Despite polls showing growing - albeit still minority - support for independence, comprising mainly the Glaswegian working classes, the large undecided vote makes the outcome uncertain.
If I was a Scot, which presumably due to a previous life of great virtue I have not been so punished, then I'd plump for independence. I'd do so because, contrary to the approach of the top bureaucratic policy-devising mandarins who nowadays surreptitiously dictate all critical policy in the advanced economies, I like small states.
If well governed, like Singapore, they can work superbly. And were I a Pom, I might also vote for it because Scotland takes a lot more than it contributes from the union, even allowing for North Sea oil. But then I couldn't claim Andy Murray ... so perhaps not.
All of this must be viewed in the context of the nation-state as a modern concept. We refer to ourselves as a young country but, depending on your starting point, we're one of the oldest - older than Germany and Italy, for example, plus at least another 100 nations, most not existing when I was born.
Given that New Zealand was the last sizeable land mass to be settled by humans, that might seem peculiar, but that is due to also being the world's most isolated country - which is why everyone, everywhere has heard of us. I mention that, given the prevailing general ignorance of geography by the average punter. In the context of globalisation, it is quite possible independent nations won't exist by the end of this century and, instead, a single governing federal body presiding over perhaps 300 sub-states. And why not? There's a lot going for it.
This is the ultimate fear of conspiracy theorists, who provide such wonderful entertainment, so it's worth proposing just to wind them up.
Nevertheless, through so many relentless forces - be they free trade agreements, common currencies, growing passport-free blocs, the internet et al - that ultimate global outcome seems inevitable.
Set against that force are numerous counter-pressures in the form of independence movements, such as the Basques and now prosperous Catalonia in Spain, Kurdistan, Tibet, the possible break-up of Belgium, Chechnya, Quebec, Trans-Niedstra, Kashmir and numerous others - in particular, Africa, with its ridiculous imposed arbitrary borders paying no regard to geography or ethnicity. On a small scale of my point, think back to Michael Bassett's overdue local government amalgamation reforms in the 1980s.
Despite the publicly recognised merits of this move, the citizens of two similar prosperous small seaside boroughs, Devonport in Auckland and Eastbourne in Wellington, protested at being lumped in with the hoi polloi and wanted to retain their autonomy.
Had I been in Michael Bassett's shoes, I'd have let them and no harm would have been done to the overall reform. But today, a quarter of a century later, I would be surprised if now, offered autonomy, they would opt for it.
In the early 1980s, there was an attempt at a South Island independence movement, which quickly faded through lack of support.
Had it happened, the South would have been greatly richer and the North poorer, due to export and population differentials favouring the South.
This is a parallel to the Scottish situation which brings me to Rob Muldoon.
He once said to me: "The decisions we make today will determine whether in 30 years we're a Scotland or a southern counties-type nation."
Those three decades have elapsed and, ironically, thanks to Rob's successor Labour government's bold decisions, we're probably marginally southern England.
