Given that Scotland was rather improvished over the Darien Scheme it iss not going to be able to establish much in the way of colonies. Besides, there is little that the country can do if England decides they are a threat and knocks them off. (The Dutch did this to the Swedish ones in North America so there is a precedent for removing "dangerous" colonies)England could still rise world power and perhaps Scotland gets few colony in North America.
Given that Scotland was rather improvished over the Darien Scheme it iss not going to be able to establish much in the way of colonies. Besides, there is little that the country can do if England decides they are a threat and knocks them off. (The Dutch did this to the Swedish ones in North America so there is a precedent for removing "dangerous" colonies)
Having a land border in their own backyard is going to force England to divert funds from its navy to secure the Anglo-Scottish frontier, especially if Scotland is no longer in personal union with England.
Having a land border in their own backyard is going to force England to divert funds from its navy to secure the Anglo-Scottish frontier, especially if Scotland is no longer in personal union with England.
How will it efface them in both the short and long run?
Unless London wants to go into deep debt earlier on, they will have to pay less to the navy in order to fund northern fortifications. A smaller Royal Navy would mean their position on the world's oceans are not guarenteed. It means they can't spend as much on foreign adventuring either. And if they ever get into yet another war with France, there'll be the threat of a Franco-Scottish alliance, making an invasion slightly easier.
Meh, most of those issues died a quick death with Protestantism. Once Scotland went Presbytarian, England was very quickly seen by a large chunk of the population as more worthwhile to have as an ally than France (the fact that they kept losing the wars against England didn't help here).