The Scots are debating whether they should be independent or not. Good luck to them whatever they decide, but it strikes me that if they truly want to be independent then they should be; they should not be tethered to the pound sterling, but run their own currency, in exactly the same way that they wish to exploit their own assets and make their own laws.
What strikes me as odd is the argument for quasi-independence that jointly operating a currency with the rest of the United Kingdom would bring; it would make the Scottish Economy subject to the overwhelming requirements of the much larger combined economies of England, Wales and Northern Ireland, without the checks and balances that the present constitutional arrangements, which give the Scots a greater say in the UK Parliament than their numbers deserve.
I have no doubt that a nation of 5.3 million souls can organise and run a currency; if the nation is successful, as those supporting Scottish Independence believe it will be, then its currency will be strong and viable. It is only if the nation’s economy is unsuccessful that the currency will be weak and unsuccessful.
Therefore it strikes me that what Mr Salmond and is supporters want, is not independence, but a union with fewer ties, but nevertheless a union. That being the case, the decision for Scottish quasi independence is not a decision just for the Scots, but one for the inhabitants of the rest of the Union too. A nation is not a nation if it is half independent.