I'm voting no because I want the whole of Britain to work together.
The question - hard won by the SNP is, "Should Scotland become an independent country?"
The question isn't, "Should Westminster change some of its current policies and practices?"
I am as annoyed as the yes-voters at the current government with its attempts, at the expense of vulnerable/disadvantaged groups, to make sure no-one ever claims benefits they might not deserve, thereby supposedly saving small amounts of money, while they seem to do nothing about unfair, barely legal practices used by 'fatcats' to avoid paying tax, but I don't think voting for independence is the answer.
I totally understand the desire for change, but the way to get it is not through voting for independence. A yes vote as a protest against Westminster is reactionary. Anyway, there is no reason to think that a scottish parliament would be morally better or more accountable than a parliament in Westminster. And, as I've said on this thread several times - it would only effect change for the people of Scotland. You can't claim the moral high ground if you are prepared to turn your back on rUK.
And the arguments that the 'better together' campaign is negative are ridiculous when the question has been asked in such a way that those voters who want to stay in UK have to vote 'no' to get that wish. The question could have been, "Should Scotland remain part of the UK?" Which would obviously have meant voting 'No' in order to get this marvellously positive change advocated by the pro-independence campaigners.
I really hope the Westminster government is shaken by the closeness of the referendum.
If your ambition is for a fairer country, campaign for proportional representation, get more involved in politics at a local level and in a-political campaigns and organisations. Stand as an independent candidate. Don't try to claim that the only way to be idealistic/brave/well-informed is to set up as an independent country.
IMO