Forbes from March

http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidnicholson/2014/03/05/5-reasons-why-scottish-independence-would-be-an-economic-disaster/

Currency – There is currently 4 currency options open to an independent Scotland. Sterling in a formal currency union (as it is now) Sterling – without Westminster cooperation (such as Panama), The Euro or an independent Scottish currency. With Nobel winning Economists stating Osborne’s statement as a bluff (after all what does he know of economics. His degree is in history. Alex Salmond’s is in economics). Mr Klaus is a former Czech president. Speaking at an event in Edinburgh University this week, Mr Klaus – referring to comments made by Jose Manuel Barroso in a BBC interview – said: “It is arrogant of the EU to say Scotland and Catalonia will not be members.” Mme Garriaud-Maylam, a senior French senator specialising in foreign policy. Speaking in the French Senate, Mme Garriaud-Maylam said: “The threats formulated by Mr Barroso are inappropriate and the result of Spanish and English pressure. London is increasingly worried. They (EU threats) are not credible. If Scotland votes for independence, it will stay in the European Union. It would be in England’s interest.”

Oil – Westminster own reports say that oil prices will continue to rise and oil production will be there until 2055. Page 24 of https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/175480/bis-13-748-uk-oil-and-gas-industrial-strategy.pdf . This is excluding further discoveries.Never mind the fact that the industry itself see’s North Sea Oil being there far into the future. You state oil revenues, this is countered by oil companies coming out and saying that the reason there has been mixed investment into the North Sea due to Westminster’s inability to keep a stable tax and fiscal policy. 16 changes in 10 years by Westminster Governments. Plus the remaining oil left is valued at AT LEAST £1.5 Trillion.

Banks – Ahh the banks, the banks that became Scottish AFTER they crashed. The UK bailed out the banks in 2008 to the tune of £66 Billion, Scottish GDP for 2008 was, ohh only £145 Billion. Damn. Also the US federal reserve bailed out UK banks by about roughly $1 Trillion. Banks are bailed out where the contagion is, not where their head office is. The real question on the banks is : Would an Independent Scotland have allowed the banks to bet like theres no tomorrow with everyones money?

Credibility – http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/why-an-independent-scotland-could-become-the-richest-country-on-earth-9096120.html Also Satandard and Poors the global ratings service said “Even excluding North Sea Output, Scotland would qualify for our highest economic assessment” Feb 2014. “if its geographic share of North Sea Oil and Gas is taken into account, Scotland’s GDP per head is bigger than that of France” <- Financial Times Feb 2014. Also the GERS reports (Government Expenditure Revenue Scotland) confirm that Scotland contributes more tax per head, and in all actuality is essentially robbed of £4.4 Billion per year. 8.4% of the UK population pays 9.9% of UK tax take.

Natural Resources – Scotland is Europe's largest oil producing nation and also boasts 25% of Europe's renewable energy potential. Scotland has a vast range of sectors and oil is only a small part of it. Around 15% of Scotland's economy. On contrast oil makes up around 25% of Norway's economy and I don't hear them complaining.

I would suggest that before you repeat the BBC propaganda (which has been found guilty of favouring the No side by its own BBC Trust) and the Better Together campaign (which calls itself Project Fear) you do some research on the subject and ask yourself, who is better placed to govern Scotland? London Centric Westminster or a government that actually stays in Scotland. As Vince Cable MP said "London is becoming a giant suction machine draining the life out of the rest of the country"