I can totally understand that many people do feel happy with the representation they have in WM. But many others aren't happy, and I don't think it's legitimate to tell them that they're simply wrong, or should be happy with it and accept it - any more than I think it's legitimate to tell people who are uncomfortable with financial uncertainty that they should just accept it!
For me, that's the impasse.
So no one can 'answer' the 'Scotland is treated unfairly claims' other than the electorate really. I think the idea that any particular issue has been 'dealt with' on this thread is a bit daft, and off-putting to new posters.
As far as I can see odd's post urging voters to vote No in order to pacify the markets (not that they are exactly in turmoil - a 1.3% drop hasn't been been headline news all year) is just as unconvincing as (several other previous posters) telling risk averse voters, who are comfortable with the current democratic set up in the UK, that they should just vote Yes and deal with the risk! Both positions are pretty patronising and fail to see where the motivation to vote Yes or No really comes from.
Though lots of people will vote Yes or No for sillier reasons than these.