"IF" a United Ireland did happen...(Mod warning in OP, stay on topic!))

Berserker

eire4 wrote: »

Support what? More devolved powers? If they go that route I don't see London still being prepared to subsidize Stormont to the massive extent they currently do.

Why not? The unionists are pushing for this since the result of the Scottish vote. It might actually work out well for Westminster. NI can't really get much worse as public finances goes. It is heavily reliant on the public sector. The private sector workers think and work like public sector workers as well. The private sector in the RoI is like the moon to them. Whatever way you look at things, Westminster is going to be pumping billions into NI for many years to come.

Also, as a matter of interest, how would welfare recipients be dealt with? Welfare in NI is far less generous than welfare down here. How would you manage that? Are you going to cut it down here? Or are you going to leave those in NI with less to live on than those in the RoI.

eire4

Berserker wrote: »

Why not? The unionists are pushing for this since the result of the Scottish vote. It might actually work out well for Westminster. NI can't really get much worse as public finances goes. It is heavily reliant on the public sector. The private sector workers think and work like public sector workers as well. The private sector in the RoI is like the moon to them. Whatever way you look at things, Westminster is going to be pumping billions into NI for many years to come.

Also, as a matter of interest, how would welfare recipients be dealt with? Welfare in NI is far less generous than welfare down here. How would you manage that? Are you going to cut it down here? Or are you going to leave those in NI with less to live on than those in the RoI.

Because I don't see them giving up power and yet still having to pay for everything and being responsible for everything as well.

The Corinthian

NI does not have a real economy. While social welfare payments there are lower than in the Republic, they enjoy benefits in education and health that the south can only dream of. Unemployment is kept low though high public sector expenditure (I believe it accounts for something like 40% of employment) and a generous grant system.

Running at what is presently an over 100% deficit, it's not difficult to conclude that this is basically a single-resource economy, which uses that resource to fund everything else which is running at a loss. Unlike other single-resource economies like Libya or Venezuela, that resource is not oil, but subsidies from the UK.

Why isn't difficult to understand. PJ O'Roorke noted the use of the phrase "acceptable level of violence" in NI, and basically that's what it is - keep people in jobs and benefits at all costs, so that they're not butchering everyone.

The problem is that the RoI cannot afford to maintain this approach. Even if it could, it could never sell it to the southern electorate who would have to see their taxes increased even further so that northerners could continue to get their free dental care.

Meanwhile NI has no stomach for economic reform. Who wants to give up their cushy state funded gigs?

And no one is suggesting any alternatives that would make a united Ireland viable. Unionists have no interest in doing so. Nationalists, Sinn Fein in particular, still live in the magical land of 1980's Marxism. London and Dublin mumble a few things but effectively passed the buck when they both accepted the principle of self determination.

And, AFAIK, the only suggestion has been a political, rather than economic one, for a federal Ireland, which hardly addresses the question of what happens when a federal unit of that Ireland cannot pay the bills - I think the idea is that they get autonomy, but no fiscal responsibility, and that's not a concept that's going to sell down south, even with the armchair republicans who'll end up voting with their pockets rather than their hearts at the end of the day.

So until that's resolved, I can't see unification happening. And given that only the Northern nationalists are doing more than spouting platitudes to pursue this end, I cant see a resolution any time soon, given that economics is still a distant priority after issues like marches and flags for them.

Godge

http://sluggerotoole.com/2014/11/05/despite-a-slightly-increased-catholic-population-parents-are-walking-away-from-segregated-ed/


Interesting article with very interesting statistics regarding the move away from Catholic schools to integrated educatiom.

A further statistical sign of people moving away from the United Ireland idea.

maccored

?

No - it shows people moving away from religion surely?

Godge wrote: »

http://sluggerotoole.com/2014/11/05/despite-a-slightly-increased-catholic-population-parents-are-walking-away-from-segregated-ed/


Interesting article with very interesting statistics regarding the move away from Catholic schools to integrated educatiom.

A further statistical sign of people moving away from the United Ireland idea.

Happyman42

Godge wrote: »

http://sluggerotoole.com/2014/11/05/despite-a-slightly-increased-catholic-population-parents-are-walking-away-from-segregated-ed/


Interesting article with very interesting statistics regarding the move away from Catholic schools to integrated educatiom.

A further statistical sign of people moving away from the United Ireland idea.

What?

You do know it takes two to 'integrate'?

eire4

Godge wrote: »

http://sluggerotoole.com/2014/11/05/despite-a-slightly-increased-catholic-population-parents-are-walking-away-from-segregated-ed/


Interesting article with very interesting statistics regarding the move away from Catholic schools to integrated educatiom.

A further statistical sign of people moving away from the United Ireland idea.

Can't say I would agree with that. It suggests to me a move away from denominational education and not very surprising given the churchs behaviour in Ireland which has been exposed in recent years. Hopefully also a positive for the long term future of Ireland.

DarkyHughes

Godge wrote: »

I would also suggest that

(1) the South will not take on any financial burden
(2) the South will not let the North maintain its devolved powers

There will be many in the North otherwise in favour of unity who would baulk at them.

A further lesson from the Scottish referendum is that people will want to know what happens after the vote.

Wouldn't it be a lot easier if we did? Just like England letting Scotland & Wales having devolved powers?

Oh and along with the 6 counties in Ulster we (Republicans) have a new demand. We want county Kilburn in London back. :pac:

Godge

DarkyHughes wrote: »

Wouldn't it be a lot easier if we did? Just like England letting Scotland & Wales having devolved powers?

Oh and along with the 6 counties in Ulster we (Republicans) have a new demand. We want county Kilburn in London back. :pac:

So we let the North keep their devolved powers but without the subsidy from London. How would that work out?

Well, the North would vote no, it would be mad to vote otherwise.
If we were to pick up the tab, we would be mad to vote yes.

There is no hope for Irish unity until Northern Ireland weans itself off the English tit.

Happyman42

Godge wrote: »

There is no hope for Irish unity until Northern Ireland weans itself off the English tit.

English?

One of Britain's ways of 'letting go'(convincing the Unionists) will be to constantly and incremently remove that tit and that process of convincing has begun.

alastair

Happyman42 wrote: »

English?

One of Britain's ways of 'letting go'(convincing the Unionists) will be to constantly and incremently remove that tit and that process of convincing has begun.

And when will this process start? Other than in your head, of course?

eire4

alastair wrote: »

And when will this process start? Other than in your head, of course?

Well if London continues to cut back on the subsidy they send to Belfast each year to keep it afloat that will certainly have a massive effect. I believe the cut was about 1b this year. in 2012 Belfast got an 11b subsidy so a 1b cut is a sizeable number.

katydid

Godge wrote: »

http://sluggerotoole.com/2014/11/05/despite-a-slightly-increased-catholic-population-parents-are-walking-away-from-segregated-ed/


Interesting article with very interesting statistics regarding the move away from Catholic schools to integrated educatiom.

A further statistical sign of people moving away from the United Ireland idea.

I don't see the connection.

Happyman42

alastair wrote: »

And when will this process start? Other than in your head, of course?

It began with the mechanism for British withdrawal without blame...the GFA.

alastair

Happyman42 wrote: »

It began with the mechanism for British withdrawal without blame...the GFA.

The mechanism that re-inforced the commitment to the union you mean? Nope, that's neither a process of withdrawal, nor anything to do with 'blame'. It provides precisely the same 'withdrawal mechanism', that applies to Scotland. See any evidence of 'unconvincing' at play there?

alastair

eire4 wrote: »

Well if London continues to cut back on the subsidy they send to Belfast each year to keep it afloat that will certainly have a massive effect. I believe the cut was about 1b this year. in 2012 Belfast got an 11b subsidy so a 1b cut is a sizeable number.

Cutbacks are a reality across the entirety of the UK. And unless those cutbacks plummet into the reality of what could be provided to NI under a 32 county republic, the 'massive effect' would have precisely zero influence in moving away from the union.

Happyman42

alastair wrote: »

The mechanism that re-inforced the commitment to the union you mean? Nope, that's neither a process of withdrawal, nor anything to do with 'blame'. It provides precisely the same 'withdrawal mechanism', that applies to Scotland. See any evidence of 'unconvincing' at play there?

The mechanism that says, when the the majority decide you are not part of Britain, we are gone.
I agree with Molyneaux and other Unionists...it was their darkest hour ('this is the worst thing that ever happened to us' I think where Molynneaux's exact words.) the day the agreement was signed. Implicit in the agreement is the statement, you are not going to be defended as British if the time comes.
That is the Unionist insecurity that underlines everything since...flegs, SF are getting everything huffing...etc etc.

alastair

Happyman42 wrote: »

The mechanism that says, when the the majority decide you are not part of Britain, we are gone.

And until then, the union is secure - just like Scotland. Are you claiming that the UK is trying to disengage from Scotland?

Happyman42 wrote: »

Implicit in the agreement is the statement, you are not going to be defended as British if the time comes.

Again, nonsense. The UK has never made it it's business to defend 'Britishness' in any part of the UK.

Happyman42

alastair wrote: »

And until then, the union is secure - just like Scotland. Are you claiming that the UK is trying to disengage from Scotland?

No similarity to. Scotland was ever inferred by me.

Again, nonsense. The UK has never made it it's business to defend 'Britishness' in any part of the UK.

They sent warships to The Malvinas, also disputed territory to defend the right of those there who wished to be British. They have agreed in an internationally binding agreed not to defend that right in a part of the UK. Explains the insecurity of Unionists since, every inch towards normality has been fought.

alastair

Happyman42 wrote: »

No similarity to. Scotland was ever inferred by me.

Of course not. Because that would confirm that the Scottish have the same deal, and no-one pretends that there's a move to disconnect them from the UK.

Happyman42 wrote: »

They sent warships to The Malvinas, also disputed territory to defend the right of those there who wished to be British. They have agreed in an internationally binding agreed not to defend that right in a part of the UK. Explains the insecurity of Unionists since, every inch towards normality has been fought.

Actually, I think you'll find that the Falkland Islanders were obliged to hold a referendum on their preferred political status, by the UK government. The UK, as it's always done, will defend the interests of it's citizenry, but that's on the basis of the consent of that citizenry. The UK government has no role to play in defending any of it's citizens preferred parades, flag etiquette, or any other antics you appear to believe defines 'Britishness'.

The GFA confirms the sovereignty of NI inside the UK. It makes no pretense that the UK will not defend that sovereignty, right up to the point that it is no longer mandated to do so by the people. Just as it does in Scotland, and, indeed, the Falkland Islands.

ardmacha

Godge wrote:

http://sluggerotoole.com/2014/11/05/...segregated-ed/

Interesting article with very interesting statistics regarding the move away from Catholic schools to integrated educatiom.

A further statistical sign of people moving away from the United Ireland idea.

katydid wrote: »

I don't see the connection.

Are people in Dublin who send their children to multi denominational schools not Irish?

katydid

ardmacha wrote: »

Are people in Dublin who send their children to multi denominational schools not Irish?

I presume most of them are.

I still don't see the connection.

ardmacha

katydid wrote: »

I don't see the connection.

katydid wrote: »

I presume most of them are.

I still don't see the connection.

Exactly. There is no connection.

Karl Stein

Scotland is very different, in a geopolitical sense, to the north. Scotland has nuclear power stations, oil and gas, naval bases and a land border to name but a few differences.

Scotland is strategically important to England/London. The north is a boil on the UK's arse.

Happyman42

ardmacha wrote: »

Exactly. There is no connection.

Correct, there is NO connection but there is a fundamental misunderstanding of what the conflict was about.

Godge

ardmacha wrote: »

Are people in Dublin who send their children to multi denominational schools not Irish?

ardmacha wrote: »

Exactly. There is no connection.

Northern Ireland is different. Segregated education has been used by both sides to preserve the Irish and UK national identities respectively.

Integrated education promotes integration within the existing political framework, an increase in integrated education is a blow to those on either side who would favour a change to London or Dublin rule, it will help build the Northern Ireland identity.

Happyman42

Godge wrote: »

Northern Ireland is different. Segregated education has been used by both sides to preserve the Irish and UK national identities respectively.

Integrated education promotes integration within the existing political framework, an increase in integrated education is a blow to those on either side who would favour a change to London or Dublin rule, it will help build the Northern Ireland identity.

Took you that long to come up with an answer? :rolleyes:
Integrated education will break down the barriers between the two communities, it is what the proponents of that system have been saying since they started.
The breakdown of barriers is what those who are trying to unite are trying to achieve.
What won't happen as a result is further entrenchment.

The Corinthian

Happyman42 wrote: »

Took you that long to come up with an answer? :rolleyes:

Now now - while I actually would tend to agree with you on the point in question, there's no call for that. His delay, after all, may simply be down to having a life beyond posting here... :P

Happyman42

The Corinthian wrote: »

Now now - while I actually would tend to agree with you on the point in question, there's no call for that. His delay, after all, may simply be down to having a life beyond posting here... :P

Accepted. Although it is evident that he/she has been very active elsewhere.

Godge

Happyman42 wrote: »

Took you that long to come up with an answer? :rolleyes:
Integrated education will break down the barriers between the two communities, it is what the proponents of that system have been saying since they started.
The breakdown of barriers is what those who are trying to unite are trying to achieve.
What won't happen as a result is further entrenchment.

Yes, it will unite people as Northern Irish, they will see what they have in common as more important that what they differ on.

mountsky

Can't imagine Ireland will ever be the 32 counties as a whole, no chance

eire4

mountsky wrote: »

Can't imagine Ireland will ever be the 32 counties as a whole, no chance

Few believed the independance Ireland has today was possible at the begining of the 20th century and they were wrong thankfully.

sparky42

eire4 wrote: »

Few believed the independance Ireland has today was possible at the begining of the 20th century and they were wrong thankfully.

It won't happen in this generation (even the most positive polling doesn't get a majority even out to 30 years), by then you are talking about being separated for as long as the Act of Union had us joined to the UK. Given the realities that both the Republic and the North would have to face up to it's extremely unlikely to say the least.

Godge

sparky42 wrote: »

It won't happen in this generation (even the most positive polling doesn't get a majority even out to 30 years), by then you are talking about being separated for as long as the Act of Union had us joined to the UK. Given the realities that both the Republic and the North would have to face up to it's extremely unlikely to say the least.

I won't live long enough to see out this prediction but I cannot see a United Ireland this century.

eire4

Godge wrote: »

I won't live long enough to see out this prediction but I cannot see a United Ireland this century.

Time will tell I guess. Personally I hope your prediction proves to be wrong.

sparky42

eire4 wrote: »

Time will tell I guess. Personally I hope your prediction proves to be wrong.

Sure, we'll be back in an IMF bailout for years and would face massive costs, but yeah!:rolleyes:

katydid

eire4 wrote: »

Time will tell I guess. Personally I hope your prediction proves to be wrong.

You want all that Northern madness to come to this state?

katydid

eire4 wrote: »

Few believed the independance Ireland has today was possible at the begining of the 20th century and they were wrong thankfully.

It only happened because we were realistic enough to know that it wouldn't work with the north eastern counties on board. And it still wouldn't.

DarkyHughes

katydid wrote: »

You want all that Northern madness to come to this state?

So you just want to heap all on them across the water? That's very anti-British of you.

DarkyHughes

katydid wrote: »

It only happened because we were realistic enough to know that it wouldn't work with the north eastern counties on board. And it still wouldn't.

The North Eastern counties didn't work very well by themselves or as part of another state. Bring them into the rest of the state on island might improve things.

tomwaterford

katydid wrote: »

It only happened because we were realistic enough to know that it wouldn't work with the north eastern counties on board. And it still wouldn't.

In reality the north east was the economic powerhouse of early 20tu centray Ireland it representes around 35% of the ecomby of Ireland at the time and its its removal made the state uneconomicly viable for a long time...it is a half truth that Britain cared about unionists in the north...it kept them as part of the treaty due to the simple reality it was financial worthwhile...hense it's abandonment of southern unionists

katydid

DarkyHughes wrote: »

So you just want to heap all on them across the water? That's very anti-British of you.

I don't want to "heap" them anywhere. They are where they are, and they're not putting in or out on anyone except themselves.

katydid

tomwaterford wrote: »

In reality the north east was the economic powerhouse of early 20tu centray Ireland it representes around 35% of the ecomby of Ireland at the time and its its removal made the state uneconomicly viable for a long time...it is a half truth that Britain cared about unionists in the north...it kept them as part of the treaty due to the simple reality it was financial worthwhile...hense it's abandonment of southern unionists

It might have made economic sense but it didn't make political sense and it still doesn't.

katydid

DarkyHughes wrote: »

The North Eastern counties didn't work very well by themselves or as part of another state. Bring them into the rest of the state on island might improve things.

Maybe for them. Not for us. We have enough troubles here. Do you really think things would be improved by dragging a tens of thousands of bigots kicking and screaming into our state?

DarkyHughes

katydid wrote: »

Maybe for them. Not for us. We have enough troubles here. Do you really think things would be improved by dragging a tens of thousands of bigots kicking and screaming into our state?

It could sort them out by bringing them into a bigger state & their petty little differences become more irrelevant. I don't think they'd be a burden at all, they have some really skilled & resilient people who would be a big assist to any state if their skills are applied properly.

tomwaterford

katydid wrote: »

It might have made economic sense but it didn't make political sense and it still doesn't.

The conspiracy being that the north would power on and the south would falter and Ireland would look to return cap in hand to the union (still get people asking around boards should we go back)
They.severely underestimated the capacity of Ireland to achieve on its own...they made the mistake that Ireland would pay for them bailing out there bankrupt landlords in Ireland less than 20 years beforehand...so when people laugh at de valera (for all his faults) for engaging in a terrible economic war you would wonder do they know Irish history atal!!

katydid

DarkyHughes wrote: »

It could sort them out by bringing them into a bigger state & their petty little differences become more irrelevant. I don't think they'd be a burden at all, they have some really skilled & resilient people who would be a big assist to any state if their skills are applied properly.

"Petty little differences"? Are you joking? You think the Troubles are down to "petty little differences!? That three thousand people died for "petty little differences"?

Over a million people up there have no desire to be part of this state. They are not going to wake up one and change their mind. The ones who riot at any threat to their precious Union Jack are not going to shrug their shoulders and give allegiance to the Tricolour.

You don't live in the real world if you think that.

tomwaterford

katydid wrote: »

"Petty little differences"? Are you joking? You think the Troubles are down to "petty little differences!? That three thousand people died for "petty little differences"?

Over a million people up there have no desire to be part of this state. They are not going to wake up one and change their mind. The ones who riot at any threat to their precious Union Jack are not going to shrug their shoulders and give allegiance to the Tricolour.

You don't live in the real world if you think that.

The strange reality is that those who riot the worst have the most to gain in a united Ireland with its less class conscious society...they are being by and large directed by people whose disdain for the poorer in society is pathological...they have most to gain from improved access to higher level education etc....they are deliberately being held back by there politicans.

katydid

tomwaterford wrote: »

The strange reality is that those who riot the worst have the most to gain in a united Ireland with its less class conscious society...they are being by and large directed by people whose disdain for the poorer in society is pathological...they have most to gain from improved access to higher level education etc....they are deliberately being held back by there politicans.

I agree to a certain extent. But their identification with Britain is more than something manipulated by politicians, it is a genuine, visceral thing, going back generations.

tomwaterford

katydid wrote: »

I agree to a certain extent. But their identification with Britain is more than something manipulated by politicians, it is a genuine, visceral thing, going back generations.

This is true...but there is alot of Anglo Irish families who very much identified as British by and large got on well in the free state...im just pointing out that they are being manipulated and was always amazed something along the lines of a Sinn Fein for working class loyalist never emerged....surly there are leaders within loyalist community who arent completey dismissive of the poor/religious nutjobs...it's Llike this do people genuinely think that the dup aren't ramping up tension about the flag for the care of the poor or are theu targetng a very marginal seat held by the alliance party in Belfast??