I can't believe how the Yes campaign can have the cheek to call other people liars etc with the things they come out out.

Example just last week: There is NO WAY that ANY UK party will go into an election building the UKs limited number of hi tech warships in a Scotland that's just told the UK to b*gge*r-off, while in England, a country feeling rejected, yards are standing idle or are even closed. Unless the party WANTS to lose, it is clearly political suicide. Yet this is, as usual, just said to be "scaremongering" and the Scottish shipyards won't lose the work. What are these people on? THE WORK WILL BE LOST.

It's such a obvious lie! Separation at any cost, no lie too big. These nutcases don't care about job losses in the thousands that they know themselves would happen, it's all a price worth paying for the bravehearts.

When Scotland gets Independence the Labour voters who switched to the SNP will switch back to the Scottish Labour Party and the Tories will never ever have a say in Scottish government and Scotland, a socialist country, will forever have a socialist government. It`s our English friends in the North that I feel sorry for, when they are condemned to Tory rule for the rest of their lifes. Wee Alex will never be Scottish president. Hopefully, former labour stalwart and political genius Denis Canavan, who recommends a YES vote, will come out of retirement and lead us into the future.

^^^^ Don't forget to cast your vote, meaningless as it is..

Will do stewarty, every vote is meaningful.

Ask yourselves a question, Why does Cameron and the Tories, who despise the Scots and are un-electable here, beg us to stay in the Union?

Just checking, you might shout louder and deriding more vociferously like the rest of the bitter togethers, but it doesn´t make your argument any more convincing. London´s lies are not much different from your own:

1. The 13% figure I originally stated was the figure quoted by the Scottish Government, which stated that Scotland, with 8.3% of the UK population, contributed 9.4% of tax revenues. Since these figures came from Holyrood I didn´t waste time referring to them.

2. Instead I quoted a report from the Centre for Economics and Business Research, an organisation that advises 25 of the top 100 FTSE companies and is widely quoted in such anti-nationalist organs as The Economist, Telegraph and Daily mail, so hardly "some think tank nobody has heard of". In their report, which you obviously didn´t bother to read, they said not that "it's not running a BIGGER deficit, it's treading water with the rest of the UK in deficit", as you say, but that "Scotland receives no net subsidy" , something very different.

3. I also quoted a report on the economics of independence from the BBC - yet another organisation to nail its colours to the unionist cause -  that gave pretty clear figures that again showed NO deficit, but you conveniently ignored that one.

When it comes down to tax revenues/spending it all depends on what figures you are willing to believe. You accuse the Scottish government of manipulating the figures - though quite why anyone would want to lie about it if it would mean governing a bankcrupt nation I don´t know - so I gave you figures from groups biased to the yes cause.

At the end of the day it doesn´t really matter about the economics since the main reasons why I support independence are political and social. I hate the Tories and all they stand for; I hated Blair and how he misled people; and I hate anybody who espouses neo-conservative free market economic policies. As if they have actually been proved to be the best for the majority of people anywhere on the planet. I have never voted SNP in my life but I believe that no matter what happens after independence Scotland will still be a better place to live, and will have a better future, than it will be if we have to endure another generation of tory (or NL) rule from London.

TTO: This is like both sad and funny, you don't even understand the basics here yet throw figures around and just keep digging a deeper hole.

"1. The 13% figure I originally stated was the figure quoted by the Scottish Government, which stated that Scotland, with 8.3% of the UK population, contributed 9.4% of tax revenues. Since these figures came from Holyrood I didn´t waste time referring to them."
THIS DOES NOT NOT MEAN SCOTLAND IS A NET CONTRIBUTOR. A NET CONTRIBUTOR IS SOMEONE/SOMETHING WHO PAYS IN MORE THAN THEY TAKE OUT, AND RUNS AN EFFECTIVE **SURPLUS**. Can you not really understand this?? You CANNOT compare income without reference to expenditure and say there is a positive contribution to the total pot, this is just the most BASIC accountancy! To take just the incomes and say this means there is a net contribution is so clueless I can only think you work in the SNP finance team .

I'll repeat again what you said
"just for the record ebulgery Scotland is a net contributor to the Exchequer, paying some 13% more in tax than it receives from London."

Yet you try and PROVE this nonsense by giving "figures" that take no account whatsoever, zero, nada, of what it receives from the UK. Do you not see the little flaw there? You even used the word received in the first instance but now are trying to pretend you don't need to bother about that half of the equation as you can't find any figures anywhere that don't show a negative balance. Unsurprisingly due to the existance of the negative balance.

I'll skip explaining the rest as you plainly don't have a clue. But I will also note you just flat ignore the official figures out there by qualified accountants that clearly showed in absolute crystal clear terms the £12 billion deficit 2012-2013, as they are obviously inconvient to your fantasy economics, and it's just denial denial attack denial.

kenny, they make VQ look like a National hero in Norway