There was a rather depressing article on the BBC website yesterday, entitled "Independence - Braveheart or iPad?". Apparently a polling company had posed a hypothetical question to a sample group; "If Independence cost you £500 in your pocket, would you vote for it?" - 20-odd percent said yes. The second question was; "If Independence made you £500 better off, would you vote for it?" - 60-odd percent said yes!
It's a shame that many people could be influenced on such a major issue by short-term thinking.
I think TB's point is valid in the current paradigm. But the world could be a very different place by 2015. Given its low population, Scotland has the potential to be nearly self-sufficient. It has a third of the UK's land area, but only a tenth of the population.
The potential for renewable energy is huge. Continued major investment in wind energy could free up some of the existing hydro schemes to be re-purposed as energy-storage solutions, thus removing one of the major disadvantages of wind power.
There is a lot of good quality arable land in Scotland (not all of it, admittedly), and the climate is fairly benign (unlike the common perception).
The education system is effective, and can (and does) produce capable, well-qualified contributors to any future economy.
As the future scarcity and high cost of fossil fuels make global trade increasingly unviable, I believe it is the nations that have the greatest capability to be self-sufficient that will thrive. Those that rely on a high level of interconnectivity are more likely to struggle.
Admittedly, none of the above would prevent Scotland becoming a target for predatory aggressors who seek what it has, and its small size and modest economy would make it difficult for it to maintain an effective defensive deterrent. However, there are many other nations also in this position.
There are some very difficult questions to be considered by the SNP, and the wider "Yes" campaign, as they start to flesh out what an independent Scotland would look like, and how it would work, before presenting this as the "product" that they wish the Scottish people to buy. I personally believe they should be doing this thinking against an assumption of zero growth and a contraction of global trade but, as has been stated many times on this forum, it's unlikely that any politician is going to even dare whisper this as a possibility.
So, we'll probably have a couple of years of the "no" campaign pointing to all the flaws in the "Yes" campaign's plans, pointing out how an independent Scotland couldn't be "competitive" or "hold its own on the world stage", etc. In response, the "Yes" campaign will probably do a lot of ducking and diving, and maybe kicking the can down the road on some issues. They'll both be framing their arguments in the present, rather than thinking about what the future will look like.
Well, that's what I think anyway.
