The Dirty Independence Question

[Comfy Bean]

As you've failed to notice yourself, I'm going to have to point out that the countries I've listed had extremely good reasons to want to throw off discriminatory imperial overlords.

I had noticed. My point was and remains that across the globe many countries have gained independence and very few have wished to return. That is the point I was attempting to make. Nothing more, nothing less.

I have been deliberately vague using " many " and " few " in an attempt to prevent you from mocking my underlying point that it " normally " works out ok by picking silly holes in the exact numbers. I am sure you will still manage to sweep this under the carpet or hopefully just ignore it unless you agree of course !?!

[Comfy Bean]

And Scotland " could " turn into a crock of shite compared to now.

Guess what the economic evidence strongly suggests?

For many people and their kids Scotland already HAS turned into a crock of shit. I previously quoted a fella from Oxfam and his concerns at that alarming rise on food bank dependency in Scotland ( think you failed to comment on it ). The next round of Welfare and disability cuts ( defended by Darling ) will drive many even deeper into the shit.

They don`t need evidence as they live it every day while reading about Trident, house of lords, fancy train sets to get in and out of London 10 mins quicker etc.

I`ve said before more than once that independence will bring difficult times and decisions but also that there could be consequences of voting NO.

Rather than turning into a " crock of shit " do you not accept that peoples lives could be improved with independence ?

[Comfy Bean]

With me not being an expert on european law or the owner of a crystal ball, I admit that I struggled to understand the response to my point that Scotland are already members. Is anyone willing to advise me that it is 100% certain that Scotland will not be accepted into the EU - that we are currently in. I said in my original post that I thought Spain could be a bit twitchy but for the wrong reasons.

Edited August 29, 2014 by comfortablynumb1910

[Comfy Bean]

No worries man.

Whatever the result I just hope we don't end up a bitter and divided nation. The Scottish parliament will have to ensure we come together.

I agree mate. I honestly believe we will be ok.The idiots on both sides will find something else to fight about and we will all get on with our lives.

[Comfy Bean]

And now we have the SNP trying to claim that anyone who disagrees with anyone of their many policies without substance is a tory by default ... and these wonderful social justice democrats will lead Scotland to the promised land via lies to their own supporters, deception to Scotland, no centre-left policies, no social justice policies, and right-of-tories economic policies.

We have " discussed " on here the funds diverted by the SNP to prevent the financial impact of the bedroom tax. Do you realise who is affected by it ? We also had some detail on the council tax reduction scheme and how the same scheme was rolled out to the 32 Scottish Councils as there were concerns at the Scottish Govt that the model down South was to complicated as you all have different systems and this could mean people moving area missing out on much needed help. I posted a link to the work being done to upgrade housing in the Ayrshire mining villages to help those suffering in fuel poverty. Millions was spent insulating their homes.

Of course we have many many problems but you cannot just choose to ignore these and many more examples and say what you are saying there.

My view is that an iScotland would attempt to tackle social injustice. Westminster could not give a fack and sadly they will prove me right whatever party wins the next westminster election.

[Comfy Bean]

And the video editors will inherit the earth iScotland (while the lied-to have to live in it).

The wonderful editing of the truth by the honest men of integrity on the yes side.

Perhaps find yourself the full interview, and correct the bullshit you're currently believing?

FFS mate.

I`m boring my self now. It may have been edited as most interviews of course are. If I can be specific, are you defending Darling here ?

There is more than enough on this version of him and also the guy interviewing him for me to be comfortable that what he is saying here is a whole lot different from the shite he was spouting on the tv on Monday. This is the leader of better together. This vote will affect millions of peoples lives. I`m concerned that what he is saying this week is NOT what he is saying with Dave and the boys behind the scenes. BT have made currency a huge issue and some people will vote based on how they understand it. He said on Monday that they should be concerned about their mortgages and pay as there will be no CU.

I`m assuming that you have listened to it. Is your honest view - There`s nothing to see here it`s been edited to make out that Darling was lying on Monday. He has never said there could well be a CU Lets just move on.

I hated the way he mocked Panama and laughed at Ireland and Iceland and I do not believe that there is any foul play affecting the view he is puting across in this video.

You didn`t comment at the time on the link to the article about the monies he receives for speaking at Dinners hosted by private health providers. Are you going with that being editing of the truth as well or are we just sweeping that part under the carpet....... again ?

[Comfy Bean]

.... are Scots really that numpty?

Latest poll shows no movement. Alex is wrong (just for a change) about momentum.

There was in fact alot of coverage that DID show poll movement today. I selected the one that mentions the Daily Mail as I`m sure we will agree that they are not likely to make these numbers up. It talks of a 4% " surge "

Edited just to annoy you : it actually mentions the word " momentum " in the headline

http://rt.com/uk/183608-scotland-independence-poll-increase/

Edited August 29, 2014 by comfortablynumb1910

[wee_insomniac]

http://inequalitybriefing.org/brief/briefing-43-the-poorest-regions-of-the-uk-are-the-poorest-in-northern-

Note: none of these are in Scotland... Can't be doing that bad from being part of the UK?

[eFestivals]

I had noticed. My point was and remains that across the globe many countries have gained independence and very few have wished to return. That is the point I was attempting to make. Nothing more, nothing less.

it's a non-argument ion favour of anything Scotland is doing.

In many cases, the independence they've sought and been exceedingly happy to have is the unionism that Scotland wishes to discard.

I have been deliberately vague using " many " and " few " in an attempt to prevent you from mocking my underlying point that it " normally " works out ok by picking silly holes in the exact numbers. I am sure you will still manage to sweep this under the carpet or hopefully just ignore it unless you agree of course !?!

What is "working out OK"??

Yes, any piece of territory can be successfully independent. Whether or not that independence is able to achieve what non-indy can is an entirely different thing.

There's an awful lot of evidence that points to iScotland being economically weaker, and little to suggest it will be economically stronger. That strongly suggests that iScotland will nto be able to de3liver on its economic promises.

Which is fine, if that's what people are happy to accept. But both you and I know that the yes vote would slump if there was certainty about the weak economics.

Meanwhile, Salmond talks bollocks to convince everyone they'll be significantly richer, when nothing of how he says they'll be richer stands up to scrutiny.

I put forwards exact facts for why I say an iScotland will be economically weaker; you've admitted that you're guessing the opposite on the basis of no facts and only what you hope.

And that's me sweeping things under the carpet, and that's you put forwards a solid argument based on facts, is it?

As you won't address anything with substance and instead offer only bluster, you are Alex Salmond and I claim my five pounds.

Edited August 30, 2014 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

Edited August 30, 2014 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

FFS mate.

I`m boring my self now. It may have been edited as most interviews of course are. If I can be specific, are you defending Darling here ?

Nope, i'm merely pointing out that he did not say what yes-ers claim he said.

He said (paraphrased) that the best thing for Scotland is CU, which it already has.

[eFestivals]

There was in fact alot of coverage that DID show poll movement today. I selected the one that mentions the Daily Mail as I`m sure we will agree that they are not likely to make these numbers up. It talks of a 4% " surge "

Edited just to annoy you : it actually mentions the word " momentum " in the headline

http://rt.com/uk/183608-scotland-independence-poll-increase/

I'm loving that you're using Salmond's mate Putin's mouuthpiece for your info. ... that great supporter of Ukrainian indu.

That's the poll I'm talking about. Look at all of the polls by that same org, and then tell me again there's momentum.

[LJS]

Beautiful poll interpretation, Neil.

6% no lead is no chahe from 10%lead you are always banging on about.

I smell momentum!

[eFestivals]

Its pretty hard to see any meaningful momentum in all the polls. The differences are methodologies and margin of error.

http://whatscotlandthinks.org/questions/should-scotland-be-an-independent-country-1#line

Survation - who did this latest poll - had closer margins in previous polls. The change from their last poll is minimal.

The gap has closed slowly over many months, but there's no sign of enough momentum in the polls to make a win.

There's only hope, the same hope that has wrongly been claiming big signs of winning momentum for all of the last year.

Your biggest hope is within the idea that every single poll is wildly wrong, and not with the idea this latest shows momentum.

[Comfy Bean]

Nope, i'm merely pointing out that he did not say what yes-ers claim he said.

He said (paraphrased) that the best thing for Scotland is CU, which it already has.

Fair enough. We disagree. I`m concerned that he is mis-leading people ( at best ) who are looking to understand the CU situation as they look to cast their vote. I also believe he is mis-leading the Scottish voters ( at best ) on the NHS. I am not bothering posting the link again - for the 3rd time - that shows his financial relationship with private health providers. His own party are taking a different line than he is on the NHS. If you are comfortable with Darlings conduct then that is up to you.

He seems to despise the idea of little countries trying to make a go of it themselves. I`ve said enough about his remarks on Panama, Iceland, Ireland. He is obviously a wave ruling empire kinda guy.

I watched a video on Youtube earlier from through the week. I`m not bothering with the link. It`s at the BT tour of 100 towns and the guy on the stage hosting the event is going on about " what will be in your pocket - groats " and suggests that the shop down the road will have to change its name to " Groatland ". I can only hope that as the weeks pass more and more people will see through that kind of crap.

Edited to add : If anyone wants to see the clip I will post it.

Edited August 30, 2014 by comfortablynumb1910

[Comfy Bean]

Neil I`m not sure why you mentioned the olympics ?

Since you did heres my own personal view on it. The UK tax payer contributed towards the cost of the London Olympics. I have no problem with that as I believe that sport and physical education feed into our overall health agenda. The Uk tax payer contributed towards the Manchester Commonwealth Games. I have no problem with that for the reasons stated. One of the main reasons it didn`t go to Sheffield was because they were to up front about saying they would need help from the UK tax payer.

The Glasgow Commonwealth games were not funded by the UK taxpayer.

[Comfy Bean]

To you Food banks may be the latest " Charity fashion ". I honestly think it is an utter disgrace that they have to exist. I have accepted on here that I am taking a bit of a leaf of faith with this so there really is no need to take the piss. How you believe that everything can be so set in stone is beyond me. Life just isn`t like that. You seem to be 100% certain that Scotland will turn into a crock of shit and this won`t happen and that won`t happen and that terrible oil burden may be over estimated by a trillion barrels here or there. I BELIEVE that an Independent Scottish Government ( Labour or SNP ) will ATTEMPT to tackle social injustice. I see no evidence that Dave and the gang give a flying fork about that or the growing wealth gap and Milliband offers nothing in opposition. Meanwhile " our" debt grows and grows.

I reckon that the sky will not fall in over currency and that Scotland is a country who wants to be in Europe and welcomes immigrants so although there will be many many technical problems to overcome it`s nothing we as a people cannot handle.

[Comfy Bean]

I'm loving that you're using Salmond's mate Putin's mouuthpiece for your info. ... that great supporter of Ukrainian indu.

That's the poll I'm talking about. Look at all of the polls by that same org, and then tell me again there's momentum.

I did read that Dave is hoping that Russia may put in a word for BT in the same way he managed to get Obama and a few others to drop it accidently into conversation but beyond that I don`t know what you mean here. There were loads of stories on it yesterday saying the same thing so I linked to the one that quoted the daily mail as I thought you would be less likely to take the piss as they are not known as lovers of Salmond. I clearly made a joke out of the fact it had " momentum " in its headline but I think you were whooooooshed by that !

My reading of it is that in like for like polls taken after the 2 debates YES has gained ground. Still along way to go and you know what I think the outcome will be. Maybe just maybe though................

Anywayz, I`m off to the boozer. Have a nice weekend y`all.

[eFestivals]

Fair enough. We disagree. I`m concerned that he is mis-leading people ( at best ) who are looking to understand the CU situation as they look to cast their vote.

no, that would be the yes-ers, who mis-use Darling's words out of their full content. You know, like you just did.

Meanwhile you've already admitted to not even trying to understand the CU situation, so that puts you in no position to comment on Darling.

I also believe he is mis-leading the Scottish voters ( at best ) on the NHS.

PMSL - from a yes-er?

I am not bothering posting the link again - for the 3rd time - that shows his financial relationship with private health providers.

He's given one paid speech from what i've seen claimed by yes-ers elsewhere.

Famous people give paid speeches all the time. The point is much more about them being famous and them collecting on their fame, than it is about cosying up to a company or the words they speak.

And the whole thing is publicly declared.

Meanwhile, Salmond has been hiding from the Scottish public the meetings he's had with Murdoch that the Scottish goivt has funded.

But it's just Westminster that can be corrupt, yeah?

His own party are taking a different line than he is on the NHS. If you are comfortable with Darlings conduct then that is up to you.

So what you're saying is that the indy ref isn't about Salmond or even Scotland, but it's about Darling and England?

He seems to despise the idea of little countries trying to make a go of it themselves. I`ve said enough about his remarks on Panama, Iceland, Ireland. He is obviously a wave ruling empire kinda guy.

Oh FFS.... so Darling isn't allowed to demonstrate via comparisons how the policies championed by the indy campaign pan out, but Salmond should be fully believed when he says just on the basis that both have oil that iScotland will be as prosperous as Norway?

Anyone might think you want it all your own way.

I watched a video on Youtube earlier from through the week. I`m not bothering with the link. It`s at the BT tour of 100 towns and the guy on the stage hosting the event is going on about " what will be in your pocket - groats " and suggests that the shop down the road will have to change its name to " Groatland ". I can only hope that as the weeks pass more and more people will see through that kind of crap.

I'm guessing that the irony he was using to say that iScotland will have its own currency - something anyone with half a brain or more already knows - was being lost on you.

In case its passed you by, an iScotland with its own currency has just 8% support in Scotland as the preferred option.

So Scotland might vote indy and get what 92% of the population don't want, far worse than any democratic deficit at Westminster. And worse than just that, your country's leader has lied repeatedly about it.

[eFestivals]

Neil I`m not sure why you mentioned the olympics ?

Since you did heres my own personal view on it. The UK tax payer contributed towards the cost of the London Olympics. I have no problem with that as I believe that sport and physical education feed into our overall health agenda. The Uk tax payer contributed towards the Manchester Commonwealth Games. I have no problem with that for the reasons stated. One of the main reasons it didn`t go to Sheffield was because they were to up front about saying they would need help from the UK tax payer.

The Glasgow Commonwealth games were not funded by the UK taxpayer.

I mentioned the Olympics because you mentioned "fancy train sets". Both things get claimed as something that Scotland has/is funded/funding by yes-ers as a demonstration for how unfair Westminster is to Scotland.

And yet...

1. The funding of those thing by Scotland does not come out of the block grant - so Scotland notices nothing of anything that it might be paying towards those things.

2. The funding of those things is excluded from the GERS figures that Alex compiles, and so the worse-than-rUK economic situation that Scotland has is not being impacted by those things, and neither is there a post-indy financial bonus to come to Scotland as a result of those things.

3. There's a claim from Scotland that not enough is done to tackle poverty in Scotland. Perhaps that's because Scotland decided to spend £1Bn of its own money on a 2 week failed referendum rally rather than tackle poverty?

(the widespread complaints about the CW Games spend has only happened after it failed to give yes a boost. Funny that ).

[eFestivals]

To you Food banks may be the latest " Charity fashion ". I honestly think it is an utter disgrace that they have to exist.

I'm not happy about them either. But that doesn't mean I pretend they're different to what they are.

They started around 50 years ago, and have since spread all around the world. Including all around the EU, showing that nothing of their existence is anything about Westminster.

You seem to be 100% certain that Scotland will turn into a crock of shit and this won`t happen and that won`t happen and that terrible oil burden may be over estimated by a trillion barrels here or there.

I'm certain that iScotland's economic situation will be worse than now, yes. That's because I look at the facts rather than go with the sort of no-knowledges guesses you've admitted to doing.

1. establishing a new currency is massively expensive. It'll gobble up the equivalent of at least one year's NHS funding, for example.

2. Scotland will lose (as a annual average) around £3-5Bn of its GERS currently claimed tax revenue via the necessary relocation of financial services that are currently located within Scotland.

3. Some other companies will relocate too (tho not necessarily before iDay. Plans will need to fit company investment cycles). This is because 70% of Scottish exports go to the rUK market, and that market will certainly shrink post-indy (down to around 30% eventually is what tends to be the standard view) without any guarantee of new replacement markets.

4. Alex has never once got the oil revenues correct, he's always massively over-estimated them. And there's very good reasons why Alex has offered no meaningful future economic plans for iScotland; even he doesn't think he could get away with firming his bullshit up (tho he does think that with 30+ years of history he can successfully keep spinning the oil myth).

5. Delivering the current levels of services without tax increases will be impossible even if Alex's claimed oil revenues actually happened - and that's before getting onto his claims of greater public spending AND and oil fund also to come out of that over-estimated oil revenue.

I BELIEVE that an Independent Scottish Government ( Labour or SNP ) will ATTEMPT to tackle social injustice.

that will only happen if iScotland votes itself higher taxes.

Given that Alex is claiming that it won't need to, that it'll be the land of milk and honey - because he knows that's the only way he can win, that Scotland won't happily pay higher taxes - then what do you REALLY think the chances of that actually is?

I see no evidence that Dave and the gang give a flying fork about that or the growing wealth gap and Milliband offers nothing in opposition. Meanwhile " our" debt grows and grows.

And will continue to grow post-indy, at an even faster rate within iScotland because iScotland has a larger deficit than rUK (by Alex's own GERS figures, and even after he's manipulated them to make Scotland look financially better than the reality will actually be.

It makes me laugh when yes-ers concentrate on UK debt. Yes, it's stupidly high and hugely increasing, but the fact of voting yes does nothing to address any of the problems. Within Scotland, it makes things worse than now.

Just as the tories are reducing the deficit, iScotland will have to cut its even-greater deficit too - which means cuts in services, or tax increases.

I reckon that the sky will not fall in over currency and that Scotland is a country who wants to be in Europe and welcomes immigrants so although there will be many many technical problems to overcome it`s nothing we as a people cannot handle.

The sky won't fall in over currency, but the expense of establishing a new one will be HUGE and will divert money from other things.

Scotland is less keen on immigration than rUK (just check that recent social attitudes survey). The only reason that immigration is less of a big issue in Scotland is because of its current much-lower immigration than rUK. If iScotland has immigration at rUK levels, you'll end up with something like UKIP but better supported.

Edited August 31, 2014 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

I did read that Dave is hoping that Russia may put in a word for BT in the same way he managed to get Obama and a few others to drop it accidently into conversation

So what you're saying (at least, what yes-ers say) is that every other world leader hates Dave (and hates the UK too, cos they all will love iScotland more), and yet they all do his bidding?

If you were paying attention you'd already know that Obama is a 100% committed unionist without any intervention by anyone - as proven by him stating very clearly that there can never be any withdrawal by any part of the USA's own union (several states are currently agitating to leave).

but beyond that I don`t know what you mean here. There were loads of stories on it yesterday saying the same thing so I linked to the one that quoted the daily mail as I thought you would be less likely to take the piss as they are not known as lovers of Salmond.

yes, the poll does show a very small increase in yes support compared to the last poll that Survation did. I've said as much above.

But it is also a LOWER result than plenty of other previous Survation polls.

So what the Survation polls show is some minor jigging around (most probably due only to the margin of error as the changes are within that), and not meaningful momentum.

You can check those facts for yourself, if you ever actually reference the facts?

The headlines that papers choose to use are about selling newspapers.

My reading of it is that in like for like polls taken after the 2 debates YES has gained ground.

there's only been this one poll so far after the 2nd debate, so you're reverting to guesses and hope and not facts ... again.

(I'm hugely amused that i'm following things in Scotland better than people like you are )

As i've pointed out, the movement is very minimal (for polls by the same company*), and within the margin of error.

(* you can't really compare against polls by different companies, because they are each using different methodologies to attempt to get demographically-accurate result. Because there's no previous indyref to compare against, they're all floundering a little on what is the right methodology).

If following polls by other companies all come in with an increase for yes, then i'll be happy to agree that they show genuine movement.

(I try to be consistent; there were 4 polls that followed the 1st debate which each showed a small fall in support for indy, and I did claim that as momentum [which I'll agree does now look to be a wrong claim by me]. I didn't shoot my mouth off from just one poll).

Generally with a referendum, if the 'change' side is not in the lead by the start of the last month then the support for the 'change' side starts to fall away. It'll be interesting to see whether that holds true in Scotland via what the remaining polls say.

Still along way to go and you know what I think the outcome will be. Maybe just maybe though................

And maybe your hopes will turn out right. I'm certainly thinking right now that now is the best position that yes has been in.

But it's still the case that there's not a single thing to suggest a yes victory outside of hope.

As I said above to LJS, yes's best hope of a victory comes from the idea that all of the polling companies have screwed up their methodologies because its new ground for them - but it's also worth bearing in mind that it's in the interests of every single one of them to be right with their polling. Their very futures depend on it.

Edited August 31, 2014 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

Scotland is less keen on immigration than rUK (just check that recent social attitudes survey). The only reason that immigration is less of a big issue in Scotland is because of its current much-lower immigration than rUK. If iScotland has immigration at rUK levels, you'll end up with something like UKIP but better supported.

Some links to back these words of mine up, that prove your guess wrong.

http://whatscotlandthinks.org/questions/do-you-think-the-number-of-immigrants-to-britain-should-be-increased-remain-the

(notice that a huge majority is against increased immigration).

And from this BBC article from Feb 2014

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-26020982

Yes, that shows Scotland is currently a little less immigrant-hostile than rUK - but that's an attitude Scotland has when immigration to Scotland is massively less (about one quarter of) the proportional immigration rate to the UK as a whole.

I can't see from those numbers how Scotland would have better attitudes than the UK if it had the same proportional level of immigration.

Edited August 31, 2014 by eFestivals

[LJS]

I mentioned the Olympics because you mentioned "fancy train sets". Both things get claimed as something that Scotland has/is funded/funding by yes-ers as a demonstration for how unfair Westminster is to Scotland.

And yet...

1. The funding of those thing by Scotland does not come out of the block grant - so Scotland notices nothing of anything that it might be paying towards those things.

2. The funding of those things is excluded from the GERS figures that Alex compiles, and so the worse-than-rUK economic situation that Scotland has is not being impacted by those things, and neither is there a post-indy financial bonus to come to Scotland as a result of those things.

3. There's a claim from Scotland that not enough is done to tackle poverty in Scotland. Perhaps that's because Scotland decided to spend £1Bn of its own money on a 2 week failed referendum rally rather than tackle poverty?

(the widespread complaints about the CW Games spend has only happened after it failed to give yes a boost. Funny that ).

So, none of my taxes went towards the Olympics? & none of them will go towards HS2? & I won't be paying a penny towards all the lovely infrastructure expenditure on London?

& I think you 'll find it was under a Labour government that we decided to bid for the commy games.

& I have not heard much griping about it.

[LJS]

I'm not happy about them either. But that doesn't mean I pretend they're different to what they are.

They started around 50 years ago, and have since spread all around the world. Including all around the EU, showing that nothing of their existence is anything about Westminster.

I'm certain that iScotland's economic situation will be worse than now, yes. That's because I look at the facts rather than go with the sort of no-knowledges guesses you've admitted to doing.

1. establishing a new currency is massively expensive. It'll gobble up the equivalent of at least one year's NHS funding, for example.

2. Scotland will lose (as a annual average) around £3-5Bn of its GERS currently claimed tax revenue via the necessary relocation of financial services that are currently located within Scotland.

3. Some other companies will relocate too (tho not necessarily before iDay. Plans will need to fit company investment cycles). This is because 70% of Scottish exports go to the rUK market, and that market will certainly shrink post-indy (down to around 30% eventually is what tends to be the standard view) without any guarantee of new replacement markets.

4. Alex has never once got the oil revenues correct, he's always massively over-estimated them. And there's very good reasons why Alex has offered no meaningful future economic plans for iScotland; even he doesn't think he could get away with firming his bullshit up (tho he does think that with 30+ years of history he can successfully keep spinning the oil myth).

5. Delivering the current levels of services without tax increases will be impossible even if Alex's claimed oil revenues actually happened - and that's before getting onto his claims of greater public spending AND and oil fund also to come out of that over-estimated oil revenue.

that will only happen if iScotland votes itself higher taxes.

Given that Alex is claiming that it won't need to, that it'll be the land of milk and honey - because he knows that's the only way he can win, that Scotland won't happily pay higher taxes - then what do you REALLY think the chances of that actually is?

And will continue to grow post-indy, at an even faster rate within iScotland because iScotland has a larger deficit than rUK (by Alex's own GERS figures, and even after he's manipulated them to make Scotland look financially better than the reality will actually be.

It makes me laugh when yes-ers concentrate on UK debt. Yes, it's stupidly high and hugely increasing, but the fact of voting yes does nothing to address any of the problems. Within Scotland, it makes things worse than now.

Just as the tories are reducing the deficit, iScotland will have to cut its even-greater deficit too - which means cuts in services, or tax increases.

The sky won't fall in over currency, but the expense of establishing a new one will be HUGE and will divert money from other things.

Scotland is less keen on immigration than rUK (just check that recent social attitudes survey). The only reason that immigration is less of a big issue in Scotland is because of its current much-lower immigration than rUK. If iScotland has immigration at rUK levels, you'll end up with something like UKIP but better supported.

It's Neil's favourite game ...pick a number out the air, treble it, add the number you first thought of & stick a Bn on the end & claim that is how much we will be worse off.