to believe the remaining UK should not make special exceptions for Scottish economic refugees?

[longfingernails]

In the event of Scottish independence, the Scottish economy will be in the toilet. In this event, Britain should not be allowed to become a magnet for Scottish economic migrants.

I wouldn't blame Cameron if the Scots choose independence; the Tory party don't exactly have a strong foothold in those parts. However, I will certainly excoriate him if he gives an inch in any negotiations in the event of independence - especially if he allows large scale unskilled immigration from Scotland into Britain.

An independent Scotland would have almost zero negotiating power and Britain should exploit that to maximise our own advantage.

Don't you think that in the event of a Yes vote, that negotiations will take place and be settled in a way which does not disadvantage either nation?

No, because all the promises made by Yes campaigners are so radically different to WM policies that someone will have to back down. And it's not usually the smaller, newer, country in the process of setting up that wins.

Why on earth would it be 'punished' for leaving the union? Why would multinationals leave? Of course it will be allowed to join the EU - all these new Eastern European countries have been allowed to join ( apart from the ones with terrible human rights records)

I think there's a tendency in the Yes campaign to see rUK or companies moving as a punishment, when actually it's a common sense policy made for the benefit of the rUK or that company.

And the shared currency - that turns out to be scaremongering, of course they will negotiate, the Bank of England has said as much.

No they haven't. Not officially. An unknown source told the Guardian that Scotland can have a currency union if they keep Trident. I don't know why the Yes campaign sees this as such a boost, given their desperation to get rid of Trident. See my first point about someone having to back down on a promise.

Of course there are risks but from where alot of people are sitting the union is a risky business too.

Not nearly as much as going solo. It's simply ridiculous to suggest that the risks of staying in the UK are even close to the risks of going independent.

Don't you think that in the event of a Yes vote, that negotiations will take place and be settled in a way which does not disadvantage either nation?

I think that's very naive. What benefits Scotland will not naturally benefit rUK and vice versa. Someone is going to have to back down, and it won't be a punishment and it won't be bullying. rUK and Scotland will act in the interests of their own citizens.

So will Spain and Italy and the other countries facing separatist movements. They don't want to encourage these movements, they aren't going to be friendly to Scotland. Again, it's not a punishment.

And the shared currency - that turns out to be scaremongering, of course they will negotiate, the Bank of England has said as much.

The 3 main political parties have ruled out a currency union. They cannot back down from this. It would be suicidal.

Every time I post MN goes down

Yes because political parties never change their minds after elections

I can't remember a time when all three political parties have stated that they will not do something and then gone back on that, when they have also produced large amounts of research to back up their statement.

58% polled in England and Wales are against a union.

But, Weatherall, I've not met anyone down here who wants Scotland to leave. If the Scots vote to leave I think the public's goodwill would evaporate pretty quickly and the politicians would feel that they had to negotiate a good deal for rUK or face a backlash from the electorate.

It's life. No-one likes to be spurned.

On some things they don't change their minds. At least not without being able to demonstrate that it is in the country's best interests, and even then it is close to political suicide. If they did (and it is a very big if) it would be at a massive price - something that would be an equal if not greater about-turn for the pro-independence politicians (Trident is the one that's been mentioned). Do you think Salmond will change his mind on Trident?

Yes because political parties never change their minds after elections

That's obviously excluding the SNP. They're going to do everything they promise, aren't they?

A currency union is out.

I am not risking my DC's future on a bluff or a giant game of chicken.

Santana: Short term could be a decade or so. Possible cuts would face everyone equally and proportionally (inherently a more level social/wealth hierarchy), as we are, after all, trying to build a better, fairer society. IMO and I hope. Because if there is no hope of something better than what we have now, then, frankly, we are fucked anyway- so really can't lose anything.

Gosh, and people say the pro-Union campaign is negative!

After the possible "yes" the SNP can stay in power or go. Up to the people. It's not the only party in Scotland! And Salmond isn't going stay or even become a president (or whatever the term will be) if the people do not want him (and many don't - me included).

I wasn't aware we were having another election straight away, so I'd imagine the SNP would be a fairly major part of the negotiations.

Probably not straight after, but there will be one at some point. Again, this is short term stuff. And, frankly, I'd rather them than the tories of WM.

After next year's General Election we could have Labour majorities in both Westminster and Edinburgh. The Labour party are against independence.

If it makes the frightened feel better - a "yes" is unlikely. I'm not holding much hope for it going through, anyway. So, you can all relax.

But that short-term will be when major decisions are made - Salmond and the SNP have set a ridiculously short timescale to independence.

Clearly we have to agree to differ, because I don't want my children living through 'a decade or so' of turmoil in the hope that things will be better. Although as my job may well be at risk then it could be a moot point if we've moved to England.

I'm not relaxing until I've seen the results.

Change is always scary.

How are people doing the bolding entire paragraphs? Are you starring every word?

Thanks for asking, OOAOML. I've always wondered too.

Neither am I OOAML.

I genuinely don't think we are fucked in the Union. We have a marvellous standard of living currently. I certainly don't think it's worth a decade of uncertainty!

I am so late to this.

But what a shitty horrible thread.

Star the beginning and end of a sentence! Sometimes it goes a bit funky though.

Or has OP disappeared and left.people having a reasonable discussion. I hope so.

Thanks SantanaLopez - trying it out

Yes - original OP was horrible.