire 19/09/2008 22:48:49
455 The Union is a union of two nations. If one nation wishes democratic self determination, then it's only natural for it to hang onto the 9% it has paid for and the natural resources that belong to it. There's nothing sinister or illegal in that.

You speak in consumer language all of the time. Scotland is not a commodity.

Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 22:49:34
Andrew, 458

Dont think you're getting my point, pal.

With c 30M taxpayers, UK plc can set up many things and spread the cost - think Army, Foreign Office, Government Departments etc

Now, set up a new Scotland....and do all those things Embra....with 1M taxpayers....and find a way to fund 1M lazy, good for nothing, I'm disabled pal - honest - malingerers in Glasgow too!

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 19/09/2008 22:49:38
Nighty night, Pax. Keep the light on in case the monsters come for you.

Nappy change at 0400.

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 19/09/2008 22:51:22
Oops, I lied (again). Nappy change at 0430 - by the resident editor.

Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 22:53:02
Andrew, 465

Oh dear....another preferring to debate my terminology rather thanb the fundamentals of the debate. tut tut.

Aye, sure Scotland can hold on to it's contribution - but we walk away from all that our neighbours have provided. The 91% you refer to!

Venerable Bede,

19/09/2008 22:53:09
pax - good point :) Perhaps Independence for Scotland (ps, you guys can keep the weegies) would be best? Can we engineer that?

Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 22:53:57
Jock, 467

See ya, Jock - you had nothing meaningful to contribute anyway.

Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 22:56:27
VB 470

New plan: indepence for Scotland - all Scotland - errr....except Castlemilk, Drumchapel, Govan, Drumoyne, Parkheid, Shettleston, Kirkintilloch, .......oh fukkkit...who's gonna pay the Disabilty dosh tae they lazy bustards?


Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 19/09/2008 22:57:46
Venerable Bede. What would happen if HBOS shares increased in value over those of LLoyds TSB? They are up 52 pence at the moment.

Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 22:59:02
473: entirely irrelevant. Now GTF.

Venerable Bede,

19/09/2008 22:59:56
Pax - there are too many on both sides that think that either an independent Scotland will make everyone rich - nonsense, or, equally, those that say it will make us all poor - also nonsense. It could be good if it is done could be terrible if it was run the way the Labour Party is currently running the country. I happen to think the SNP are excellent managers - the nippie sweetie gets a great write up on health.

john z,

edinburgh 19/09/2008 23:01:53
No one is yet asking the right question.

Why is it, that HBOS was forced into the merger with Lloyds, and then, within 24 hours Gordon Brown announced a ban on short selling of financial stocks.

Why was the ban on short selling not announced 24 hours earlier to prevent HBOS fate?

Did Gordon Brown have early talks with the CEO of Lloyds which in reality precipitated and ACCELERATED the failure of HBOS.

Someone needs to do some digging, and really checking these points. The jobs of thousands of Scots are at risk.

Finally, could it be, that Mr Brown and his english advisors saw a way to 'shaft' the Scottish banking industry. He did, after all say he would use ANY MEANS to preserve the union.

Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 23:04:21
VB 475

Aye...I'm just trying to find some logic in the independence case.

It really p!sses me aff that so may want independence after two pints of McEwans, a Glenfiddich, and a Braveheart DVD.

At work we're trained to GET THE FACTS to base our decisions in logic.

In Scotland we seem to be saying: sing Roamin in the gloamin then I'll decide.

Venerable Bede,

19/09/2008 23:08:17
473 - a good question. HBOS was shorted to hell for 2 reasons. 1. Management exposed it to the debt market too much. 2. People knew it was going to get smacked for its exposure, so would short it like made to make very good money. Everyone knew that going short on HBOS would make them money. FOr a long time there was no bid price on HBOS (I sat and actively watched it on my screen all day).

So, what happens now? Well, I don't cover financials, but, the Lloyds move is simply prudent. ~Dont worry - these firms are ultimelty owned by fund managers...many of which are back up in Embra. They also "own" huge chunks of many companies world wide. Sentiment is strong with things with the word "scotland" in them...its just another company.

Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 23:08:29
John 476

Dont be so parrachial. The jobs of thousands of BRITS are at risk.....

HBOS is history, pal.

No Inquiry needed. Are you really suggesting that had the short selling ban been introduced 24 hours earlier the fate of HBOS might have been different? Really?

And Gordon's discussions were to SAVE the Bank - albeit with new owners. The market had already decided - they were Donald Ducked.

john z,

edinburgh 19/09/2008 23:09:10
Pax Vobiscum

You talk such rubbish, posing as pseudo economics. Scotland could easily be indpendent, without fighting (and paying billions for) perpetual battles in Iraq and Afghanistan. England still tries to behave like a colonial global power, but inreality, England on its own is just a very small country in Europe. Take a look at a map and you'll see just how insignificant England really is.

And this is the point. Scots are aware of Scotland and its place in the world, whereas England still likes to send soldiers all over the world - something which bigger European countries do not do.

The rest of the points you make are just pseudo intellectual guff. Stick to arguing doon the pub.

Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 23:10:58
VB 478

there's an industry that does have potential to put cars on our drives....good old funds managed in Embra.

Just a pity some of the indies are so ignorant they cannae make a decent case for themselves.

Like I said....two beers and a Braveheart DVD and their mind is made up.

Andrew BOD,

Aberdeenshire 19/09/2008 23:12:58
Pax @ 469
"...we walk away from all that our neighbours have provided."

I think I've finally got you now. You think England provides the gravy train? You seem to have a real loathing of Scotland. Have you no pride?

And your terminology belies your aspirations. Consumption. You are soulless.

Pax @ 466

I got your point the first time 'pal'. It was flawed. You didn't read my point. And actually, can you list the top ten nations by GDP per capita in the world? None of them are in the G8. What then Scotland's chances? Albania or Denmark? Your answer every time will be Albania because you have no pride in your country.

So really, it's not worth the debate, but it is worth pointing out.

Venerable Bede,

19/09/2008 23:13:57
476 - because short selling was leading to the demise of ALL the major i-banks. had jp morgan and goldman gone then that would be the end of investment banking as we know it and the world economy would go back 15-20 years. What Brown did was the prudent response. I'm no brown fan, but he really did make the right call. Had he shut down hedges too early, that too would have rocked confidence. HBOS was the lamb that needed to be slaughtered to make everyone see what could happen.

Nobody died.

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 19/09/2008 23:14:22
Thank you Vene Bede. I am also a shareholder and was wondering if the share price might affect the offer price and shareholder voting which is forthcoming.

Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 23:14:30
John, 480

Right....a few personal insults....ho hum....boring...and then some guff about Iraq....and new independent Scotland isnae gonna fight they wars.


That'll no change if - in future - some nutter blows 300 to pieces in Waverley station one wet Tuesday morning?

Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 23:20:09
Andrew, 482

Aye, you're right: you're no' worth the debate!

In 482 you unilaterally attribue to me various views I dont hold - and then you ridicule me - for the view I dont hold!

Tacky debating, mon ami...

You'll find these forums work much much better if you debate based on what a guy posts rather than what you imagine he posted!

Aside of that I see you provide various misplaced insults and flawed assumptions. Ho hum.

Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 23:20:28
* attribute

Bosco Bhoy,

19/09/2008 23:20:38

You would agree that their are more than just economic reasons for a nation and its citizens wishing to be independent and shape their own destiny?

Inded history shows that most countries sought 'freedom' for far more than just the pound in yer pocket.

Andrew BOD,

Aberdeenshire 19/09/2008 23:21:10

As you are taught to rely on logic, what are Lloyds-Halifax current liabilities, and could that provide an indicator to their long-term survival or not? Then will the UK taxpayer not end up bailing them out anyway?

I've read their liablities are £264 billion. Is that correct? And how does that compare with other UK banks?

Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 23:25:01
BB, 488

How ya doin?

Know where you're coming from there, BB....and I entirely agree.

Just trying to get at the facts. Economic and otherwise. I think it'd be entirely reasonable for Scotland to say: we've had a look at this, and economically it's marginal....maybe even a bit negative....but for other reasons (national pride etc) we're gonna go with it.

just as long as we go into it with our eyes open...and dont believe all the guff that we're told by patronising politicians.

Andrew BOD,

Aberdeenshire 19/09/2008 23:25:25
Pax @ 486

So it's Denmark then?

Things are looking up. Will you be voting 'yes' in a referendum then?

Venerable Bede,

19/09/2008 23:26:03
Jock - i'm sorry if you lost money. It is all scale, but I have a colleague that lost "a large seven figure sum" with hbos (he quit when they were taken over). Its all bad...but, what do you say? This is a 1 in 100 event. Brown has wiped out pensions - aks how many 30 year olds have a pension...not enough. Pensions are about spreading risk. The old phrases - eggs in one basket etc - are trite right now, but sadly ring true. I hope the bid price improves, but this is still a buyers market. The Equity mrkt might have move 8,5%, but that only takes it back to where it was last week.

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 19/09/2008 23:26:51
488, 489. See 467 &468. Smell the repetition plant.

Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 23:27:14
Andrew, 489

Good man, like me you're seeking facts, and you're asking the right questions. Well done!


Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 23:29:11
Andrew, 491

Oh dear....after one good post, you're straight back to flawed assumptions and myths.

Come on, pal: let's do FACTS rather than your silly imaginings!!!

Bosco Bhoy,

19/09/2008 23:29:42

To be honest i dont know if anybody can tell with any real certainty what would happen economically with independence for Scotland. It may as you say be at the margins but maybe people do have to accept their are bigger issues than just the tax rate etc.

Re the experts views of what might be the economic landscape in an independent Scotland, we only have to look at how wrong they were in their predictions of what would happen to the UK after the introduction of the Euro.


19/09/2008 23:31:44
490 Pax Vobiscum

What is all this tripe about roamin in the gloamin and Braveheart and two beers etc etc ad nauseam as being typical of the SNP and then you come away with the classic "Tacky debating, mon ami".

I cannot see anything tackier than attributing remarks and attitudes to SNP supporters. I certainly don't see them on this site mentioning Brigadoon, short-bread etc etc. You've repeated mentioned them.

Venerable Bede,

19/09/2008 23:32:05
Funny, I re read the headline of the article and remembered what bunk this paper peddles. I can't accept that they are so dumb and so have to attribute it to anti snp feeling. Johnstone Press as a stock needs all the online readers it can get - these are snp rabble rousing articles. Not sure its a good long term strategy - they were very worried by an online boycott earlier this year.

Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 23:34:43
BB, 496

Aye, I buy all that, BB.

I know too that at work we make important commercial decisions and work hard to gather as much meaningful data as we can to build our decisions upon.

The decisions that face Scotland are exponentially more important than the decisions me and my guys make. We should work long and hard to really understand what we're doing here - not base it on some Mel Gibson and Alex Salmond guff.

Bosco Bhoy,

19/09/2008 23:35:34

I know its easy for me to say living in Ireland and without having to face the risks of the downside of Independence but i do hope one day Scotland can make that jump and go for it.

I mean up until the 90's and before the creation of the Celtic tiger many a blueshirt in our wee backyard may have felt it would have been better to be under the control of London and then we might have not been an economic black hole.

Happily most here saw the issue in greater terms than just disposable income and good roads.

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 19/09/2008 23:35:44
492, Venerable Bede. Thanks for the sentiment but what, I suppose, I'm asking is what can be done to reverse the share price now that short selling has been made illegal? It seems to be reversing by itself.

It would be poetic justice if the reverse of the HBOS share issue was to happen - namely the share value is more than the Lloyd's offer when the paperwork comes through my letterbox.

Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 23:37:51
brownlie 497

Doesnt seen unreasonable to me to point out to others that they've misrepresented my posts.

I take great care with my posts - and dont take kindly to others misrepresnting me.

I think you'll find I havent reciprocated - or retaliated. I'll leave that behavioyr for those who lack confidence in their case.

Andrew BOD,

Aberdeenshire 19/09/2008 23:39:09
Pax - the following is a post from another thread that I've not been able to confirm as yet. However, if true, it looks ominous if the markets remain unstable.

"This looks like financial suicide to me. The combined company will have unfunded liabilities of £264 billion! HBOS is currently finding it impossible to fund £197 billion from the money markets.

Let's compare this to the other big banks -:

HSBC - £10 billion surplus
RBS - £50 billion unfunded
Barclays - zero
Lloyds - £70 billion unfunded

Lloyds TSB is by far the least solvent of the big four banks. What are these people thinking?

I've heard a lot the past few days about how cautiously Lloyds have been lending, with a debt-to-equity ratio of 1.43 I beg to differ. Out of the five biggest US banks, none have a ratio higher than 1.08. Lloyds-Halifax would be 1.61

This can only end in disaster, I can't see any other outcome. From too big to too big to save.


Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 23:42:47
BB 500

Aye, old Roisin Dubh is a good "case study" the Nats could refer to to construct a decent economic case.....and that's aside of the appalling cruelty that inspired brave men to fight the Westminster sourced terrorism in your country.

Earlier a good poster made some observatiosn about attitude, and I think therein lies the knub of this issue.

Blessed with outsanding natural resources and people with many talents, we do have many factors that could lead to success......but is our attitude right?

Are we gonna make a go of it?

Work at it?

All of us?


19/09/2008 23:44:15
502 Pax Vobiscum

No problem with the points you make in support of your views. What I do object to are remarks associating the SNP with romantic dreams of a Brigadoon-like Scotland.

Most SNP supporters are as sensible, practical and well aware of the enormous work that would be required to enable an independent Scotland to flourish.

Have your unionist views by all means but don't talk down, or down to, individuals who have similar hopes and aspirations as your own.

Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 23:44:35
Andrew 503 - Yep, the decision makers will need the facts for that one!

Andrew BOD,

Aberdeenshire 19/09/2008 23:51:15
Pax @ 504

I don't understand.

This is a good post asking an obvious and important question, but your previous posts tend to focus on pure economic reliance to the UK, and how it would be treacherous to seek independence.

I sense that you are unsure.

Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 23:51:52
brownlie, 505

I'll start my retort to your lecture by correcting you: I'm not a Unionist. So, if you're gonna lecture me, could you get your facts right, please?

Neither have I associated "the SNP with romantic dreams of a Brigadoon-like Scotland"

The generalisations I've made about those seeking independence ae based on posts on this site and my "real life" discussions. My generalisations are as valid as yours. You assert a positive perspective of SNP voters - your perspective - fine.

Pax Vobiscum,

19/09/2008 23:52:48
Andrew, 507

Have you actually read my posts?

Bosco Bhoy,

20/09/2008 00:02:22
Andrew BOD

I think Pax's point is that how many Scots are willing to take a hit in their pocket for a 'free' Scotland?

And it is a very relevant question as we do see so many pro Independence people often over estimate the oil money and other factors which indicates to me they are not so confident of winning people over with a patriotic call.

Scottish people should accept their country could be poorer, their country will be less important, with schools and hospitals that are not as shiney as the ones down south but you will be paddling yer own canoe.

And is that not better?

Andrew BOD,

Aberdeenshire 20/09/2008 00:04:23

Yes I've read those posts from when I joined the thread. I'm certainly not going to trawl through 500 odd posts. I can see your playing the devil's advocate thing tainted with mild insults about those supporting independence liking Braveheart, Shortbread, Tartan, Brigadoon, etc.. So no, I don't get it entirely.

OK. So could Scotland survive independently and at the same time preserve the standard of living we currently enjoy? Is that what you're about??


20/09/2008 00:05:21
508 Pax Vobiscum

Sorry, I was fooled by your postings such as 472, 477, 481 etc.

As for the unionist part, if it quacks like a duck etc etc.

Oidche mhath

Pax Vobiscum,

20/09/2008 00:09:29
brownlie, 512

Apology accepted, and yes, you are a fool for failing to read my posts properly.

I see from your duck quip you've STILL not learned your lesson.

Pax Vobiscum,

20/09/2008 00:13:54
Andrew, 511

If you need to pigeon hole me then try: undecided.

I'm trying to flush out a sound economic case for the nationalist position. Over and over (and over) again I've sought it......and I still havent found what I'm looking for.....

And repeatedly I've found views apparently inspired by Mel Gibson. They canne take ooor.....

Pax Vobiscum,

20/09/2008 00:16:13
BB 510

As my faither once said of Roisin Dubh (whilst sitting in the dark with Tommy and Vincent) - it may be shoite, bt it's our own shoite.

Venerable Bede,

20/09/2008 00:21:13
Pax, with smaller government, fewer civil servants, fewer embassies, a much reduced military, and fingers crossed, better allocation of social security benefits, I think there is a good economic argument. Fundamentally, we need to spend more money on education. From that, health and wealth will flow.

A key economic measure is growth.

Can you explain why growth in Scotland has been below the UK average, yet Ireland, Iceland, Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Findland and Luxembourg's growth have all outstripped us?

Do we benefit?

Pax Vobiscum,

20/09/2008 00:25:53
VB, 516

So, we're gonna take on the additional responsibility of governing our country but do it with LESS of those guys? Take on Defence - but have LESS Defence? Take the burden of lazy malingering Glaswegians - but allocate SS better?

Sorry....doesnt make sense!

Dont know answer to your question, but YES growth in GDP per capita is key measure.

Senga Jean,

20/09/2008 00:41:17
It is not rocket science!. Visiting Slovenia I did notice they did not have a problem with these issues. Their Unionists tried to fry them. Ours so far only try to con us!

Andrew BOD,

Aberdeenshire 20/09/2008 00:41:47
Pax - I'm going back to Denmark again.

A country of 5.4 million, a focus on education and a very competitive free market economy, it's main exports are food and energy (carbon and non-carbon)

Surrounded by the sea on three sides, it too has a major global power to the south which is very important economically as well as it's close neighbours in Scandinavia.

There are, therefore, distinct similarities. However, Scotland would need to become more entrepreunerial, less reliant on the public sector, improve our education system, but most of all, we need to believe in ourselves. Yes, being part of the Union has some economic advantages, but it has also caused a brain-drain and an over-reliance on government to bail out and prop-up. It has shackled us in respect of not having to create local business for economic survival. The big English companies have moved in and taken over, but have provided effective employment.

Scotland, though, has other advantages over Denmark. It's links with established capitalist democracies around the world, are stronger. We speak the English language - a real advantage. And I've not even mentioned oil yet.

So, in summary, I believe we could make it economically, but we may have to go through a transitional period where receipts from oil buy us time to enable us to make it on our own.

So there are similarities

Andrew BOD,

Aberdeenshire 20/09/2008 00:42:50
Strike that last 4 words


Murrieta CA: for more WAR VOTE McCain 20/09/2008 16:03:49


Alex Salmond Ur SNP leader sounds more like our evil Pres. Bush.

Salmond repeatedly told the Scots (u dudes) the Scottish economy has proved more resilient than the rest of the UK to the effects of the economic slowdown."
Like give us a break dudes.

Here in the US, Pres Bush tells the American people our economy is fundamentally sound.

Like give us a break dudes.

Enter geriatric McCain who says quote " the American economy is fundamentally sound".

These 3 politicians got it all wrong.

But the difference is, the US is a giant, and Scotland is a province in the UK.

The US can weather any financial storm, we just print more money. Scotland can't do that. The US weathered the crash of 1929-30 .

So quit ur usless squawking and do something positive.

Independence is no solution for a pip-squeak country on its own . Your SNP supports live in the gray fog of dead and gone history.

Dump Salmond ..suck it up and move on..

And quit squawking .

Happy Jan 20 2009




Murrieta CA. for more WAR VOTE McCain 20/09/2008 16:08:14
Takeover 'may tip economy of Scotland into turmoil'.

Wow dudes ..BE AFRAID...!!!!

The END is nigh.
Pray to Mohammad .
Pray to Budda ..
Pray to Jesus ..
and don't forget to, pray to DOG

Way to go dudes.

Happy 20th. January..2009


Murrieta CA . for more WAR..VOTE McCain 20/09/2008 16:11:18
The DOG I believe in

ain't short of cash.

Away to the beginning of non-particle matter universe.

Time for Change.



Comment on this Story


In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In



Featured Advertising

Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.