Showing posts with label Independence. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Independence. Show all posts

Friday, 20 November 2015

Is an SNP led "Indy 2" referendum over for a generation ?

Could this new information hammer the SNP's chances for good ?
Very recently Alex Bell (ex SNP policy advisor to Alex Salmond) published a report on "Rattle" that "The SNP’s model of independence is broken beyond repair. The party should either build a new one or stop offering it as an alternative to Tory cuts" (Read the whole important article here )
However some of the important text that makes an Indy2 difficult is below .......
=======================================================================
"2014 was an economic sweetspot for two reasons. It was a good year for oil, and it came after thirty good years. Thus the Scottish economy looked healthy and was able to boast that it had chipped in more to the UK treasury than it had got back over recent times.
That is not the same as being able to say the Scottish economy could afford British levels of spending, which was a significant plank of the Yes promise. That debatable point could be obscured by lots of noise, and the SNP is accomplished at shouting.
But Nicola Sturgeon knows the SNP is good at misdirection. The party’s success has been built on hard work and spin. Behind the scenes she isn’t gullible. It may work in public to rubbish claims by the Institute of Fiscal Studies that there is a gap between what Scots pay into government and what they get out in services, but only fools believe their own propaganda. The fact is a gap exists – Scotland does not earn enough to pay for its current level of spending."
========================================================================
The current spending gap between what Scotland spends and what it actually earns in Tax Revenues is approximately £9 Billion pounds, this means that to be "Independent" or to take on "FFR" (Full Fiscal Responsibility) it would have to be able to fund that gap (at least), either by raising Taxes , cutting Spending (including deep Welfare cuts) or combinations of both plus potentially taking on levels of debt (which needs to be serviced ...which has added additional costs) in the money markets. (for more on debt issues and costs read the "Rattle " article direct )
This "Onshore" Spending gap has in the past been offset by good "Offshore" North Sea Oil Revenues on profits which in good years balances the shortfall ,sometimes even excelling it but in bad years of poor revenues the shorfall in Scottish Spending needs is met by the RUK taxpayer as part of the "pooling and sharing" of resources arrangements with the RUK government.
It goes without saying then that with the halving of Oil prices and the hugely rising costs of operating in the North Sea the final revenues on taxable profts are now very small in fact the last reported Oil tax revenues wasn't a profit at all it was actually a cost to the UK taxpayer of around £300 million.
This means that currently the natural Scottish "onshore" spending gap is now fully exposed at around £9 billion pounds required to fill that gap. Therefore if the SNP wanted to hold another Indy2 referendum it would have to convince Scots to accept a lower standard of living than in RUK after Independence due to having to cut spending or have higher rates on personal Income tax in Scotland (or both) this could also cause a movement of Jobs and workers which wouldn't be good for the Scottish economy either. I doubt if the Scots electorate would ever successfully vote to have a lower standard of living as their RUK counterparts..after all do Turkeys vote for Christmas ?
It has to be assumed then that the SNP would choose to wait until better economic conditions arrived and it coudl attempt to try convince Scots once again of a rosy and successful future, however this might be hard to achieve considering the electorate have seen how they were deceived last time.
So the ten million dollar question is ..how short or long a period could it be until Oil prices rose to allow the SNP to have a second attempt at Independence ?
It's not just as simple as waiting to get back to where the Oil price was last year because the cost of operating in the North Sea have also risen hugely with steel and engineering infrastructure being so old it is now needing replaced at modern day costs, this means profits and therefore taxes on profits are going to be so much smaller than they used to be in the last ten years. It's been said in fact that for Oil revenues to get back to the levels of 10 years ago Oil prices per barrel would have to get back nearer to $200 per barrel compared with the price last year of $113 per barrel.
Recent data that has been made available from BP though now suggests that Global Oil reserves are actually going to double by 2050 and will far outstrip demand , therefore it could be expected that Oil prices per barrel could now remain low or even go lower than now for a very very long time to come, this in turn (if its fact) is going to make it very difficult for the SNP to make another case for Independence for potentially a very long time as well... on the back of Oil revenues at least.
The SNP could of course try also to convince the electorate to vote on accepting a lower standard of living than in the rest of the UK...but could Turkey's really be convinced to vote for Christmas..I personally don't think it would ever be successful and a second failed Referndum would sink the SNP as a political party for a very long time.
The BP article is below :.
========================================================================

"The world is no longer at risk of running out of oil or gas, with existing technology capable of unlocking so much that global reserves would almost double by 2050 despite booming consumption, BP has said.

When taking into account all accessible forms of energy, including nuclear, wind and solar, there are enough resources to meet 20 times what the world will need over that period, David Eyton, BP Group head of technology said.
"Energy resources are plentiful. Concerns over running out of oil and gas have disappeared," Mr Eyton said at the launch of BP's inaugural Oil and gas companies have invested heavily in squeezing the maximum from existing reservoirs by using chemicals, super computers and robotics. The halving of Oil prices since last June has further dampened their appetite to explore for new resources, with more than $200bn-worth of projects scrapped in recent months.
By applying these technologies, the global proved fossil fuel resources could increase from 2.9 trillion barrels of oil equivalent (boe) to 4.8 trillion boe by 2050, nearly double the projected 2.5 trillion boe required to meet global demand until 2050, BP said.
With new exploration and technology, the resources could leap to a staggering 7.5 trillion boe, Mr Eyton said.
"We are probably nearing the point where potential from additional recovery from discovered reservoir exceeds the potential for exploration."
The world is, however, expected to reduce its reliance on fossil fuels in favour of cleaner sources of energy as governments introduce policies limiting carbon emissions in order to combat global warming.
"A price on carbon would advantage certain resources," Mr Eyton said.
Governments are expected to agree on a framework to limit global warming by limiting carbon emissions at the United Nation's climate summit in Paris starting this month. European oil companies have urged policy makers to introduce a global price on carbon that will favour the use of less dirty natural gas at the expense of coal.
"Ultimately, national and international policies will determine how much of and which resources will be produced."
"We envisage increasing competition between energy resources," he said. "This will likely result in increased competition in the energy market and disruption for the incumbent."
In North America, a price of $40 per tonne of carbon would make gas turbine power plants more cost-effective than coal, BP said.
However, an $80 per tonne price on carbon would make onshore wind technology competitive with gas-fired power and would also make carbon capture and sequestration with gas-fired power economic.
And while oil is expected to be the main source fuelling the transport sector by at least 2035, electric vehicles could approach cost-parity with the internal combustion engine, due to advances in battery technology, BP said.
BP, the largest operator of solar and wind power among its peers, will see its investment portfolio evolve over time in line with government policies, Mr Eyton said.
However, an $80 per tonne price on carbon would make onshore wind technology competitive with gas-fired power and would also make carbon capture and sequestration with gas-fired power economic. "
The original online report can be found via this link by clicking here
========================================================================
The oil price is unlikely to recover next year, according to the boss of the French energy giant, Total.Total's Patrick Pouyanne "doesn't anticipate a recovery in 2016". In fact, he thinks supply will grow faster than demand next year.
He is not alone. Last Friday, Goldman Sachs put out a note suggesting prices could fall a lot further.
"While [we are] forecasting oil prices over the next few months to be near $40 a barrel, or roughly where they are trading today, there could be another 50% to fall," the investment bank said.
Read the whole Total Oil article by clicking here
=========================================================================
For explanations on the Scottish economy , the "onshore" and "offshore" revenues and also on how "pooling and sharing" works to the Scottish advantage see Kevin Hagues presentations by clicking here

Kevins main Blog and menu can be found here
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thursday, 27 August 2015

The best presentation I have ever seen on the SNP Manifesto Document " Scotlands Future"

So here we are , nearly one year on from the Scottish Independence referendum vote, for myself I made my decsion back then on how to vote based on more than 25 years of following the UK Business financial markets and some reasonable  knowledge of how volatile the Oil markets are and their outurn effects on the overall UK economy.  For me it was Job done and I duly voted "No" based purely on what I think was a pretty well informed financial opinion on Scotlands prospects. For me the head always has to rule the heart, commonsense has to prevail over rushing in blindly into someone else's Political Ideology based on "Hope without Facts."

So nearly a year later , with the benefit  of hindsight ....do I think I made the right decision for me , for Scotland and the nations future ?

Well since the time of  the Referendum Vote the Oil price per barrel of Crude Oil has fallen rapidly from over  $100 to around $45 per barrel as I type and its also pretty obvious that the SNP led administration had made deliberately optimistic  predictions for the future Oil Price in the Manifesto Document ,well above the figures used by the "Office for Budget Responsibility's" own predictions.... clearly to try to deliberately influence the outurn of the Vote in its own favour.  Looking back, this to me appears to have been wholly reckless and clearly "not very responsible at all " and  not what I'd expect from  any Government asking a nation to make such a large important decision on its future. It's my own clear personal view now that the SNP are simply idealogically driven  without morals and no longer financially trustworthy to be trusted with managing Scotlands long term future for the nations best result.

I'd  have some real difficulty personally trying to explain the complex financial figures  contained in the Independence manifesto  (and so do some members of the current SNP Government it would appear) so therefore I was very lucky to come across Kevin Hagues online blog (chokkablog)  very recently which even with the knowledge I had was a real eye opener and undeniably backs up my own view that Scotland as a nation managed to dodge a very large bullet back in September 2014.

I'd urge everyone  who may not  have fully understood the Indy Manifesto fully last year to watch
Kevins excellent presentation of the figures alone without offering any judgement or personal direction of how a vote should have been cast at that time.

His presentation starts with a very quick overview video and then follows up with a more indepth
and enlightening set of presentations  on the figures regarding Scotland long running fiscal deficit and how that figure would affect "FFA" (Full Fiscal Autonomy)  , its affect on Independence as well as how any financial shotfall might possibly have to be dealt with and the possible potential time periods involved to balance Scotlands large financial deficit. (More than scary !)

Clich here for the Video's   Click here to start Kevin Hagues excellent video presentations 

Kevin's Chokkablog Homepage can be found here http://chokkablog.blogspot.co.uk/ 

The "Gers" figures which are trustworthy Scottish national statistics compiled by the Scottish Government itself are explained again here
http://chokkablog.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/how-scotlands-economy-contributes-to-uk.html

What FFA is http://chokkablog.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/full-fiscal-autonomy-for-dummies.html

These texts are all the work of Kevin Hague who has a very wide following from people on both sides of the Independence arguement. (see the "endorsements" tab on his Blog)

I hope you find them all as useful and informing as i did. (Kevin can be followed via his Blog or via Twitter.  Help inform other people by highlighting Kevins videos to them too.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

With Oil down at around $48 per barrel I am expecting at some point to see more figures to compound  a continuing worsening of the Scottish Financial position as i do not expect the World Crude Oil price to rise in the markets greatly anytime soon. I still can't beleive the deliberate deception in the Indy Manifesto by the SNP party Seniors in both using "old" data and then further using wholly over optimistic predictions on that old data to produce a fradulent picture of the "potential of Scotland's future". Kevins presentations show that SNP over optimistic promises of future prosperity were simply  a demonstrable lie.  How the SNP leaders have the gall to continue to rant on about the same issues and another Indy referendum is astounding as their niave childishness in blaming everyone but themselves for the last defeat. A flawed Ideology in Denial.

I wonder how people that voted Yes feel when they can clearly see that the SNP financial arguement for Independence was so weak that the Party  had decided to manipulate the figures to make them look so much better than they actually were ? The SNP clearly must think the Scottish electorate are fools that can't be trusted to make good clear decision on the real  facts and  so decided to use over optimistic  data that made the future of Scotland look far rosier that it actually was.  Wouldn't  that nornmally be called "fraud" ? 
There is an old saying we should never forget "Once a liar always a liar" the SNP have tarred themselves with their own brush.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/11481010/SNPs-whopping-exaggeration-on-oil-revenues-laid-bare.html





















































































































  
      


























































Tuesday, 11 August 2015

The SNP simply doesn't believe in real true democracy but actually believes in minority rule.

                                
I found this article today that holds many quotes that ring true with me about the SNP and what i feel are is its singular simplistic pursuit of political Power for only its own leaders benefit in pursuing a Single Party State (not that uncommon with Natzism  too wasn't it ?) while saying it pursues "Pro Business" policies and yet claiming it is a "grassroots" party "led by the people for the people" there are many i think would would consider the two statements there an oxymoron in their own right. Interesting words quoted here though in reference to a book by David Torrance which clearly demonstates the hprocrisy of the SNP where the party's own leaders often state restrictions and vetoes that they want to impose on other organisations  ideas that it actually opposes being applied to similar policies of its own...the SNP is duplicious and self-serving  yet likes to promote  itself (in its own inward looking eyes) as "progressive", it's leaders  cannot see their own hyprocrisy in their own observable and widespread behaviour.

"Ms Sturgeon has proposed that Scotland (or Wales or Northern Ireland) should be able to veto a majority vote in an EU referendum. But she applies that only vetoing a vote to leave; she doesn’t want anyone to veto a vote to stay in. Torrance argues against that idea. He claims that’s the same logic as if England, Scotland or Wales should have had a veto over the Scottish vote in the 2014 referendum.
But surely the point is that no part of the whole has the right to overrule the whole. No minority has the right to veto a majority decision. Democrats believe in majority rule; the SNP believes in minority rule. The whole British people have the right to decide the major constitutional questions of national unity and national independence, whether we are to stay united or be divided and whether we are to be in the EU or not.
As a nation we believe that an overall majority of the votes cast across Britain as a whole should decide whether we leave the EU. In March 2015 a survey by a team from Edinburgh University found that people across the UK oppose Sturgeon’s call for multiple vetoes on a British exit from the EU. Clear majorities in England (68 per cent), Northern Ireland (60 per cent), Wales (64 per cent) and Scotland (55 per cent) disagree with the Scottish first minister.
Sturgeon and Salmond have constantly asserted that “Constitutional referendums are once-in-a-generation events.” So SNP policy is that we have no right to have a referendum on the EU. It thinks that the 1975 referendum was too recent to be repeated.
However, Sturgeon and the SNP believe that the 2014 Scottish referendum is not too recent to be repeated as soon as next year. The SNP has not ruled out promising another referendum in its manifesto for the Scottish parliamentary election of May 2016. If the SNP won that election, it could call another referendum before the end of 2016.
A generation is a short time in SNP politics.

Read the full article (from a surprising source) here :
https://www.cpbml.org.uk/news/unsustainable-policies












































































Thursday, 30 July 2015

An SNP "Scottish" Currency Lie ? : Hiding the True Facts and Dangers of an Indy "Yes" vote ?


  An SNP "Scottish" Currency Lie ? Hiding the real facts and Dangers behind an Indy "Yes" Vote  ? 

The SNP's insistence on its Indy Manifesto fronted by its head illusionist Alex Salmond that the "Scottish Pound " would be the currency if Scots voted for Independence  was merely a "smoke and mirrors "untruthful  attempt to instil the idea in Scots voters minds that Voting for Independence would mean that very little would really change apart from not having a Tory Government in Scotland any more and that Scots lives  would stay much the same or even improve from what  had been beforehand.

The truth is really that it was for one reason only and that was to stop Scots thinking for themselves of what other real unmentioned situations might come to pass and to stop them from even questioning the SNP's manifesto for Independence as being in any way  whatsoever  "risky" , "reckless" or " unwanted " in their own lives.

 Salmond can claim of course he wasn't actually blatantly lying at the time because immediately after the Indy Referendum in the event of  a "YES" vote the currency would by default  still been the Pound, but thats where the story ends.

With the splitting up of  UK assets between two Sovereign  nations both parts required 2 basic things :-
1: An individual currency, and 2 : A powerful "national bank of last resort "

The reasons for this are that  any  government  with its own fiscal budget and individual political policies regarding taxation and welfare spending programmes needs to be able to control its own  fundraising (ie its own Goverment bonds issued in Financial markets), its own interest rate and the control of the supply of its own currency in circulation.

What you cannot ever  have is two completely seperate European Governments of two Independent sovereign nations with different Political viewpoints running two completely different Fiscal spending plans , different Welfare policies and differing Taxation plans  with one shared currency that only one country has responsibility for maintaining the stability of . That is only a recipe for disaster beacuse it would allow the other country to hold the other one to ransom or run the other  into ruin by introducing poor taxation , spending plans and taking on loans  in the money markets that could  destroy the value of a currency in the money markets that they themselves have absolutely no responsibility for maintaining, it simply would never work. 

Of course Alex Salmond knows  this very well too and certainly knows also that  two countries CAN share a currency but one would have to hand over sovereignty to the other that actually owns the currency to manage  overall Fiscal policy and Currency control and that the actual solution already has a name  "Devolution Max"  so when the SNP were campaigning for "Independence" was this what the SNP really had in mind throughout the whole process if the Statement  to share  the pound was really a truthful one ? 

More info on this issue here  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-miles/memo-to-alex-salmond-inde_b_5074697.html  

There were another couple of options the SNP could have adopted but of course were not discussed at all with the Nation most probably as one was unworkable and very costly even if physically possible and the other one would have been deeply unpopular with Voters and would no doubt have returned a clear NO vote on Independence.

Other than Devo Max the second option would have been a completely new currency (with its own exchange rate) and while this is a "real" option on the table it really would have been too ridiculous to contemplate, it would have meant Scots having to exchange money while crossing the border going out the country (even to England) and vice versa when anyone  came into Scotland. It would be another problem for Tourists coming to the UK having to have carry two different currencies to vist England and Scotland and probably would hit the Tourist industry in both as many Tourists may just find it simpler just to go to Europe instead (visit multiple countries and use one currency only). A new currency would also create more red tape for Industries both in Scotland and all its trading partners and reduce Competitiveness and Profits by increasing costs (due to currency conversion costs). So therefore a complete non-starter and would be quickly ruled out.

The Third and most likely the very real SNP unspoken and unwitten  plan if it truly wasn't lying to Voters that it had wanted "Devo Max" rather than true and real Independence can only have been a plan to adopt the Euro as the "new" Scottish currency, the reasons for this is that it would solve two of the SNP's biggest problems at a stroke.
 1: It would provide the large established and powerful European Central Bank as the Scottish "Bank of Last Resort".
2: An available and widely used Currency , the European Bank alreadly  owns the Euro,  an  existing currency that already is used widely in Europe, already traded on the  World  money markets and alreadly accepted all over the World for International Business transactions.

George Soros's view on a Scottish Currency http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/10692558/George-Soros-Scotland-sharing-the-pound-after-independence-is-impossible.html

Another Youtube Video  presentation on  options for "A Scottish Currency" is here ...while viewing this video its very important to remember clearly what has happened to interest rates in Russia and other countries that have and are dependent on Oil as large parts of their GDP , Government budgets and therefore spending plans for their  nations. World Financial commodity shocks can and do cause countries to have long periods of high interest rates to protect their currencies  which has been implications for Mortgage holders https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mBC0mLFz91o 

So what  "evidence" exists that the real unspoken and unpublished plan that the SNP had for Scotland's New currency all along in fact was the Euro all the time ?

1: Well the SNP has said all along that Rejoining the  EU  would be a priority for it and all other recent new membership Countries of the EU have had to adopt the Euro as a Currency as well, this is a very unpopular issue with Voters in Poland  but they wanted to join the EU and were simply not allowed to join  without signing up to adopt the Euro as part of that sign-up. (They have agreed to change to the Euro when some of the debt issues in the EU have been resolved)
see here for more info
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poland_and_the_euro  

2: Is there evidence that the SNP itelf has shown as Policy willingness to adopt the Euro ?  Well yes there is , the SNP is very pro-EU and sees further integration with Europe as the future. In a past speech to the European Centre for Policy Studies  Alex Salmond speaking as leader of the SNP not only supported Scotland joining the Euro but actually attacked the pound that he tried to say Scotland would keep after an Indy "YES " vote , can this man be trusted at all to ever be telling the truth ? He described the Pound as "''a millstone round Scotland's neck'' and challenged the euro's supporters to launch a more aggressive debate against the new currency's critics.
Salmond then went on to say "''I think that being outside the euro area is already penalising the Scottish economy. In the medium-term, the longer we stay out, the more damage will accumulate. The euro is an example of why Scotland needs membership status so that it can take a decision on entry into the single currency,''  and also said "'Scotland is a trading nation and our main trading partner is the EU. At present, over 60% of our manufactured exports are to the EU and it is to Europe that we must look to secure Scottish prosperity and Scottish jobs,'' he told his audience of European officials and diplomats."
See more here: http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/12207577.Salmond_in_call_to_dump_millstone_of_the_pound/

The Euro has also been highlighted as a Scottish currency at other times too.
"Alex Salmond and his ministers know there are other options, not least because they used to champion one of them.Not so long ago the Scottish National Party was a fan of the European single currency.As recently as 2009, at the SNP's annual conference in Inverness, the party's former treasurer, Ian Blackford, argued that being "tied to sterling" after independence would mean Scotland having to, "pay the price in higher interest rates while being exposed to a currency that has a history of suffering from wild fluctuations".

see more here:  http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-26168002  


So it  appears that Alex Salmond was speaking with a forked tongue with the backing of the rest of the SNP while deliberately trying to deceive Voters on what any potential Scottish  currency would ultimately be  ? The SNP has talked down the Pound in Scotland as a currency openly in Public several times now in the past while it can also be seen that it has often said it sees the benefits of the Euro over the Pound as a currency many times.  

So why was then was the SNP so afraid to put it on the Indy manifesto ? Is it simply because it knows the Scottish electorate  would  quickly reject that policy and return a massive "NO" vote and therefore the SNP set out a deliberate plan of deception to win a YES vote by presenting a  a false and untruthful manifesto to the whole nation instead ?
What does that really say about the SNP's trustworthyness and of it's need to exert "control" over the nation by deceit ?


Of course one avenue may have been to use one of the SNP's most favoured tactics,  just go ahead and offer a hugely populist but completely unrealistic plan to the  electorate to gain political power and then when the  "ridiculous proposal" is rejected by the rest of the UK government that your trying to divorce yourself from, you can then produce your "policy of greivance" Joker card ,blame Westminster for not accepting your own wonderfully credible original plan and use "your mandate" you say the Scottish electorate gave you to default the Scottish electorate into the deeply unpopular Euro against the will of a nation. Job done, the SNP and Alex Salmond get what  they have openly wanted for years and the UK government gets the blame for it.

 We know the SNP would blame the UK Government for this as everything is always the fault of Westminster and not ever the fault of the SNP.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

























































































































Tuesday, 28 July 2015

How and why the rapidly falling Oil Price could have caused Family breaking high Mortgage rates in an Indy Scotland.

  Another major issue with falling World Oil prices that hasn't been given much thought in an Independent Scotland and even less talked about by the SNP (understandably) is the effect it may have had on  "Scottish Mortgage Rates" and its devasting effect on Scottish Homeowners.

If Scotland had been already an Independent country when this Oil price fall had hit , not only would working families have had to bear the brunt of likely heavy increases in a local Income Tax to make up the shortfall in the Scottish budget, ordinary Scottish Homeowners with Mortgages in the nation may have also had to cope with additional crippling Bank Interest rate rises that the Scottish Government of the day would most likely have had to implement in order to protect  against the value of its currency falling due to steeply falling Government Oil Revenues.  Protecting the value of a Countries currency is important and essential for creating a stable exchange rate for its Industries that trade with the rest of the World. To give some idea of just how disastrous this would have been to millions of Scottish families consider how any individual in Scotland would cope with a shock 15-17% Mortgage rate as this was the Bank exchange rate Russia too had to implement to protect the value of its own currency due to its own shortfall in its own finances because of the falling Oil price last year. Russia's interest rate is still currently 12% more than six months later. Other Oil producing countries had to cope with similar problems. The UK overall escaped this because Oil is only 3-5% of UK GDP but would have been around 15-18% of an Independent Scotlands GDP , this is one of the realities and huge risks of being an Independent Scotland having to cope with World commodity shocks..would it really have been worth the risk of tens of thousands of Scots losing their Homes and family lives when they couldn't keep up mortgage payments due to punitive levels of interest rates in an Independent Scotland ? This could have brought  hardship and utter misery to a whole nation but the SNP do not want you to consider the consequencies of this scenario in the slightest. There have been many Oil shocks in past fairly recent History and there will be more Oil shocks in the future as surely eggs are eggs and the Scottish Government has no means whatsoever of protecting Homeowners from these if it were Independent whenever they happen, as they are outwith Government control. The only way to try to cope with shocks like these is to stay part of a much wider and broader Industrial economy where individual commodity shocks have an overall smaller effect on the economy  and preferably as part of a  Country that actually can control its own interest rates , its own stable currency and therefore its own long term financial destiny.
This is a  real scenario not a theoretical one but have  Scottish Voters really understood the risks or have they merely been blindly misled and ill advised by the SNP for their own agenda. It's not the SNP MP's that could lose the roofs over their heads with £75 salaries and expense accounts but the families of ordinary working Scots. SNP MP's will have nothing to lose in this siuation but ordinary working families have everything to lose. With high interest rates and people rushing to sell to get out of ever rising debts House prices would also likely be hit hard , good for buyers , not good for forced sellers at all.

How would Scots really cope with a substantially higher Mortgage Interest Rate in Scotland than England  because this  is a very real potential result of breaking away from the UK's larger, more stable economy and broader Industrial base , my guess is that they would be less than happy ? Understatement ?  So why aren't Scots taking this whole issue seriously yet ?

Russian Interest rates http://www.global-rates.com/interest-rates/central-banks/central-bank-russia/cbr-interest-rate.aspx

Venezuela Interest rate (also has a large part of its Economy based on Oil )
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/venezuela/interest-rate

 Winners and Losers from falling Oil prices
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29643612

Why do Governments have to control the Interest Rate anyway ? :
Interest rates are one lever used to control the economy. The MPC's remit is to keep inflation near the official target of 2%. Raising the base rate should bring down inflation by encouraging saving and deterring people from borrowing - thus lowering demand for goods in the shops. Lowering rates should stimulate economic demand and push up prices, as consumers would be left with more disposable income after paying mortgage costs.
This base rate is used to calculate repayments for tracker and variable-rate mortgages. The interest rates paid on savings accounts should also move in line with the base rate, although retail banks are not obliged to pass on changes in full.

Another Youtube Video presentation on options for "A Scottish Currency" is here ...while viewing this video its very important to remember clearly what has happened to interest rates in Russia and other countries that have and are dependent on Oil as large parts of their GDP , Government budgets and therefore spending plans for their nations. World Financial Commodity shocks like for the price of Oil can and do cause countries to have long periods of high interest rates to protect their currencies which has been implictations for Mortgage holders https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mBC0mLFz91o 


While younger Homeowners probably only remember lower levels of interests rates in recent times, they have been as high as 14% in the 1990's after ERM exit and over 12% in the 1970's, these were periods when many people struggled to keep up morgage payments and many of course evntually often lost their Homes.  Small countries generally have unstable and unpredictable economies, larger ones with a broader selection and number of Industries generally always fare better than smaller ones when economic winds blow hard.

Full Historic Interest Data here http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2011/jan/13/interest-rates-uk-since-1694
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What happened in Russia could easily have happened in an Independent Scotland too because in Scotland "Oil is not just a bonus" no matter what the SNP say.

"On Russia’s “Black Tuesday” this week (16 December 2014), the Central Bank tried to stop the rouble’s value falling by hiking interest rates to 17%. It didn’t work. The bankers and corporations panicked; the rouble kept falling. It has now lost half its value in six months. The main cause is the falling price of oil, on which the Russian economy is heavily dependent.
Now Russian people are likely to pay the price, with inflation, unemployment and falling living standards. More than at any time since president Vladimir Putin became the Moscow elite’s dominant figure 15 years ago, he is likely to face a population troubled by serious economic hardship.Q. So what were the triggers for this week’s collapse of the rouble?
A. Low oil prices, which always threatened to undermine the Putin set-up, have arrived.
See more here http://rs21.org.uk/2014/12/18/the-spectre-of-social-unrest-is-haunting-putins-russia/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Irina Fedulova and her husband have repaid more than one-third of their $150,000 housing loan, but they owe more than when they started, thanks to the collapse of the Russian ruble.
The loan was in dollars but “our salaries are in rubles, and we realize we can't pay it the way things are,” the 42-year-old chemist said by phone from Nizhny Novgorod. “We are so desperate we might have to sell our three-room apartment and move into a smaller one, if we can afford it now.”
Millions of middle-class Russians are facing unexpected hardship this winter amid a 40% decline in global oil prices   http://touch.latimes.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-82305345/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Russian energy executives expect that the current slump will correct itself by mid-2015, as demand picks up and the existing glut of supplies disappears. Yet, what happens if these expectations do not come to pass? If significantly lower global energy prices represent a “new normal” that is likely to persist for years to come, however, what then? 
See more http://nationalinterest.org/feature/russias-double-trouble-dilemma-crashing-oil-prices-tough-11939  
( Editor: It's now September 2014 and  Interest rates in Russia ie Morgages are still at 12% having been at 17%  and 15% in the last year since the Oil price fall...how would you lives in Scotland be affected by similar Interest rates induced by a Currency Crisis caused by the same Oil price drop affecting Scotland ?  This is one of the Dangers of ever being a small country with a large part of its national spending budget depending on the Oil price, despite what the SNP say "Oil is NOT just a bonus" to the Scottish budget, its essential to its financial stability as long as Scotland carries the £9 billion "onshore" budget deficit shortfall, a shortfall that could take anywhere from 50-100 years to attempt to rectify with no guaranteee of success )
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Whats a currency crisis ?  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Currency_crisis



Update 17 Jan 2016   How a small Oil rich country is not coping with the fall in the Oil price and how its facing disastrous economic issues http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-35329617