Long-term thinking

Everyone agrees that an oil fund would be a good idea, in principle. But an oil fund is something to build over many decades, to leave something for our children and theirs. The occasional fluctuation in price, month to month, is irrelevant. If only we could somehow form some idea of what oil prices are likely to do, long term. How on earth can we know what is going to happen, over decades, to the price of a vital, finite resource for which the modern world thirsts?

Update: as at 10 October 2013,  Brent Crude was trading at just over $111 a barrel. Check the current price here.

Peer pressure

Someone recently swore blind to me that "Lord" Foulkes' elevation to the peerage was the result of deliberate appointment rather than, as I'd assumed, the reluctant acceptance of some sort of "Who Do You Think You Are?" revelation of an unexpected aristocrat in his ancestral cupboard. I find that really, really hard to believe.

Against whom?

This is a video of the debate at Abertay University a couple of weeks ago where there was a huge swing to Yes amongst the audience after the debate. Frankly, you can see why. There's a brilliant exchange at 54m00s onwards. One student says she's worried: "What if Scotland was to get invaded by, I don't know, Iraq or Afghanistan?". She says we'd be too wee to fight the invader off. Everyone, as seems to be de rigeur these days, listens respectfully to the baloney. However, the unrestrained relief and joy of the audience is palpable when the next questioner (who sounds American but is a first year student and who can't have planned his contribution) can't help himself and says:

"A few points. I want, not to be personal or anything, but maybe just to say something about the defence issue that just came up. [Pause]. In what world would any country decide to attack Scotland? [Laughter] [Applause]. The only country that would attack Scotland [Pause]. Is England. [Laughter] Any country that attacked Scotland, other than England, would be attacked. [Pause] By England. [Pause] And America. And France. And Germany. And Norway. And, I'm pretty sure, quite a few other countries. So, the issue of defence is non-existent."

It's impossible to put it more clearly. Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings. Do watch Stuart Hosie though as he's very good too.

In re GB v EU (part 2)

The proposed bankers' bonus cap is not the only threat that the plucky Chancellor is going to law to see off. Brussels bureaucrats plan to inflict yet another tax on the hard pressed, hard working families of Great Britain. The plan is to introduce a "financial transaction tax".

Q: Good grief! A tax on every transaction. That'll be ruinous won't it? We already pay vat at 20%. What rate are the idiots proposing?
A: A range. Between 0.01% and 0.1%.
[Pause]
Q: Well, ok, but still. Why should I have to pay the bloated, bungling Brussels bureaucrats even a penny?
A: You won't.
Q: What?
A: There's an exemption for the day-to-day financial activities of citizens.
[Pause]
Q: Ah yes, but what about the day-to-day financial activities of our hard-pressed businesses, smart arse?
A: They're exempt too.
Q: What?
A: They're exempt too.
Q: How do you mean?
A: They're exempt too.
[Pause]
Q: Well, ok, but what about non-day-to-day transactions. What about business investment, banking activities in the context of raising capital?
A: They're exempt too.
[Pause]
Q: Right. What about businesses that are in trouble and are trying to save themselves and the jobs of all those who work in them? What about transactions carried out as part of restructuring operations?
A: They're exempt too.
Q: Oh ffs. Really?
A: Yes. Would you like me to explain what it does apply to?
Q: That'd be good, yes.
A: Essentially, not the real economy but to the exchange of shares, bonds and derivative contracts.
Q: Well, ok. But what's the point?
A: The revenue raised would be between €16.4bn and €43.4bn per year, or 0.13% to 0.35% of GDP. If the tax rate is increased to 0.1%, total estimated revenues would be between €73.3bn and €433.9bn.
Q: Well, on reflection, that all sounds ok. I don't think a 0.01% tax is going to put anyone off doing anything, ever. Certainly not a bond trader. Why's it not happening again?
A: Because the UK is going to law to stop it.

In re GB v EU (part 1)

As we all know, the culture of bonuses was blamed for encouraging excessive risk-taking amongst bankers. The EU voted 26 to 1 to cap bankers' bonuses. The "cap" will ensure that bonuses are slashed to a swingeing...err...100% of salary. That'll work. Who can imagine a banker deciding to take a risk simply to double his salary?

Anyway, no need to guess who the "1" was? More bankers earn over £1m in the UK than everywhere else in the EU COMBINED. So, to protect this vital interest, the United Kingdom government is going to court.

The expected cost to the tax payer in legal fees is £1m.

It's not all about identity. But if it was...

I don't normally care about this kind of thing but thought it's interesting. The reason it's interesting is the often-made claim that lots of people are comfortable being Scottish AND British. Firstly, no doubt they are. So am I. But the arguments being made are grown-up ones about governance, social justice and economic prosperity, not flags, and if you can be Scottish and British in a British state (which you can) you must be able to be Scottish and British in a Scottish state. Like you could be Norwegian and Scandinavian both before and after Norwegian independence from Sweden. I feel more of an affinity with someone from Dublin than someone from France (or, for that matter Norway or the US) but so what?

But anyway, and in any event, the next part of the 2011 census results are out today. Given the choice, 62% described themselves as "Scottish only". Just 18% said "Scottish and British". As I say, doesn't matter to me but I'll bear it in mind next time the point is taken.

Again with the oil

A report from the industry body, Oil & Gas UK, contains so much detailed, independent, positive analysis that even the Telegraph says that " the bullish assessment will raise the profile and importance of North Sea oil and gas in the independence debate and provide [Yes Scotland] with more economic leverage [and that].. the fresh lease of life projected in today's analysis provides a considerable boost".

Where to start?

• North Sea investment this year will be the biggest and most extensive for 30 years.

• Producers say they are ready to embark on the biggest exploration programme for six years.