What a bullshit article. Firstly it's completely dependent on counting North Sea oil revenues over the last 30 years, which certainly can't be relied upon for the next 30 years, let alone the next 300 and second it says "But the statistics do not take into account the level of public spending in Scotland." which is kinda fucking important in weighing things up.
8.4% from last census, which is only 0.6% what would be lost in GDP, so it's certainly financially viable, were all the legal wranglings entirely free and uncomplicated I wonder how much it'd genuinely cost to go through the process? I do hope estimates of that figure come out.
What's the population %?
Whether Scotland would be better or worse off remains to be seen, it would have a better chance of a fairer distribution of wealth at least.
i do wonder why the Tories are so desperate to keep Scotland if it is actually subsidised by the rest, you'd think they'd be happy to see the back of it.