Towards a United Ireland

Ziphius

I don't have a background in economics so perhaps I am wrong but doesn't the competition between the two Irelands have its advantages?

Isn't competition in a capitalist system what drives innovation and productivity? Would this not be lost in a unified state? Particularly as, being an island, we would now need to get a boat or plane to get to another state.

Happyman42

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

That's more of an argument for Ireland to rejoin the UK,

Only somebody who is addicted to instability and the promotion of violence would be in favour of that. The N.I. statelet has failed, it cannot govern itself without supervision and imploding.
And we wouldn't be 'rejoining', we didn't join it in the first place.

marienbad

Happyman42 wrote: »

Only somebody who is addicted to instability and the promotion of violence would be in favour of that. The N.I. statelet has failed, it cannot govern itself without supervision and imploding.
And we wouldn't be 'rejoining', we didn't join it in the first place.

And it would appear the Republic can't now either !

Iwasfrozen

Happyman42 wrote: »

Only somebody who is addicted to instability and the promotion of violence would be in favour of that. The N.I. statelet has failed, it cannot govern itself without supervision and imploding.
And we wouldn't be 'rejoining', we didn't join it in the first place.

Only somebody who is addicted to instability and the promotion of violence would be in favour of 1 million odd unionists joining our state.

Mayo has failed it can't support itself without subsides from Dublin.

It's amazing every argument made by nationalists can be logically turned on it's head. Says a lot about the validity of your cause.

An Coilean

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

In the past, that doesn't mean Ireland would suffer under a devolved federal UK. I'm not saying I want it I'm just pointing out the logical flaw in your argument.

NI has.

The reality is that in the UK only England has prospered, Wales Scotland and NI have not. NI is in a devolved UK with the same curancy, civil service etc., there is no reason that I can see that Ireland should do any better in the UK than NI has.

You are not saying you want it, but then again you are not saying you don't want it. so what do you want? Do you believe Ireland should be independant from the UK?

Iwasfrozen

An Coilean wrote: »

NI has.

The reality is that in the UK only England has prospered, Wales Scotland and NI have not. NI is in a devolved UK with the same curancy, civil service etc., there is no reason that I can see that Ireland should do any better in the UK than NI has.

You are not saying you want it, but then again you are not saying you don't want it. so what do you want? Do you believe Ireland should be independant from the UK?

I disagree, NI is a basket case because of the troubles not because the region is economically unviable. It doesn't even matter that NI is a net recipient from London. Longford is a net recipient from Dublin. Even in a UI I would expect four out of six counties to be net recipients. (excluding Antrim and Down.)

I want to maintain the status quo.

Bertie Woot

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

That's more of an argument for Ireland to rejoin the UK, just saying. You're going to have to do better then an argument that brings it's logical conclusion somewhere else.

"The removal of the border would be beneficial in several ways.

As has been mentioned, it would see the duplication and waste inherent in having two civil services, two sets of emergency services, two health systems, two legal systems, two education systems etc etc removed.

In terms of FDI, we currently have two juristictions wasting resources trying to compete with each other to attract the same jobs to their side of the border. Every job won for London is a job lost for Dublin and vice versa. Instead of working against each other Ireland and Britain should be working together to attract jobs to Ireland, in a UK any job brought to the UK be it in London or Dublin is to the benefit of the archipelagos economy as a whole.

Having two currencies, two tax systems, two sets of state agencies dealing with business is a waste of resources and to the detriment of business across the archipelago."

Post reunification, how would you feel about a rejuvenation of the pre-1921 "Union of Great Britain and Ireland", only of course this time with Ireland being a completely autonomous, independent country and an equal partner with Great Britain?

The way I see it, unity is strength, and even with a former colonial power. A redefined re-union with Great Britain would provide tremendous socioeconomic benefits and imbue Northern Unionists with a sense of continuity with the past and an incentive to work for and with the new re-unified Republic.

sanbrafyffe

i can guarantee you sinn fein will never bring about a u.i,,we would prob have one by now if they werent there

An Coilean wrote: »

I would certainly support Unification, the border has never and will never make economic sense, it is to the detriment of both sides.

I would be very happy to see a movement for unity established that would allow people from all backgrounds who support unity to work twords that goal, it should not just be Sinn Féin.

An Coilean

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

I want to maintain the status quo.

Why? What, in your opinion is the reason that the south should not be in the UK?

Iwasfrozen

Bertie Woot wrote: »

Post reunification, how would you feel about a rejuvenation of the pre-1921 "Union of Great Britain and Ireland", only of course this time with Ireland being a completely autonomous, independent country and an equal partner with Great Britain?

I'd agree with it in principal but it won't happen, a union of four equal self governing nations would be ideal.

Bertie Woot wrote: »

The way I see it, unity is strength, and even with a former colonial power. A redefined re-union with Great Britain would provide tremendous socioeconomic benefits and imbue Northern Unionists with a sense of continuity with the past and an incentive to work for and with the new re-unified Republic.

I would agree but it won't happen because the UK won't give up their monarchy and nationalists won't give up their republic.

Iwasfrozen

An Coilean wrote: »

Why? What, in your opinion is the reason that the south should not be in the UK?

I don't want to destabilise my country. We have a good thing going here why mess it up.

sanbrafyffe

sure the union is breaking up,,,there will be no defined republic within the uk,,,if a united ireland is voted for well unionists will have to live with it and make it home,,,,,or else just croass the water,,thats the reality of it,,,i personally think unionists need to start talking on how a unifed ireland would work and how will it accomodate them

Bertie Woot wrote: »

Post reunification, how would you feel about a rejuvenation of the pre-1921 "Union of Great Britain and Ireland", only of course this time with Ireland being a completely autonomous, independent country and an equal partner with Great Britain?

The way I see it, unity is strength, and even with a former colonial power. A redefined re-union with Great Britain would provide tremendous socioeconomic benefits and imbue Northern Unionists with a sense of continuity with the past and an incentive to work for and with the new re-unified Republic.

COYW

An Coilean wrote: »

The removal of the border would be beneficial in several ways.

As has been mentioned, it would see the duplication and waste inherrent in having two civil services, two sets of emergency services, two health systems, two legal systems, two education systems etc etc removed.

And what do you plan on doing with all the people who will have to lose their job, as a result of the removal of all of this duplication?

An Coilean wrote: »

In terms of FDI, we currently have two juristictions wasting resources trying to compete with each other to attract the same jobs to their side of the border. Every job won for Belfast is a job lost for Dublin and vice versa. Instead of working against each other North and South should be working together to attract jobs to Ireland, in a UI any job brought to Ireland be it in Belfast or Cork is to the benefit of the islands economy as a whole.

Not really, a job that goes to Belfast instead of Dublin would still be a job lost for Dublin. The Dublin person would still be unemployed. NI is not match for us in terms of FDI at the moment.

An Coilean wrote: »

Having two currencies, two tax systems, two sets of state agencies dealing with business is a waste of resources and to the detriment of business across the island.

Re-unification with the UK would solve that problem for us and leave us in a far strong position in economic terms. We would be free from the Euro. As per above, removing the excesses in the public sector means redundancies. How do you plan on addressing this?

An Coilean wrote: »

Everyone North and South recognise the need for cross border co-operation, a United Ireland just brings this to its logical conclusion.
There is no economic basis for partition on this island, it is clearly to the economic detriment of both sides.

I still fail to see one economic benefit from a UI. Actually, from your points above we would be better off unifying with the UK, under the crown or staying as we are.

maccored wrote: »

How could it prove the economy? What, by not having a border and not having different currencies, and having one body responsible for the whole country rather than two different ones? You cant see how getting rid of the duality will save money? Isnt it obvious it would cost less and there'd be less wastage? Nevermind tourism. You'd get a massive influx of tourists if Ireland once and for all showed it was at peace.

As I said above, I don't see how it would save money. I believe it will cost money, unless you plan on making thousands of civil servants disappear or you severely cut the social welfare they would be paid. If you keep them within the public sector, doing other work, it would result in an astronomical public sector pay bill. You would need to implement drastic contract cuts to balance the books in that event.

As for tourism, I think a UI would have the little effect on tourism. The notion that more people will flock to Ireland because it is united is idealistic nonsense. Both NI and ROI are bleeding as much from tourism as they can at the moment.

An Coilean

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

I'd agree with it in principal but it won't happen, a union of four equal self governing nations would be ideal.

Why would that be preferable to four independant self governing nations co-operating on a basis of mutual interest through the EU?

Iwasfrozen

An Coilean wrote: »

Why would that be preferable to four independant self governing nations co-operating on a basis of mutual interest through the EU?

From your post,

"The removal of the border would be beneficial in several ways.

As has been mentioned, it would see the duplication and waste inherent in having two civil services, two sets of emergency services, two health systems, two legal systems, two education systems etc etc removed.

In terms of FDI, we currently have two juristictions wasting resources trying to compete with each other to attract the same jobs to their side of the border. Every job won for London is a job lost for Dublin and vice versa. Instead of working against each other Ireland and Britain should be working together to attract jobs to Ireland, in a UK any job brought to the UK be it in London or Dublin is to the benefit of the archipelagos economy as a whole.

Having two currencies, two tax systems, two sets of state agencies dealing with business is a waste of resources and to the detriment of business across the archipelago."

Happyman42

marienbad wrote: »

And it would appear the Republic can't now either !

Britain had to be bailed out too in 70s/80s, it's transitory. N.I. has never been able to govern itself.

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Only somebody who is addicted to instability and the promotion of violence would be in favour of 1 million odd unionists joining our state.

Mayo has failed it can't support itself without subsides from Dublin.

It's amazing every argument made by nationalists can be logically turned on it's head. Says a lot about the validity of your cause.

Why would it be violent? I thought Unionists where democrats and went with what the majority wanted?

Iwasfrozen

Happyman42 wrote: »

Why would it be violent? I thought Unionists where democrats and went with what the majority wanted?

I wouldn't count on it. And I know what you're going to respond with "but why should we let thugs dictate to the rest of us?"

Well we shouldn't. But we also shouldn't needlessly destabilise our country. Unionists did that when they treated Catholics like shít and I personally don't feel like inheriting their problems.

Happyman42

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

I wouldn't count on it. And I know what you're going to respond with "but why should we let thugs dictate to the rest of us?"

Well we shouldn't. But we also shouldn't needlessly destabilise our country. Unionists did that when they treated Catholics like shít and I personally don't feel like inheriting their problems.

N.I. is and will continue destabilising the island. I feel responsible for the problems on this island and I don't shy away from them. That is why N.I. exists in the first place. Sooner or later we all have to face up to it, we are a good bit down that road with the GFA, time to put it to right, once and for all.

Iwasfrozen

Happyman42 wrote: »

N.I. is and will continue destabilising the island. I feel responsible for the problems on this island and I don't shy away from them. That is why N.I. exists in the first place. Sooner or later we all have to face up to it, we are a good bit down that road with the GFA, time to put it to right, once and for all.

I disagree, we are in a good spot. We've had twenty odd years of peace now and even when the troubles were in full swing we emerged relatively unscathed. Some notable examples like the Dublin and Monaghan bombings and that incident in Clontibret but over all we got off light. Our country was never de stabilised.

Let the UK sort it's own problems, we've got plenty of our own.

Bertie Woot

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

I'd agree with it in principal but it won't happen, a union of four equal self governing nations would be ideal.

You have to acknowledge the fact that three of those nations are on one island ie. Great Britain, whilst a reunified Ireland is on a separate island (stating the obvious). Despite the domination of one island by the other in the past, future arrangements could create an equal partnership between Great Britain ie. England, Scotland and Wales and a reunified Ireland, and for the betterment of a 32 county Republic.

I would agree but it won't happen because the UK won't give up their monarchy and nationalists won't give up their republic.

No-one is asking the UK to give up its monarchy, and no-one is requesting that Irish Nationalists give up their Republic. It is possible to have a rejuvenated re-union of Great Britain and Ireland, with GB remaining a monarchy if that is the British people's desire, and the ROI remaining an independent Republic.

Happyman42

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

I disagree, we are in a good spot. We've had twenty odd years of peace now and even when the troubles were in full swing we emerged relatively unscathed. Some notable examples like the Dublin and Monaghan bombings and that incident in Clontibret but over all we got off light. Our country was never de stabilised.

Let the UK sort it's own problems, we've got plenty of our own.

You are just the type of person who the extremists wanted to target, 'campaigns of terror' are designed to get people like you to face up and do something. Thankfully, the British and Irish governemnts finally succumbed to it and sat down and trashed out a deal. Now it is our turn, to consolidate the peace, because it simply will not hold, it is breaking down on the fringes as we speak.
The conflict in N.I. exists because we in the south, either colluded with the British, turned a blind eye, or refused to take responsibility for those that we abandoned in the first place. There is more to do.

marienbad

Happyman42 wrote: »

You are just the type of person who the extremists wanted to target, 'campaigns of terror' are designed to get people like you to face up and do something. Thankfully, the British and Irish governemnts finally succumbed to it and sat down and trashed out a deal. Now it is our turn, to consolidate the peace, because it simply will not hold, it is breaking down on the fringes as we speak.
The conflict in N.I. exists because we in the south, either colluded with the British, turned a blind eye, or refused to take responsibility for those that we abandoned in the first place. There is more to do.

Or we could contemplate the unthinkable - people like you facing down the extremists ?

Iwasfrozen

Happyman42 wrote: »

You are just the type of person who the extremists wanted to target, 'campaigns of terror' are designed to get people like you to face up and do something. Thankfully, the British and Irish governemnts finally succumbed to it and sat down and trashed out a deal. Now it is our turn, to consolidate the peace, because it simply will not hold, it is breaking down on the fringes as we speak.
The conflict in N.I. exists because we in the south, either colluded with the British, turned a blind eye, or refused to take responsibility for those that we abandoned in the first place. There is more to do.

I agree that we have a strategic interest in seeing peace in NI, that's exactly why we shouldn't upset the apple cart now.

There is no more to do, we have our country and our independence. NI is not our problem. If violence breaks out again the only thing we have to do is make sure it doesn't spill over our borders.

Iwasfrozen

Bertie Woot wrote: »

You have to acknowledge the fact that three of those nations are on one island ie. Great Britain, whilst a reunified Ireland is on a separate island (stating the obvious). Despite the domination of one island by the other in the past, future arrangements could create an equal partnership between Great Britain ie. England, Scotland and Wales and a reunified Ireland, and for the betterment of a 32 county Republic.



No-one is asking the UK to give up its monarchy, and no-one is requesting that Irish Nationalists give up their Republic. It is possible to have a rejuvenated re-union of Great Britain and Ireland, with GB remaining a monarchy if that is the British people's desire, and the ROI remaining an independent Republic.

Yeah I agree with that but the Phillipines is set on an archipelago and they seem to make it work. The beauty of a federal structure is that it limits central governments power.

Happyman42

marienbad wrote: »

Or we could contemplate the unthinkable - people like you facing down the extremists ?

You obviously have no idea about what was done to stop the more extreme and radical elements from ramping up the conflict.

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

I agree that we have a strategic interest in seeing peace in NI, that's exactly why we shouldn't upset the apple cart now.

There is no more to do, we have our country and our independence. NI is not our problem. If violence breaks out again the only thing we have to do is make sure it doesn't spill over our borders.

And that is as good an example of the partitionist/I'm alright Jack thinking that will cyclically bring the fundamental problems in Ireland back to the fore, again and again. It's a quietly shocking thing to write.

COYW

sanbrafyffe wrote: »

if a united ireland is voted for well unionists will have to live with it and make it home,,,,,or else just croass the water,,thats the reality of it

Happyman42 wrote: »

N.I. has never been able to govern itself

And it wouldn't be governing itself in a UI. We would be governing and supporting it, just like the mainland UK is now.

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

I wouldn't count on it. And I know what you're going to respond with "but why should we let thugs dictate to the rest of us?"

Well we shouldn't. But we also shouldn't needlessly destabilise our country. Unionists did that when they treated Catholics like shít and I personally don't feel like inheriting their problems.

Yes, bang on Iwasfrozen, and just to add, how do republicans plan to prevent the possibility (inevitable in my opinion) of unionists being treated like dirt in their (a republican) UI. I have quoted sanbrafyffe, as case in point of this. He or she is hardly promoting a shared future built on respect, is he/she! By the sounds of it, he/she wants some pure Nationalist country where anybody outside that spectrum can "just croass the water", i.e. go to another country. Lovely stuff!!!

junder

Happyman42 wrote: »

Who would you blame for the current peace? Those Unionists who said no, no, no and had to be dragged and are still being dragged into a normalised democracy?
N.I. failed and had to be rescued by the Irish and British governments (the British too, having to be dragged by death and violence to the table)
It cannot now function without the intervention and supervision of both governments. One of those governments has signalled by international agreement that it no longer has a strategic interest and is only there so long as Unionists are in the majority. The question is, do you want to be positive and proactive or do you want more kicking and screaming.

I'm sorry to have to point this out, but republicans lost, the gfa was thier terms of surrender, Northern Ireland is secure within the union, and thanks to the gfa britian, or should I say England can't get rid of us, since only the people of Northern Ireland can decide thier future and most recent evidence shows the majorty of people are happy with the way things are. It's funny watching republicans try and trust defeat into victory, they fought a 30 year conflict to gets the Brits out, not only are the 'Brits' still here, they are now garrisoned here, just like any other part of the UK. British rule is still in place, although now republicans have accepted British ministerial posistion and are now responsible for administrating 'British rule in Ireland'. Yes Martin did shake the queens hand, but not as a fellow head of state as he had hoped, but electoral failure in the republic ment he had to shake her hand as an employee. Slight tangent here but talking about elections in the republic, finna foil managed to all but run the Irish economy into the ground, the Irish state had to run cap in hand to the eu for a bail out, even the hated Brits had to lend youse some money, to say the Irish people where displeased is an understatement. Perfect time for Sinn Fein to capatilse on this anger, instead they only managed a couple of extra seats and a failed presidential campagin. Now polls are showing that the Irish people are still sticking with the main stream party's, talk about missing the boat. Every objective the pira set itself it failed and now it disarmed does not sound like a victory to me. Sinn Fein and more importantly the dissidents know , the longer Northern Ireland remains stable, the further the prospect of a united ireland becomes

marienbad

Happyman42 wrote: »

You obviously have no idea about what was done to stop the more extreme and radical elements from ramping up the conflict.



And that is as good an example of the partitionist/I'm alright Jack thinking that will cyclically bring the fundamental problems in Ireland back to the fore, again and again. It's a quietly shocking thing to write.

And you obviously have no idea what ideas I have . All you are proposing is your way or no way

OCorcrainn

junder wrote: »

republicans lost, the gfa was thier terms of surrender

This is exactly the kind of mentality amongst Loyalists and Unionist that keeps dragging NI into the gutter and that sow division. Nobody lost, and it those kind of comments by you that highlight this confrontational and hostile attitude unionists have towards people who disagree with them, you turn something positive like the GFA into something you can rub in the faces of nationalists instead of getting along with them. You disappoint me.

pablomakaveli

Happyman42 wrote: »

And that is as good an example of the partitionist/I'm alright Jack thinking that will cyclically bring the fundamental problems in Ireland back to the fore, again and again. It's a quietly shocking thing to write.

Actually he's thinking logically. What sane person would want to destabilize and damage their country?

You can call it selfish or partitionist or whatever but the reality is things are better than they have been in a long time. The status quo seems the best option for peace in NI as things stand.

Republicans are like the dog chasing the car. They wouldnt know what to do with a UI if they got it yet they'll chase it down no matter what the cost if even that cost is the end to the current peace. Its probably more selfish and shocking to want to throw that peace away so needlessly.