Let alone one where you have a lot of debt then the Barnett formula takes 15% of your current budget away immediately
Let's just gloss over the fact yet again that the money returned to Scotland via Barnett is but a small part of the total revenue Scotland sends to the Exchequer in the first place. So no, Scotland's budget would not be reduced by the loss of Barnett, it would be vastly increased due to retaining 100% of all revenue generated within Scotland in the first place.
This is a rare place for a country to start from
Precisely because contiguous States maintain responsibility for 100% of debt accrued prior to separation. Again, this is entirely the rUK's problem to solve, because short of invading iScotland and removing "UK" assets brick by brick, there isn't really any other means to recover Scotland's "portion" of that debt if Scotland simply says "get bent".
He said unionists think Scotland is too wee and too poor. Unionists said nothing of the sort. Unionists point out economic reality. Economic facts. If he can’t counter that with anything other than making up ‘too wee too poor’ nonsense that’s on him
Difficult to square this with David Cameron himself reiterating that just like other small, Northern European nations, he believed that an iScotland would undoubtedly be a thriving and prosperous State. So there's at least one Unionist whose "economic reality" isn't the bleak picture typically painted by most. Since we're also told by Unionists that it's the Indi lot guilty of ignoring reality, which is it? We're just in agreement with David Cameron.
Out of curiosity, what is it about debt-free, asset-rich, talent-rich, resource-rich Scotland that Unionists are convinced would be an economic catastrophe? You could look across the Irish Sea for an example of a similar nation that has thrived after starting from a far more parochial and disadvantaged position. Why would Ireland, or Finland, or Denmark, or even Iceland thrive, and Scotland fail? Iceland is a curious one. Almost bankrupted by the same banking collapse that hammered the UK, yet Iceland bounced back within a couple of years and the UK is still circling the drain. I wonder what the difference there is?