You say we are so poor we cannot afford to be independent, but that we are doing "tremendously well" under Tories. Which is it?
As I understand it the facts are the Scotland has contributed far more to the UK treasury as a percentage than it has got back for most of the last 40 years, largely because of oil revenue. It is true this has reversed slightly in the last couple of years because of lower oil revenue. That's the current position. Scotland needs to adapt to a post-oil economy whether we are independent or not. We need to develop our strengths and the best way to do that is to make the right choices for our own economy. Not allow others to make mistakes on our behalf.
If the unionists' plan is simply for Scotland to rely on money from the rest of the UK I don't think that's a plan the rest of the UK will welcome. And neither would it be good for Scotland. We have a lot going for us including untapped oil and gas, renewable energy, tourism, fishing, niche food and drink exports, world class universities, creative industries and so on. Norway is rich because it used its oil wealth wisely. Unfortunately our North Sea oil revenue was not wisely used. But it's not the only way to create a successful small country. Look at Denmark without oil.
Again the issue comes down to this. Those who say an independent Scotland would be a disaster need to explain what they think is so uniquely inadequate about Scotland or Scottish people that they can't be trusted to govern themselves.