REFERENDUM debaters all seem to be considering just the next few years.

Separation is, however, kind of permanent. For example, looking at oil revenues until, say 2021, is unsatisfactory in predicting what they might be in 2031 or 2041, the forecast reference year of the Office for Budget Responsibility. All we can be fairly certain of is that by 2050 most of the current estimated volume remaining of 12-24 billion barrels will have been pumped up at increasing cost.

After 2031 there will most likely be a reducing income from the oil, but public expenditures will have increased greatly. Will the economy have been strengthened sufficiently by then to cope with the loss of the key oil revenues? It's these which make Scotland's finances reasonably viable.

Asserting that our trade balance will be positive is unproven. Scotland exports and imports most to the rUK. The Yes campaign has a duty to explain how it views the rest of the century, accepting that this becomes increasingly conjectural.

Scotland's Future is quite inadequate for the long term that is independence.

Joe Darby,

Glenburn,

St Martins Mill,

Cullicudden,

Dingwall.

I WAS born in Glasgow in 1947 and am proud to be a Glaswegian. I have lived most of my life in various other parts of UK but I only belong to one place, and that is Glasgow. I joined the RAF and spent most of my time at units in England with one tour of duty in Scotland and one tour in Germany, plus a detachment to the South Atlantic during the Falklands war.

When I retired from the RAF my best job opportunities were in England. I am British and can choose to live where I like in the country.

During the constitutional debate I discovered that I had effectively been disenfranchised by my country of origin. They had pulled up the drawbridge and people like me were unable to vote on the process. However, when I thought about it, I realised that it should not just be people like me who should be allowed to vote, but the whole of UK. After all, we had all agreed to be one country. Otherwise it becomes as silly as Passport to Pimlico, the 1949 Ealing Studios film starring Stanley Holloway where the London borough decides to declare independence and the film follows the logical development of an absurd idea.

The logical development of this absurd idea is that my ex-wife, who is French, can vote, because she lives in Dundee, whereas I can't because I live in Devon, where quite a few Scots reside. We joked about it recently.

It also strikes me as ludicrous that the Scottish Government lowered the voting age to allow the least experienced citizens a vote to potentially eradicate 300 years of successful joint enterprise between our countries, largely based on some romantic ancient notion alluded to in a film starring an Australian actor. The romantic notion ignores the fact that Scottish clans were fighting Scottish clans.

Although I am totally against independence, allowing the UK to vote as a whole would have been the best chance of it being successful, as the rest of UK is fed up watching a part of the country that they had previously been immensely proud of acting in such an immature manner, under the direction of a man who manages to look unusually ridiculous in a kilt.

Brian Young,

Springfield,

Coryton Lane,

Kilmington,

Axminster,

Devon.

AS a supporter of independence I write this letter reluctantly, but the idea has been on my mind for some time and it has to be said: Alex Salmond is a divisive figure.

I realise that the Unionist camp has made every effort to focus the debate on the personality of Alex Salmond and tried to define the Yes campaign as his own personal vanity project. Making the argument personal is clearly a distraction and has the added advantage for the No side from having to debate the real issue of who is best placed to govern Scotland.

Although I find this level of argument insulting to the many nationalists who have gone before and the thousands of Yes supporters campaigning throughout Scotland today, the fact is the personalisation of the debate has worked. The unpalatable truth that supporters of independence and Mr Salmond in particular need to take on board is that he is a divisive figure.

I have heard stated on many occasions "I would consider voting Yes but won't because I don't like Alex Salmond". It grieves me to say this, because I want the level of the debate to be better than that, but that is the reality of the argument to many Scots.

I also know that we would not be where we are today, less than eight weeks away from our momentous decision, if it were not for Mr Salmond.

Is there one more game-changing move that he can pull out to help his side over the winning line? Would a commitment to stand aside after Independence Day be enough?

Richard MacKinnon,

131 Shuna Street,

Glasgow.

I HAVE some referendum advice for voters: when you come to think of it, even if one is of average intelligence, half the world is by definition dumber than you are. Human nature being what is, many dim people, my good self included, lack the self-awareness to appreciate this and are happy to broadcast their ignorance totally oblivious to the fact that they would struggle to put a nut in a monkey's mouth.

It strikes me that if a voter cannot independently discover facts upon which to make a balanced decision but has to rely on the opinion of a celebrity of unknown intellectual calibre to point them in the right direction one may as well consign democracy to the dustbin. (As if we hadn't already done so.)

Society should never discount the power of us stupid people when we group together, especially when we base our judgments on advice taken from those who attain celebrity status by being good at singing, kicking a ball about, telling jokes, being a faithful servant to a political party or just for being born with a smiley face.

David J Crawford,

Flat 3/3, 131 Shuna Street,

Glasgow

There has been quite a bit of talk about how the Commonwealth Games should not be used for point scoring by either camp in the referendum debate. My wife and I were very fortunate that we were able to attend the opening ceremony at Celtic Park, and I was surprised to find No Thanks activists handing out campaign material outside Central Station when we arrived to catch our connection to Dalmarnock en route to Celtic Park.

At Dalmarnock itself, there was an even greater presence of No Thanks activists. I did hear a couple of people going to the stadium wondering why the Yes camp weren't out campaigning also. I was able to tell them that it was felt that such campaigning was not considered appropriate by Yes in the context of the Games. Obviously the No camp had no such sensitivities.

I do hope our First Minister will now bring his Saltire to the closing ceremony.

Geoff Caldwell,

23 Fullarton Drive,

Troon.