Bill Brown describes himself as a positive pro-Unionist" (Letters, July 17), and goes on to say "all the evidence in modern times shows aggressive selling makes people defensive, irritated and walk away".

This has been demonstrated by the performance of the self-described project fear campaign led by Alistair Darling, with its plethora of negative scare stories too numerous to mention. Cue the next positive argument for the Union, we are then warned that independence would be ripe territory for re-opening long closed wounds and internecine feuds, one can only assume positive pro-Unionists don't recognise irony.

As to the conclusion that the arguments – unstated – for Scotland being better on its own are as genuine as Mr Brown's tiger-skin car seat covers, I wonder what a disinterested observer would see as the best use of £100 billion: using it to finance the Trident programme would be a difficult stance to maintain. It is telling that Westminster announced it is imperative we spend this sum on missiles – and the money will be found – while at the same time those least able to pay are having the bedroom tax imposed on them, and the Trussell Trust is reporting a triple rise in referrals to food banks – 350,000 in the last year – in what is one of the richest countries in the world.

I would invite Mr Brown to read the article by Ian Bell published the same day as his letter, a scathing indictment of the UK political culture which backs the case that we are Better Together, but only for some ("The lies of the land that demonise common people", The Herald, July 17). Political self-determination: the leather seats option.

Stuart Black,

62 South Mains Road, Milngavie.

Bill Brown's letter encapsulates the paucity of thought characteristic of the No campaign. It backs the Westminster officials who tell us not to bother with the debate as the argument is already won.

He starts out by telling us the decision we make next year can be compared to his non purchase of a sports car as the sales presentation of it was based on style, glitz and seat covers. He tells us he wanted to hear the engine running but was diverted and that put him off the purchase.

It would appear he has not yet realised Scotland's engine is running in the form of a Parliament at Holyrood and to most of us it seems to be purring nicely. I am not aware of any movement to disband it and return powers to Westminster. I also believe I can take it as read that most people in Scotland approve of devolution and the decisions made in Holyrood have had a positive impact on the lives of our population.

I lean toward independence but, like most of us, await the arguments and events which could prove to be conclusive. I am aware no firm predictions can, or should, be made about all the outcomes that would follow a Yes vote just as I am aware the outcome of a No vote would mean things would go on as they are and the UK would continue to be governed for the benefit of financial rather than industrial interests.

The No campaign is based on promoting the fear that Scotland would not survive and prosper as an independent nation. Mr Brown takes this fear factor further than most by suggesting the regions of Scotland are disparate and it is likely old wounds and feuds could be reopened after independence. That really is scraping the bottom of the barrel.

Bill Hendry,

6 Blackwood Road, Milngavie.