No, no and no. How about we vote instead to bring Ireland back on a proper federalist system of government? Nowadays religion is much less of an issue and both are developed nations. That would be nice, uh?

I think this pseudonationalism willing to split European nations miss the mark by a mile. A smaller, more local government is no guarantee you are going to be heard if politicians keep bowing down to the will of Brussels, or the Banksters, or whatever. In fact, the very essence of those movements is insincere since power-greedy politicians are just trying to advance their own cause.

Entirely up to the Scottish people. They are being bombarded with propaganda from both camps so they should be well informed to make what they believe to be the best decision for their country.

1. No
2. No
3. None (read nothing compared to impact it would have on Scotland)

I'm english but I can see some advantages to the split. The big negative is it will take so much time and resources dividing the two countries. There will be lots of negotiation on who gets what, how debts and assets are split up etc.

It will take many years to sort and in that time our focus should be on other things.

Europe has been centralising power in recent years and quite frankly its a total disaster. Not only do we have to pay a huge amount for another layer of useless politicians who are corrupt, overpaid and frankly incompetent but many decisions have been made that are simply wrong a lot of the time. Some decisions only work in a subset of european countries but are applied to all. The fact is governments need to be smaller and localised to their own countries. Scotland making its own decisions is better than England or Europe making decisions for them. A lot of decisions they can make themselves now but not all. The big decisions are still really made in London or Europe.

I think there will be a huge migration of jobs from Scotland to England in the split because England has a far larger population and companies based in Scotland will be at a disadvantage. There is also greater migration from Scotland to England than vice versa. Also Scotlands infra-structure is far more expensive, things like parcels etc cost a lot more to deliver in Scotland than England but there are national tariffs for many of these things. Ultimately though Scotland. There is about 5 billion pounds of north sea revenue per year for Scotland although not sure how that would work out with a split. I believe based on the locations the mini UK will get about 10% of that revenue/oil fields. Would the mini UK then add new oil fields right on the edge of the UK area to gain a greater share of the oil?

What about british overseas territories. Scottish people helped achieve/gain territories like the British region of Antartica and other areas which could be resources for oil etc in the future. Do they get a share if they split?

A lot to work through and think about.

Im Canadian too and I live in Québec most polls are in the 30's for yes and don't change a lot.But I don't think Scotland will there a lot of implications with being independant it's easier to run a province,state etc then a country.

Well, Scotland only became part of the UK because they wanted England to bail them out when they bankrupted themselves trying to colonise the Americas.

Surely, just repaying the monies that they required to be bailed out from that with interest for the past few centuries would settle it? :P

Lies! I'm the sole vita owner in Edinburgh. Near told me so.

I'm not British but if they want it, I'm all for it. As far as I know, they used to be a seperate nation so they have their own history, which pretty much means that if they want independence, they should get it. I'd also be willing to give the Sami people in my country independence if that's what they want so I'm not being a hypocrite.

If by that you mean that many Scots politicians (some of whom had lost money on the Darien expedition) accepted English bribes to vote for union against the wishes of the Scots people then you are correct.

From Wiki

[Scots poet] Robert Burns referred to this:

Some of the money was used to hire spies, such as Daniel Defoe; his first reports were of vivid descriptions of violent demonstrations against the Union. "A Scots rabble is the worst of its kind," he reported, "for every Scot in favour there is 99 against".

No.