The whole world is shrinking, larger and larger countries joining to create benefits, the UK is powerful from historic rights and the fact London pulls hard in the world of finance. If Scotland moved on, they'd have oil for a bit and fold, in England I assume we'd be screwed a bit harder for a bit for fossil.fuels then not really notice in day to day life.
It would make a difference rlto.the scots, less to.those south of the border.

Given a choice, if I was muzzish and lived in muzzland then id want muzzians to run rule me, so the question for me is this:

Are the Scottish part of the UK and happy to be Scottish as part of one of the greatest nations the worlds ever seen or are they Scottish and wanting to go their own way, play braveheart if you like.
I'd like whats best, if Scotland need to go then go... But they should and must do.it alone. No tagging onto the pound, no.shared resource, just leave and stand alone.

Mmm, bit of all over the place there fella. Kind of get what you mean. Scotland can't just *go* as you put it. Doesn't quite work like that. Braveheart?? just do it!!?

As I said earlier some ill thought out naive thoughts. Not all Scots want to go down this road of independence. Coming across as being the main part of the UK powerforce doesn't exactly *do it* for some. Believe it or not most in my neck of the woods are quite happy being part of the UK.

Coming across as arsey & telling "some" Scots what they can or cannot use for currency, doesn't fill them with the best thoughts. I fear you're taking things a bit personally.

We will all have to wait for the count, literally.
For now try not to take things too personally.

It's not about the UK telling an independent Scotland what they can and can't use for currency, it's about the nationalists not getting to dictate to the UK that an independent Scotland WILL use the pound and be part of a mythical currency union. As I've already said, what on earth is the point of wasting countless billions on splitting from the UK if we continue to allow them to be in control of the most important element of a country, the economy?

If you own a part share in a house with someone and sell or in this case , give your share to them, you no longer get to use the house as security on a loan but the SNP seem to think you can.

You've missed my point A, I never mentioned the UK. What ever currency Scotland will use, will not be dictated by English. Some view this as ammunition. Now the SNP is another story, there are things I totally disagree with, but that's a different story.

With respect jimboy, you did mention the UK in your post, both directly and in inference, after all the question is not whether Scotland will be independent from Germany, is it?. And this is NOT about being dictated to by "the English", the nationalist plan is to dictate to the UK that we will use their currency - and currency has value which can go up or down dependent upon how the economies of the countries using it perform. Bad decisions made by an independent Scotland trading in the pound could have an adverse affect upon the remaining UK, why should they stand for that? And why would an independent Scotland expect the remaining UK to act to protect the interests of Scotland, a competitor on international markets, employment etc?

Ah yes A I did mention UK but not when I was referring to the currency bit if you get my drift. Simply put, an Englishman telling some Scots what they can or can't do is not going to help. Making myself more clearer.....encourage more yes votes & nudge some of the don't knows.

Perhaps a bit simplistic but there you have it. Hope that's a bit clearer A.

Just to add I wasn't going into any detail about the currency good bad or indifferent, just a simple swing to the yes camp. Really hope you get my drift.

Hitler! Be serious man.

You clearly don't understand what this is about.

We are not voting for anyone or a political party.
We are voting to decide - "Should Scotland be an independent country"

If Scotland votes YES, Alex Salmond doesn't become Leader of an Independent Scotland. We will still have elections to decide which political party gets into Government.

You are all fixated with Alex Salmond.
The YES Camp is not just SNP supporters there are Labour, Lib-Dems, Greens and Tories who want Independence.
I'm not an SNP supporter or voter.

Good question Jim.

From previous and current experience the majority do not.

Reluctant to lose the last little pieces of an Empire?

Ach can't resist one last stab before bed. Obviously there are different takes on this subject, but I'm a bit surprised how "some" have totally taken their own view on this & nothing else, I except that this is their thoughts but there are others like myself have a more holistic view & although I've stated I'm fine in the UK I've also thrown in what others around me are thinking.

I don't expect my views will be echoed by everyone, but I've tried to keep an open mind. What ever way the vote goes, politically things will not be the same in the UK I fear unrest & upheaval, one way or another the man in the street will pay the price.

Right off to Germany...sorry bed I mean...

Well said Jim. I'm not totally convinced by either side yet.

I'm interested that there seems to be - on both the Scottish and English side of the fence - some expression of the kind of cartoon "Auld enemy" thing. I'd also be interested to hear the views of Welsh, Northern Irish and indeed other nationalities without historic axes to grind.
One problem it seems to me is that although Alex Salmond and the SNP are not the only purveyors of Scottish independence, they are the ones trying to build a cogent case for it and - in my view - not really succeeding. If he can't make a convincing case when it's the entire raison d'être for his party, then I'm not sure anyone else will do better. I absolutely understand that some Scottish people resent that decisions affecting them are made a long way away in a "different country" by people who they feel don't really care about their best interests. But is that any less true of Yorkshire or Dorset?
Almost all English people I know are against this brand of independence, but not for any kind of petty reasons of historic enmity or somehow wanting to punish Scotland by saying "And we'll have THAT back too. And don't think you'll be using our currency, and..." It's really not like that, it's better thought through and people just aren't convinced it will benefit either side.

Although this is a bit of a ramble, I'll add one further point: much has been made of how strong the Scottish identity is and it's true. Wales, too has a recognisable brand and culture, whereas England really doesn't. Unless you count fat, pissed, bald, tattooed blokes wrapped in flags of St George.
The point is that perhaps being a part of the UK has strengthened the differentiation between the "other nations" and England?

One aspect that may be a concern to all sides in this debate is the timetable should a yes vote be successful. From what I have read it seems that it would be a least 2 years of uncertainty before any party would end up in government and we would have all the wrangling and horse trading leading up to it.
2 years may not sound a long time to some but will be an eternity to others.
I am not sure there has been much discussion on how this transition would be managed and potential ramifications. I am not suggesting it's a reason to vote no but it is a concern.

There seems to have been a lot of talk (from the beginning of the debate a couple of years ago) about jobs going south of the Border - Azzura mentions it himself - but do people really think that an independent Scotland will cease to have, for example, Government agencies to provide employment?

There will be a Scottish version of everything we have now and even if the politicians are self-serving at least they'll be our self-serving ones, not trapped in far, far away land in the South East of England.

I think it's this latter point (the so-called Westminster Bubble) that drives a lot of people away from politics as a whole, not just Scottish people.

Well, Scotland will not be short of skilled politicians, civil servants, administrators, etc, if they choose to relocate back to an independent Scotland.

My worry would not be the establishment of an, er, establishment, but how the Scottish state will pay for its infrastructure.

The point that Westminster disgusts people is not necessarily hopeful for Scottish politics either though.

FREEEEEDOOOOMMMM!

The end.

I think most of this is also felt by most people north of Birmingham! I'd rather see a north of England + Scotland - or maybe a borough of London devolution would be better?

That might be the way forward, BM; if the rest of the UK builds a wall around London and says "You can keep your insane property prices and statistics-skewing salaries and congestion nightmare. Fine, you somehow generate lots of pretend money, but if you want any land or resources from outside then you can distribute your wealth a bit more".

I think it's interesting that a friend of mine voted Yes last time there was a referendum (1976?) - he said he now so pleased that they didn't win then. He's now firmly in the No camp.

For me it's a heart and head decision. I can understand why a Scot would want to be independent from an emotional point of view but, from a practical point of view, I simply can't see the benefit. I live there and have done for 10 years - if I thought it would improve things, I'd happily vote Yes but, frankly, I don't see the point. In fact, I can see things like being charged extra for delivery for living in the Highlands becoming baked in as Scotland will become "abroad". Same goes for lots of products and services.

Exactly, MRS! I can totally understand the emotional desire, but - to my mind - it would not be matched by any tangible advantages.

It already is for a lot of delivery companies

Too right but I can complain now citing lots of companies that don't charge. I see they will have the perfect excuse given a Yes vote. Currently I also boycott those that charge extra out of principle. I might not have that choice in future.

I think my concern would be what some eminent politicians and economists are describing as "Capital flight" in the wake of a yes vote. I can't now find the article i was reading but the one i've posted isn't a bad summary.........

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa/article-2731584/Capital-flight-risk-Yes.html

Yes it's the Daily Mail and therefore inherently and deeply wrong in all aspects.....but there's some good points there imo

With respect, it's not I who doesn't understand. This is NOT a single issue referendum, it is about the future of every aspect of Scottish society, matters which have for the entirety of modern hstory and beyond been inextricably linked to the United Kingdom and to simply say it's about whether Scotland should be an independent country does not even begin to cover the multitude of changes that would be in store and which those promoting the idea have never discussed or have simply shrugged aside with an "it'll be alright on the night" attitude which is frankly terrifying in its' lack of care.



Do you really think that the number of people employed to administrate 5 million citizens will come close to the amount of people employed to administrate 65 million citizens?

I could liken it tonthe seperation of 2 business units, at the start of the process lots of money will be spent on advice, legal services, contracts and negotiation. Some key points will be missed, some misinterpreted and some misrepresented. There will be an aim for a business as usual approach with underlying feelings of resentment and the other guy is screwing us over on x y and probably z.
Eventually the transitional agreements will expire and the unit that is leaving the group will find it's own way of doing things, its own style of management and will forget that it was ever part of a bigger entity. But to get there hurdles must be crossed, infrastructure, financing key roles being filled and strong direction to get through the plethora of tangled mess that will arrive...

Wonder what the royals think about it all as they do "own" it.

So should Scotland off by itself we who remain become the " not so United Kingdom of what's left"
Nominations for a new description or term?

The kingdom of London and surrounding slums?
Londonland
I still think anyone from Birmingham upwards should getvthe vote to cast off from the lopsided southern powerhouse. The cornish have had a go at it, as have the Welsh, most of the irish have - yet we have mass immigration, wonder whats so great about England that no one wants to be united with us yet is desperate to live here.....

It is clearly down to Scots to decide if they wish to leave the UK, if they decide to follow a romantic ideology then so be it.

Much the same as it will be for the outer islanders to decide if they would then wish to remain a part of the romantically independent new Scotland. I wonder if the pro Scottish independence movement will be happy if the cash cow of their new economy decides that Shetland would be better off (With it's fishing & Mineral rights) to leave Scotland.

Independence can swiftly turn into further division if any one element feels they would be better off without the rest. People should be careful what they wish for because the smaller you become the easier it is to break up even further.

There is already a fairly strong independence ( under the ambit of Norway ) movement for Orkney & Shetland ....

It isn't actually - it's down to the residents of Scotland - quite different. There's plenty of proud Scots who choose not to live there and won't get a vote. And there's plenty of non-Scots who will get to vote.

You are all welcome to visit the Independent State of Barnacle, once I can arrange visas for you all!