Off the microphone of RE
Follow us on Twitter @doomstead666
Friend us on Facebook
Aired on the Doomstead Diner on September 11, 2014
Discuss this article at the Podcast Table inside the Diner
Don’t miss the recent Rants on the various factions all lining up now in the Battle for All the Marbles!
Friends & Enemies, Allies & Adversaries
It’s SHOWTIME!
Snippet:
…The UK as an entity basically tracks the course of the Industrial Revolution, and as Industry grew, you got consolidations on every level, corporate consolidations and large monopolies forming, and Nation-States consolidating their hold over various territorial possessions which were the source of raw materials and food for the growing entities. The British Empire of the period was the most successful of these, but all the Europeans were at the game, the French and Germans too. You can think of each of these Nation-States as a large corporation with a Military arm for acquiring more resources.
They all were (and still are) in competition with each other both for acquiring control over resources as well as control over the monetary system used to distribute those resources. Although in times of “peace” the Elite in control of each of these places seem to work as a single monolithic entity, the reality is that they all are struggling to be in control over the greatest swath of the earth they can at any given time. The battle is ongoing even in times of peace on the financial level, but through the whole period from 1700 onward has been punctuated by NUMEROUS wars.
A Short List here of the Wars the UK has been involved in one way or the other for the last 300 years:
War of the Spanish Succession , American Revolutionary War , Seven Years’ War, The United Kingdom in the Napoleonic Wars , War of 1812 , Crimean War , Franco-Prussian War , American Civil War , History of the United Kingdom during World War I , Military history of the United Kingdom during World War II , The Troubles , Falkland Islands War
Not gonna detail all the rationales behind these wars or their timelines, but I will drop links down for them when I air this rant…
[img[/img]
[img[/img]
Slightly out of date. I think Belarus was coopted already.
The Vatican will likely end up lining up with Vlad the Impaler.
RE
Those are countries Britain has invaded, conquered, or been at war with. When did the Brit-Belarus show play?
Does the Crimean War or the post-WWI intervention in the USSR count? We could shoehorn them in under those conflicts.
Sorry, I was thinking of places overrun by the International Banking Cartel. Working on another rant.
RE
Latest from John Ward of The Slog and Michael Snyder of Economic Collapse on Scottish Secession:
http://www.doomsteaddiner.net/blog/2014/09/12/vote-yes-on-scottish-independence/
http://www.doomsteaddiner.net/blog/2014/09/12/scottish-secession-transition-from-global-to-local/
RE
No way TPTB will allow Scottish Secession. The election will be rigged for sure.
RE
Panic On The Streets Of London … Can Scotland Ever Be The Same Again?
Submitted by GoldCore on 09/12/2014 12:39 -0400
Australia
Bank of England
George Soros
Hong Kong
International Monetary Fund
Lloyds
RBS
Reuters
Royal Bank of Scotland
Rupert Murdoch
Treasury Department
Unemployment
United Kingdom
There is now less than one week of campaigning remaining before the Scottish Independence Referendum, which takes place next Thursday, September 18.
[img[/img]
The pro-union ‘no’ vote campaign is back in the lead this week after the latest opinion poll from pollsters YouGov put them at 52%, marginally ahead of the pro-independence ‘yes’ campaign.
The referendum question being asked is simply “Should Scotland be an independent country?”
After being ahead significantly since the outset of the independence campaign, the pro-union side was abruptly shocked last weekend when the pro-independence side took the lead based on an opinion poll result, also from YouGov, released on Saturday, September 6.
This forced the pro-union campaign into panic mode this week with the UK witnessing an unprecedented coordinated campaign between all the main political parties. who are pro-union, and a number of major UK companies to try to convince the Scottish electorate to stay in the United Kingdom.
Scotland’s financial sector became one of the main battlegrounds this week, with many Scottish headquartered banks and financial services companies first threatening to relocate their headquarters to London and then actually announcing that they will move south if the referendum outcome results in a ‘yes’ majority.
The HQ move threats and announcements appeared to be part of an orchestrated corporate campaign run by the UK’s Treasury department and the Treasury did not deny this.
According to the banks, they are seeking to move because an independent Scotland would create too much economic, regulatory and financial risk and uncertainty for their headquarters to remain there.
Amongst the banks, two of the UK’s biggest banking institutions, the Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS), and Lloyd’s led the charge. Crucially, since the RBS and Lloyds were both bailed out by the UK government during the financial crisis, the UK government is now a significant shareholder in both institutions, owning a whopping 80% of the RBS and 25% of Lloyds.
RBS has been headquartered in Scotland since 1727 and employs 35,000 north of the border. Lloyds owns various institutions including Bank of Scotland (not to be confused with the Royal Bank of Scotland), Halifax and Scottish Widows, the pensions and life insurance group.
Scotland’s third biggest bank, Clydesdale, owned by the National Australia Bank (NAB) said it also planned to relocate its HQ to London, again citing the uncertainty that a yes result would generate. Other banks such as the TSB and Tesco Bank also followed suit and said they too would move.
Many of the banks’ and asset managers’ share prices had been hit on the London Stock Exchange this week due to the pro-independence movement’s lead including the share prices of RBS, Lloyds, Aberdeen Asset Management and Standard Life.
Financial services giant Standard Life joined in, saying that it would relocate large parts of its operations such as pensions and investments out of Scotland if the country voted for independence. Dutch asset manager and insurer Aegon said it too would move operations to London.
Other industry leaders also sided with the pro-union alignment with the CEO of the UK’s largest oil company British Petroleum (BP) saying that the company and the economy was “best served by maintaining the existing capacity and integrity of the United Kingdom”.
Scottish first minister and pro-independence leader Alex Salmond said that the corporate announcements had been orchestrated by the prime minister’s office in Downing Street in London, and that Treasury had been ‘caught red-handed in a campaign of scaremongering”.
According to the FT, a Treasury official admitted that “Danny Alexander and George Osborne have been making calls.” George Osborne is the Chancellor of the Exchequer and Danny Alexander is his assistant at the Treasury. The calls to RBS would have been quite easy to make given the government’s 80% shareholding. Likewise with Lloyds.
As RBS and Lloyds are already essentially run from London, the HQ move announcements do appear to have been more politically motivated than anything. HM Treasury does appear to have been bullying and pulling strings behind the scenes. On one hand it says plans by companies to move were ‘understandable’, while on the other hand it has been making phone calls encouraging companies to move.
Elsewhere, Mark Carney, the Governor of the Bank of England, became involved in the debate which is slightly surprising given that the Bank of England is supposedly neutral of political interference. Carney said this week that a currency union between Scotland and the rest of the UK is incompatible with an independent Scotland.
Media mogul Rupert Murdoch chimed in, hinting that he was on the side of pro-independence, most likely because of his current coolness towards the Westminster leaders, while financier George Soros weighed in on the pro-union side.
There is much to lose for the City of London’s financial sector due to the economic uncertainty and sterling currency risk of an independent Scotland and the loss of financial power, international standing and resources that a smaller UK would represent.
The International Monetary Fund (IMF) also became involved this week warning that “the main immediate effect is likely to be uncertainty over the transition to a potentially new and different monetary, financial and fiscal framework in Scotland.”
The pound sterling has fallen and risen this week based on the prevailing sentiment expressed in the various independence polls. Sterling strengthened today following the latest poll but had touched an 11 month low earlier this week against the dollar.
In terms of sterling, the gold price has not really moved significantly over the last month, remaining in a £20 trading range between £780 and £760, although the price did fall from the £780 range on Monday down to £760 today, slightly more than the US dollar denominated price move in gold, but in in general sentiment to the weakness in the US dollar gold price.
Scotland’s bid for independence has also crystallised nationalist aspirations in other countries, most notably in Catalonia which is on the brink of its own unofficial referendum to try to break away from Spain. Yesterday was National Catalan Day and millions protested across the region most notably in Barcelona.
There has been much speculation this week about how the UK’s gold reserves would be affected if an independence result emerges. The UK Treasury said that all Treasury reserve assets would be up for negotiation. Since this is a very general statement it does not provide much clarity as to whether an independent Scotland would be able to take any of the UK ‘s gold reserves, but this did stop various media outlets from appearing to think that Scotland would get its share of the UK gold.
At this stage it is best to adopt a wait and see attitude since there are too many unknowns for any factual conclusions to be reached on the future of the UK, let alone future UK fiscal plans.
Whatever the outcome of next week’s independence referendum in Scotland, it has illustrated that the UK is a economic entity which is in some parts held together by groupings that do not have the same outlook. The closeness of the results for the two campaigns suggests that if the pro-union campaign wins, they will still have to address the concerns of the large Scottish independence movement, and calls for a future referendum on the subject may not go away.
Economic uncertainty in the UK will remain in the near term and it is hard to see the UK economic landscape ever being quite the same again after the heated campaigning on both sides of the independence issue.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-09-12/panic-streets-london-can-scotland-ever-be-same-again