to wonder how Scotland's decision will affect england?

[LEMmingaround]

Just that really? If they do go their ownway how will it affect england?

Also will it open a can of worms with wales and northern Ireland?

Frm, the reference to 'it's nae fair' puzzled me as well. In what part of Scotland do they say that, I wonder? Brigadoon?

The correct phrase would be 'it isnae fair' or 'it's no fair.'

Or 'its no fucken fair you fucken fuck'.

In the parts of Glasgow I lived in.

OOAML - I don't know anyone who has accessed SALT or OT for comes needs really - the NHS will only find if you're easy fixed (in 6 weeks) in my experience. He has been at an excellent special school since he was 6 & used to be able to access SALT via the in house one as and when needed but that changed a number on years ago & it's now difficult again (SALT hours for the school have been cut & as every child in the school needs SALT for communication and/or feeding needs it's not easy to get to be a priority).

For a while respite etc was quite good but that is now going pear shaped with council cuts & as far as I can see there are no - & I mean no - services for him after he leaves school. I have no idea what we'll do - he's non-verbal severely autistic, he can't be at home all the time but I don't want him forced into residential miles from home yet just to access services.

There seems to be a mistaken belief amongst people with higher functioning children that if your child is severely autistic then you just walk into services. That has not been my experience at all. We have been very lucky with his school - but if we live ten miles away in any direction we'd be under different authorities with no suitable schools. So that was luck.

Sorry should have said 'some' after mistaken belief - and I've found that's the divide in belief rather than area. I honestly don't know anywhere in England with good SALT/OT services.

For your interest, these are unofficial users of the pound...look at them and then tell me Scotland wouldn't be able to use it!

Would you really want Scotland in that list though? They're not exactly strong, thriving economies.

I'm not particularly bothered which way the vote goes (other than I think a yes might get things hot and bothered in northern Ireland again - which would be a shame as it's benefitted greatly from peace imo), but if I was in Scotland I would be seriously worried about being an unofficial user of the pound. I think the only situation I'd be happy about if I lived in Scotland would be the Euro - but I can't see that being a possibility (Spain for starters will veto anything to do with Scotland joining the EU surely?)

I'm with Carol on this - you seem to be unable to tell the difference between and asset, a liability and a debt.

Taking percentages out of the question as they are measuring different things. Scotland runs a deficit - its ok - we all do. ie. They spend more than they take. In Scotland the public spend per capita is higher than rUK due to the Barnett formula.

in the event of independence, assuming the oil and gas are apportioned along maritime boundary lines, then the tax take of the new scotland will be less than its current spending.

In order to pay for this spending it will borrow money. This is the national debt.

Taking CU off the table - it aint happening - believe me. If Scotland refuses to honour its debt as a seceding state then it will be required to get a credit rating and a central bank sharpish to borrow money.

The money that the UK govt borrowed to shore up the financial system (mostly in scotland i note) was used to invest in the banks - they owe a debt to those who lent them the money - however they used it to gain an asset which is Lloyds TSB,RBS and HBOS. So if you dont want a share of the debt - you dont get a share of the assets the money bought. Like ships, planes, buildings. Or is iScotland suggesting the sequestration of assets owned by non-scottish people or bodies? That does not play well with people you want to borrow money from.

For those voting no because of the currency issue, let me just put your mind at ease:

1. Scotland will use the pound:

• for those who have misread or not understood better together, they are not saying you can't use the pound. The pound is tradable anywhere in the world.

Better Together do not use the words "you can not use the £" anymore because they know it's not true. It is a currency union they are claiming they do not want.

2. rUK does not want a currency union with an #indy Scotland:

• #BetterTogether will have us believe that they are not interested in a formal currency union with Scotland. I would ask my undecided & No voting friends to think of this logically.

Scotland holds all the aces in this pack, if there is no currency union, we will chose to forgo the uk national debt (international law dictates this) & by not having a currency union our national turnover which is between £100-150bn will be wiped off the Uk accounts.

Put this into perspective, during the last recession (2008) £2 bn was wiped from the uk economy & the country went into meltdown, imagine the effect of £100-150bn.

Scotland is England's biggest trading partner, we buy more English goods than any other country in the world, a currency union makes sense for businesses either side of the border.

If it is not in place it will become cheaper for Scottish business to buy from other countries.

In short without a currency union the uk will be bankrupt

3. the oil dilemma:

• you will hear many No Sayers tell you "it's gonna run out". This is stating the obvious, it's a finite source & they have a tendency to run out.

However, what #ProjectFear will not mention is that the trillions of £'s of the uk debt are secured against this oil. Similar to your mortgage being secured by your property.

If you remove this asset then the lenders get very jittery.

4. lender of last resort

• this is the big one for me, I've been asked it several time & unfortunately I don't think the questioners really understood what this means.

When the banks failed in 2008, the Bank of England bailed them out & the uk economy plunged into recession.

Public money, yours & mine was used to keep the rich in jobs while ordinary people lost our jobs or had to take pay cuts.

This was because the regulations governing the banking system was not strict enough.

If you did not have a lender of last resort, the banks would not have got themselves into such a mess. Remember the outcry a couple of years ago where we wanted the #bankers jailed for the way they gambled away our money?

So to summarise, #Scotland will be using the £ after independence because it is more beneficial to the rUK then it is to Scotland. There will be a currency union because without it the rUK economy will go bankrupt & as far as the Bank of England acting as the lender of last resort that is up to us if we want that, not having it will tighten the legislation on the banking system - a kick up the back side they need! We have a once in a lifetime chance at real democracy and to shake up the system.......and I have to ask my 'no' voting friends.....is your vote out of selfish personal reasons or are you truly thinking of the greater good of the nation, people and what an independent Scotland would offer the world?

Frm of course scotland would be able to use the pound. In fact many businesses will insist on it - as i suspect what ever is introduced will be volatile and inflationary. The reason why countries such as zimbabwe use the pound is because their currency is shafted

I have found this debate very informative, in particular posts from oddcommentator surrounding the banking situation.

For me and my partner a yes vote would be a disaster. Both of us would need to relocate to the se England but unlikely to have any money to finance it as the value of our house would plummet.

The irony is that both of us voted snp in the holyrood election (not who we would ever vote for in a general election) as the snp were doing ok running a devolved government and the system was set up so that no one party would ever have a majority - how wrong we were on that one.

Yes I've found oddcommentator's posts really helpful as well (thank you for taking the time to post lengthy explanations odd).

We'll see, oh and for the record, NO ONE up here says 'it's nae fair' please stop stereo typing

I mentioned it because one of Eck's men was spluttering with indignation and incredulity on Newsnight at the mere suggestion that Westminster would not award heavy industry contracts to Scotland. He kept wittering on about it would be vindictive not to.

Unfortunately the isnae fair whinge is a stereotype because there is truth in it.

Frm

1 - You can use the pound - you can use the dollar - you can use what you like but that is not the same as currency union

1. Scotland holds no aces at all. £2bn is a drop in the ocean of the UK economy - you do know that dont you. And the turn over of scotland is not covered by the currency union. Please try harder. England is Scotland largest trading partner - but it is not the other way round. In short without currency union - Scotland will be bankrupt. You can make specious arguments all you like but they are specious. Shouting them doesn't make them true.

3 - Oil -is not what the UK national debt is secured against. It is secured against future income streams. Some of them are oil based.

4 - Your understanding of the banking crisis seems to be based on reading the morning star. The bail out didnt plunge the country into recesssion - the recession was the cause of the crisis. (which in fact was a wholesale lending liquidity crisis caused by sub prime issues.) They were intelinked.

Were scotland to have been independednt - Your banks would have gone under.

Currency union is neither in the interest of the rUK nor would it be politically palatable in the event of the yes vote.

Scotland has a GDP of 216Bn. the UK has a GDP of 2.4 Trillion.

There you go your economy is 1/10th of the UK - do you really think it would get noticed? At the rUK growth rate we would make up for that loss in 2 years.

Get over yourself. Scotland is neither that big or that important.

I am sure the industry of tartan, shortbread, whisky, annoying little dogs and light sweet crude will do you well.

Frm why will it be cheaper for Scotland to buy goods from other countries if there is no currency union? Which goods?

What if Scotland isn't part of the EU, which they will have to apply to join? They won't have free trade with Europe.

Finally whilst England may buy many things from Scotland. The flip side is also true. If it doesn't make economic sense for Scotland to import things from England. It won't make sense for England to buy things from Scotland.

And in 2008 there was never an explicit guarantee that the Bank of England would bail out Northern Rock, HBOS or RBS. It could have let them fail, as Lehman did. None of the boards ran those banks knowing they would be bailed out.

And i can guarantee that the ship building and industry will move. And not a single - not one contract will come from Westminster.

Because anyone who gives contracts to a foreign country will lose their political job. It isnt vindicitve - its like that - its just the way it is.

The nearest equivalent is Venezuela - they unofficially use the dollar, have a vast amount of heavy crude (better for fuel that Brent Light Sweet) but due to the central control and socialist policies is now rationing arsewipe.

If you want to know how it will turn out - look at Caracas. It might not - but you would need a fiscally responsible government so fast it doesnt bear thinking about. Cutting public spending is very unpopular - it cost politicians votes.

Shenanigans / Saintly - thank you - I do my best!

Years of training in banking and finance do help - as a well as a masters degree in international monetary economics

But, but, but, you must just be making it up oddcommentator! No companies will leave, you're just scaremongering...

It scares me how many people refuse to accept that actually, it might not all be great. That, actually, the industry which directly provides about 15% of the employment in Edinburgh and indirectly provides a hell of a lot more might be pretty much decimated. I work in fs too and pretty much share your perception.

I remember speaking with someone who was staunchly pro independence but was very realistic. She knew and admitted that it could be pretty grim for a while. But she firmly believed it was worth it. I didn't agree but I at least respected the fact her view was an honest and realistic one. I find however that some yes voters -see upthread - have swallowed the propaganda hook line and sinker. That's scary.

There is a lot of propaganda on BOTH sides IMO

Agreed fanjo, there is propaganda on both sides. I get frustrated when either quote opinion as fact and won't acknowledge the uncertainty. I don't think it makes for a sensible discussion.

It's worrying how close the vote looks like it will be - either answer with just a narrow margin will cause huge upset and political uncertainty for a long time.

I don't know how I feel about either result, as an English person in England I don't have the right to a say and thinking about it too hard causes an emotional reaction rather than a logical one but just from posts on forums and friends on Facebook in Scotland it seems hugely polarised and sensitive.

I think Facebook is one of the more emotive and likely to kick off arenas in which the discussions take place - the mood on a Facebook thread can turn very quickly and there are some people (on both sides) who post the same incendiary stuff at pretty much every opportunity. There's a lot of insults, but there are also people trying to actually have a discussion.

It is a very sensitive topic - it is a huge decision. Almost every news story or event can be picked apart and analysed with reference to the referendum. And things get heated very quickly.

What do people outside Scotland think when their FB friends post lots of referendum stuff? Lots of my FB friends are of the 'pictures of kittens' variety and I do wonder what they make of it all sometimes.

I have family in Scotland - one member if which has been asking for opinions from both sides to help them make their mind up. I read it all carefully (am interested) but the yes information just seems flimsy to me - said family member seems to be swayed by it though.

I'm in an English city that would benefit directly from a yes vote as we're in direct competition with Scotland for particular contracts (& have gradually lost a lot to them over the years). However, I still hope for a no. I can't see it benefitting family who live there (they may disagree) and I do worry that a yes may destabilise Northern Ireland.

frm please look at Iceland where the lender of last resort failed to save the banks (as it was too small) - this is what an iScotland would have looked like without monetary union but its own currency.

It is quite possible for the iScotland govt to tighten the rules for its banks to make them more secure, but this will make them less profitable, so they will move.

A successful iScotland is totally possible, but do not pretend it will be painless and the only changes are increased benefits for all and perfect public services.

So I personally like the info on Facebook although much if it seems a bit flimsy

It's not called the United Kingdom of England and Scotland. It's called the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and will continue to be whether bits of it leave or not.

Just to be pedantic, the land mass comprising England, Scotland and Wales is actually called Britain. "Great Britain" comprises Britain plus all the surrounding English, Scottish and Welsh islands, and the "Great" has no political/imperial etc. connotation.