|
|
|
|
|
by sparkzilla
4300 days ago
|
|
It can get a lot worse. The key word in your post is "arguably". The plan is to use oil money that may or may not exist to give more and more freebies to those in government jobs or on welfare. If there is less oil money than expected, where will the money come from? More debt and higher taxes. Not a good environment for any business. The banks have already started moving their head offices and other companies will follow. the market is too small and the risks too high. The corporation tax cut is window dressing. It doesn't matter to a company if they get less tax if there is political instability, and anyway the costs of dealing with a different currency and cross-border transactions alone will drive up costs. You talk of guarantees and bets in the same sentence. Who is making these the guarantees? I haven't seen any realistic pro-business plans on offer. While you may place your bets, many people will just walk away from the table. |
|
"The banks have already started moving their head offices..." Which banks, sorry? Do you mean RBS (who talked about how they may or may not move their registered office to London leaving their operations intact in Scotland) or Lloyd's (already headquartered in London)? If not these, then which?
There's maybe legit reasons to think about voting "No" - you needn't muddy the waters by just simply making things up and talking nonsense.
Remember you're talking to fairly smart people on HN so the FUD is unlikely to hold much water here, save it for Facebook.