2 days to go,

One of the worrying things about a 'referendum vote' is that it is often based on sentiment and desperation. That the existing status quo, which seems to many not to hear their social dilemma, where politics seem far off, is conducted in a different part of society with very little relevance to them.
The chance to give the ruling class a good kicking, even if it is only for a minute or two can blind rational thought leaving the  emotion of the moment to forget the hang-over tomorrow.
Scotland receives, through the Barnet formula. This system which distributes spending throughout the United Kingdom is not on an equal basis but is weighted depending which country is the recipient. Northern Island receives the best deal of any Union member followed by Scotland, Wales and last is England. This generally reflect the special needs of a country and of course if Scotland become independent they will have to fund all their social spending out of their own tax base. With oil from the North Sea being proportionally a high source of fundamental revenue it begs the question, what happens if the price on the international oil market falls and what happens when this finite resource is used up. Where does the income come from to fund the pensions, the schools, the social dependency.
Any resourceful well educated country can evolve the skills to create the industries to compete and sell their products on the world stage but the financial backing from the investment and money markets may not lend at a preferential rate of return and a county can struggle to balance its books.
These are not issues that the emotional call to independence deals with.
Their claim that they are in a better position to decide what to spend their income on, that they would naturally have a more empathetic view for their own specific population, than a bunch of millionaire politicians in Westminster is hard to deny.       

http://twocents2012.blogspot.com.au/