Oil Price

**sids** · 20-Dec-14, 18:43

Originally Posted by Scout

So why was it big issue for SNP to push for Independent, all the TV debate from Alex was on oil.

It was very important and would make us all rich. I remember them boring us about it.

But that was then and this is now. Oil now has no importance to the Scottish mega-economy. Oddquine told me so.

**Oddquine** · 20-Dec-14, 18:58

Originally Posted by Scout

So why was it big issue for SNP to push for Independent, all the TV debate from Alex was on oil.

Actually, no it wasn't, but the MSM would have the gullible believer that. They are still doing it....and the gullible are obviously still believing the MSM. Even Ian Wood, fracker extraordinaire and the fount of all Westminster's oil wisdom, it seems, hedges his words about job losses and production with the use of could and might, but he also says that " but predictions that the region is “close to collapse” are exaggerated" and suspects low prices will last for a year to 18 months. So if we had voted for independence, the price would probably be heading upwards by the time of independence day, anyway. I suppose you do realise that the oil price has been lower than $60 before.....for most of 2008 into 2009, in fact?

The issue was more the fact that the UK Government has, since the 1970s been widdling what could have produced an oil fund for the UK, as recommended by McCrone, if not specifically for Scotland, up against a wall as they were leaving the brewery in which they have proven, over the years, that they couldn't arrange a boozy party.

I do notice that they have learned a lesson, so fracking income in the North of England will produce an oil fund for that area, as it did for Shetland...but Scotland can just go whistle. Buying votes much?

**sids** · 20-Dec-14, 19:08

Master Slave Manipulator?

Methylsulfonylmethane?

**rob murray** · 20-Dec-14, 20:19

Originally Posted by Scout

I'm sorry but the SNP was totally relying on oil price for tax. The Whisky industry has seen drop in sales overseas, house tax will go up from April next year making it more expensive for people to sell and buy. Land reform has more tax on fragile industry. If we were independent now be disaster for Scotland.

Spot on mate, some people on here can deny facts until they are blue in the face but the entire Salmonella economics behind braveheart was based on $100 a barrel and the other part of the lie ( pretence ) was Scotlands supposed diverse economy ( call centres, collapsing financial services and retail !! ) we didn't really depend on oil eh !!!!...well try telling that to the 100's paid off from full time on shore oil jobs in Aberdeen these past few weeks...goggle this until you find numbers that contradict this....no doubt some idiot will find some propaganda...I notice no one has made any informed comments on the total collapse of wave power...a lot of blind and deaf people on here eh... still pretending that "we" blew the chance of freedom....lol lol lol get real. SNP lies will be coming home, Sturgeon hasn't any answers or creditability after all she echoed Uncle Alexi's lies and gamble...liars and total fakes the lot of them

**rob murray** · 20-Dec-14, 20:24

Originally Posted by Rheghead

The drop in the price of oil would be great for an independent Scotland so long as we are hooked on fossil fuels for our energy and we ignore climate change. If you haven't notice, we live in a pretty sparsely populated country. It is funny that you have framed the failure of the Yes campaign due to the price of oil when we all know the factors for it are outwith Scotland's influence. Even sir Ian Wood says that the contraction of the oil industry in Scotland would be just 10% despite his claims of disaster. Since Scotland has so much more to offer than just oil then an independent Scotland could easily shrug that one off.

Fail. Next...

Oh yeah.... I never framed an oil price collapse on Scotland and well you know it...hooked on fossil fuels...get real...the only credible options left are wind and nuclear as wave power is screwed.

**rob murray** · 20-Dec-14, 20:26

Originally Posted by Oddquine

Actually, no it wasn't, but the MSM would have the gullible believer that. They are still doing it....and the gullible are obviously still believing the MSM. Even Ian Wood, fracker extraordinaire and the fount of all Westminster's oil wisdom, it seems, hedges his words about job losses and production with the use of could and might, but he also says that " but predictions that the region is “close to collapse” are exaggerated" and suspects low prices will last for a year to 18 months. So if we had voted for independence, the price would probably be heading upwards by the time of independence day, anyway. I suppose you do realise that the oil price has been lower than $60 before.....for most of 2008 into 2009, in fact?

The issue was more the fact that the UK Government has, since the 1970s been widdling what could have produced an oil fund for the UK, as recommended by McCrone, if not specifically for Scotland, up against a wall as they were leaving the brewery in which they have proven, over the years, that they couldn't arrange a boozy party.

I do notice that they have learned a lesson, so fracking income in the North of England will produce an oil fund for that area, as it did for Shetland...but Scotland can just go whistle. Buying votes much?

And your point is ??

**golach** · 20-Dec-14, 21:04

Oh deary me, Norway is in a worse state than we are in the Union
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/4a83b09e-8...#axzz3MTDjAaBl

**Rheghead** · 20-Dec-14, 21:56

Originally Posted by rob murray

Oh yeah.... I never framed an oil price collapse on Scotland and well you know it...hooked on fossil fuels...get real...the only credible options left are wind and nuclear as wave power is screwed.

I never said that. You did. I said you are framing the failure of the Yes campaign due to the price of oil.

**sids** · 20-Dec-14, 23:10

Originally Posted by Rheghead

I never said that. You did. I said you are framing the failure of the Yes campaign due to the price of oil.

You're not wrong. The Yes vote failed long before the oil price.

**rob murray** · 22-Dec-14, 13:29

Originally Posted by Rheghead

I never said that. You did. I said you are framing the failure of the Yes campaign due to the price of oil.

I didnt, I stated that if we voted yes we would be in an undeniable hole ! I thanked the no voters as they saved us from a melt down. The yes campaign failed for numerous reasons as you well know, and the oil price back then was nearer Salmons $113 a barrel !!! Just goes to show how a black swan cannot be forecat or predicted

**Better Out Than In** · 22-Dec-14, 15:22

I was told that oil prices are primarily low due to price manipulation between the big players not market forces as a fight back against USA shale oil. Arab countries can recover oil at a few $ a barrel which is less than fracked shale and much less than deep water offshore. So they can afford to see price drop more than the USA and North sea is even more vulnerable. So to use oil, whose price is controlled by others, as a means to bank rolling Scottish independence was always a high risk strategy. I agree with comments - we have been saved from very early ruin by the skin of our teeth.

Low oil prices does not just affect direct workers - for example half built vessels are still on their chock being mothballed as not longer market viable.

Regards wave energy - the amount of money invested (wasted?) in developing this technology is a small fraction compared to what has been spent on fast breeder and Dounreay decommissioning. Long term it is a viable energy source and green, it just needs the right incentives and support to kick off. However, whilst land lubbers might like the idea of marine energy more than land renewables , it does interferes with other marine users.

Norway. Very early on Norway took the decision not to spend their oil revenues but to invest it and then only spend the interest (put simply). So Norway's home economy is not directly affected by oil prices even though an oil economy. It is more affected by international markets - which do respond to oil prices but dampened and slower. They also have very cheap hydro power and cause this to make up energy deficits.

**Rheghead** · 22-Dec-14, 19:20

Originally Posted by rob murray

I didnt, I stated that if we voted yes we would be in an undeniable hole ! I thanked the no voters as they saved us from a melt down. The yes campaign failed for numerous reasons as you well know, and the oil price back then was nearer Salmons $113 a barrel !!! Just goes to show how a black swan cannot be forecat or predicted

Your argument doesn't stand either. If independence had gone ahead then the Scottish government would not have taken over until March 2016 and it would have been the UK government that still would have suffered and by which time the oil price could have recovered. In any case, the Scottish government is not reliant on high oil prices as oil is a bonus.

**Scout** · 23-Dec-14, 09:45

[QUOTE=Rheghead;1106078]Your argument doesn't stand erelither. If independence had gone ahead then the Scottish government would not have taken over until March 2016 and it would have been the UK government that still would have suffered and by which time the oil price could have recovered. In any case, the Scottish government is not reliant on high oil prices as oil is a bonus.[/QmUOTE] I'm amazed you can predict the future so only two years then all perfect. Remember the recession? had taken more 4 years to come out of it. Aberdeen is soley reliant on oil jobs in center off city, this will have knock-on effect through out Scotland. SNP with out doubt based it's argument on oil, what other income would it based it's income on to support Scotland. Whisky is up and down, only survives on low tax, if we came independent tax would all go up to pay for it on fragile economy.

**Rheghead** · 23-Dec-14, 09:55

Originally Posted by Scout

I'm amazed you can predict the future so only two years then all perfect. Remember the recession? had taken more 4 years to come out of it. Aberdeen is soley reliant on oil jobs in center off city, this will have knock-on effect through out Scotland. SNP with out doubt based it's argument on oil, what other income would it based it's income on to support Scotland. Whisky is up and down, only survives on low tax, if we came independent tax would all go up to pay for it on fragile economy.

Gosh! horror! Calamity!

We must be the only small nation that can't support itself even with oodles of oil left in the North sea. Here is the truth, we are flippin brainwashed into thinking we are too small, too weak and too drunk to help ourselves.

I'm ashamed of that and I feel sorry that you believe it too.

**Scout** · 23-Dec-14, 10:23

Originally Posted by Rheghead

Gosh! horror! Calamity!

We must be the only small nation that can't support itself even with oodles of oil left in the North sea. Here is the truth, we are flippin brainwashed into thinking we are too small, too weak and too drunk to help ourselves.

I'm ashamed of that and I feel sorry that you believe it too.

This may help suggest why not all would work out ok http://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2014/...-three-charts/

**rob murray** · 23-Dec-14, 15:51

Originally Posted by Better Out Than In

I was told that oil prices are primarily low due to price manipulation between the big players not market forces as a fight back against USA shale oil. Arab countries can recover oil at a few $ a barrel which is less than fracked shale and much less than deep water offshore. So they can afford to see price drop more than the USA and North sea is even more vulnerable. So to use oil, whose price is controlled by others, as a means to bank rolling Scottish independence was always a high risk strategy. I agree with comments - we have been saved from very early ruin by the skin of our teeth.

Low oil prices does not just affect direct workers - for example half built vessels are still on their chock being mothballed as not longer market viable.

Regards wave energy - the amount of money invested (wasted?) in developing this technology is a small fraction compared to what has been spent on fast breeder and Dounreay decommissioning. Long term it is a viable energy source and green, it just needs the right incentives and support to kick off. However, whilst land lubbers might like the idea of marine energy more than land renewables , it does interferes with other marine users.

Norway. Very early on Norway took the decision not to spend their oil revenues but to invest it and then only spend the interest (put simply). So Norway's home economy is not directly affected by oil prices even though an oil economy. It is more affected by international markets - which do respond to oil prices but dampened and slower. They also have very cheap hydro power and cause this to make up energy deficits.

Very well put, clear and truthful, we cant turn back time, the Norwegians were in a position years back to take the decision to accumulate an oil fund, we would have to have started from scratch with depleting resources and price volatility : a large percentage of the population were brainwashed into thinking that oil prices would be $113 a barrel and hence we could be "free" and create a more just Scotland ( nothing wrong with aspiring for a more just socially inclusive Scotland..how will it be paid for ? ) and that Scotland was the "Saudi Arabia" of renewables...both courtsey of Alex Salmond and both massively, massively wrong. Salmon had a high risk strategy, to high to soon.

**Rheghead** · 23-Dec-14, 21:56

Originally Posted by Scout

This may help suggest why not all would work out ok http://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2014/...-three-charts/

That is laughable when unionist parties have been recently discussing an oil fund for the whole of the UK because of the fall in oil prices. You know, people on the No side have to agree or not whether the oil is a good thing or not and stop squeezing the last bit of propaganda out of this slump in oil prices.

**sids** · 23-Dec-14, 22:19

Originally Posted by Rheghead

You know, people on the No side have to agree or not whether the oil is a good thing or not and stop squeezing the last bit of propaganda out of this slump in oil prices.

No they don't.