How long before Irish reunification?

janfebmar

Fionn1952 wrote: »

Ah yes, the old school of, 'totally making numbers up with no basis whatsoever'.

I reckon the North will cost twenty seven euro and forty cent a year on the deficit....at a guess, because feelings! About as useful as your, 'estimate'.

Just a ball park guess. Given so many people in N I. are on the government payroll in one way or another, how much extra would their pay / pensions / unemployment have to be increased by to bring it in to line with the Republic ?

Fionn1952

15-20 years

janfebmar wrote: »

Fionn1952 wrote: »

Ah yes, the old school of, 'totally making numbers up with no basis whatsoever'.

I reckon the North will cost twenty seven euro and forty cent a year on the deficit....at a guess, because feelings! About as useful as your, 'estimate'.

Just a ball park guess. Given so many people in N I. are on the government payroll in one way or another, how much extra would their pay / pensions / unemployment have to be increased by to bring it in to line with the Republic ?

Since we're just making up figures, I'll, 'ballpark guess' that it'll cost twelve euro.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Read the commitments the British and Irish Government signed up to in the WA which are directly taken from their committments in the GFA.







It is vital that the Irish Government 'intefere' to see to it that commitments made in the GFA are upheld. So far that has been done in negotiating the WA.

I asked you for the relevant paragraph from the GFA, not the WA.

ittakestwo

20-30 years

janfebmar wrote: »

Just a ball park guess. Given so many people in N I. are on the government payroll in one way or another, how much extra would their pay / pensions / unemployment have to be increased by to bring it in to line with the Republic ?

That's it. If the north is already running a deficit of £10bn (€11bn) PA with the UK, with public wages and social benefits far lower than the souths. It would have to be presumed that €11bn deficit would balloon if they were going to reline the norths public wages and social benefits with the souths.

Stop moaning ffs

10-15 years

ittakestwo wrote: »

That's it. If the north is already running a deficit of £10bn (€11bn) with the UK, with public wages and social benefits far lower than the souths. It would have to be presumed that €11bn deficit would balloon if they were going to reline the norths public wages and social benefits with the souths.

That’s answered in the FT link Posted above. Jan is well. A bit of a fantasist and often lies outright. You’d be best reading her posts with that front of you mind.

blanch152

blanch152 wrote: »

I have the considered opinion that the cost will be at least €12 billion. That is based on numerous discussions and analyses on here and in the media.

Furthermore, integration will require both tax increases and social welfare costs. For example, the cost of extending child benefit rates in the South to everyone in the North is about €300m




https://www.nisra.gov.uk/publications/registrar-general-annual-report-2016-births

23,075 births in Northern Ireland in 2016.

https://www.cso.ie/multiquicktables/quickTables.aspx?id=vsa02_vsa09_vsa18

63,841 in Ireland in 2016.


https://www.gov.uk/child-benefit-rates

Child benefit rate in Northern Ireland is £20.70 (€23) for first child per week and £13.70 (€15.23) for each other child, giving monthly rates of €100 and €66.23.

https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/social_welfare/social_welfare_payments/social_welfare_payments_to_families_and_children/child_benefit.html

Child benefit rates in Ireland are €140 for each child up until the eight child.

Assume that there is a 50-50 split between first and other children. There is an extra monthly cost per child (€40 for the first child and €73.67 for every other child) for every child born in Northern Ireland.

That gives a total extra cost per month of €1.311m or €15.73m per year if you applied it in the first year to newborns. If the increase is applied to all children, that would mean an annual cost of around €270m. That isn't in anyone's €12 billion.

It is a simple cost to calculate. You can argue with my methods, but that would mean that the estimate is somewhere between €240m and €300m a year for harmonising child benefit. What price all social welfare benefits?

Now think about who pays for that, on top of harmonising other social welfare payments, and where does that leave tax? Do we harmonise tax upwards as well to pay for this?

The only way that a united Ireland will work is if there are tax increases and social welfare cuts. Given that generally income taxes are lower in the South, and social welfare is higher in the South, that will mean pain for most people in the South, not just to pay for the €12 billion, but also for harmonisation.

While you might take comfort in the fact that 37% would be happy for taxes to increase to pay for unity, most of that 37% probably don't pay much income tax so don't really care, but if you asked whether you would be prepared to accept tax increases and social welfare cuts, I bet the 37% would drop through the floor.

Do you want the good news? TV licence in the North is £145.50 (€161.84) but €160 in the South, so only a €1.84 increase in the TV licence.

Fionn1952 wrote: »

Since we're just making up figures, I'll, 'ballpark guess' that it'll cost twelve euro.

Here is my post from earlier in the thread where I set out the cost of harmonising child benefit rates - somewhere in the region of €240 - 300m.

Now obviously, you could cut child benefit rates in the South instead, but that would hardly increase support for a UI?

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

I asked you for the relevant paragraph from the GFA, not the WA.

Amazed you have to ask that.

GFA wrote:

(vi) recognise the birthright of all the people of Northern Ireland to identify themselves and be accepted as Irish or British, or both, as they may so choose, and accordingly confirm that their right to hold both British and Irish citizenship is accepted by both Governments and would not be affected by any future change in the status of Northern Ireland.

Here is Leo Varadkar on what was achieved in the WA on behalf of those who identified as Irish, under the GFA

Leo Varadkar wrote:

So, what's been achieved?

1. The Good Friday Agreement in all its parts is protected.

2. Everyone born in Northern Ireland will continue to have the right to Irish and therefore EU citizenship. So, a child born in Belfast or Derry today will have the right to study in Paris, buy property in Spain, work in Berlin or any other part of the European Union. All they have to do is exercise the right to Irish and therefore EU citizenship.

And for your further education, here is the section of the WA dealing with the Irish dimension.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/the-irish-chapter-of-the-draft-brexit-withdrawal-agreement-1.3697971

ittakestwo

20-30 years

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

That’s answered in the FT link Posted above. Jan is well. A bit of a fantasist and often lies outright. You’d be best reading her posts with that front of you mind.

The FT article seems to make no allowance for the fact that the €10bn deficit will go up if the north pay and social welfare get relined with the souths.

They seem to just say the north currently runs a €10bn deficit with the UK and Ireland could afford a 10bn deficit..... But what would the defcit be if the north public wages and social benefits were the same as the souths? presumably a lot higher than the €10bn they quote and can we afford it then.

Stop moaning ffs

10-15 years

ittakestwo wrote: »

The FT article seems to make no allowance for the fact that the €10bn deficit will go up if the north pay and social welfare get relined with the souths.

They seem to just say the north currently runs a €10bn deficit with the UK and Ireland could afford a 10bn deficit..... But what would the defcit be if the north public wages and social benefits were the same as the souths? presumably a lot higher than the €10bn they quote and can we afford it then.

I think you’re confusing deficit with the subsidy they get? Sorry if I’m reading that wrong.
The subsidy they get from the uk also pays for load of mad random stuff like The monarchy and military. So it’s acmuch lower number around 5 or 6 billion when those are factored out.
The huge civil service up there would be streamlined and aligned with our own. The pay and pensions and voluntary redundancies on offer for all those employed would be the responsibility of the UK as they’re the employers. Ireland would take on the the pay and so forth of those staying on in a UI civil service

Fionn1952

15-20 years

blanch152 wrote: »

blanch152 wrote: »

I have the considered opinion that the cost will be at least €12 billion. That is based on numerous discussions and analyses on here and in the media.

Furthermore, integration will require both tax increases and social welfare costs. For example, the cost of extending child benefit rates in the South to everyone in the North is about €300m




https://www.nisra.gov.uk/publications/registrar-general-annual-report-2016-births

23,075 births in Northern Ireland in 2016.

https://www.cso.ie/multiquicktables/quickTables.aspx?id=vsa02_vsa09_vsa18

63,841 in Ireland in 2016.


https://www.gov.uk/child-benefit-rates

Child benefit rate in Northern Ireland is £20.70 (€23) for first child per week and £13.70 (€15.23) for each other child, giving monthly rates of €100 and €66.23.

https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/social_welfare/social_welfare_payments/social_welfare_payments_to_families_and_children/child_benefit.html

Child benefit rates in Ireland are €140 for each child up until the eight child.

Assume that there is a 50-50 split between first and other children. There is an extra monthly cost per child (€40 for the first child and €73.67 for every other child) for every child born in Northern Ireland.

That gives a total extra cost per month of €1.311m or €15.73m per year if you applied it in the first year to newborns. If the increase is applied to all children, that would mean an annual cost of around €270m. That isn't in anyone's €12 billion.

It is a simple cost to calculate. You can argue with my methods, but that would mean that the estimate is somewhere between €240m and €300m a year for harmonising child benefit. What price all social welfare benefits?

Now think about who pays for that, on top of harmonising other social welfare payments, and where does that leave tax? Do we harmonise tax upwards as well to pay for this?

The only way that a united Ireland will work is if there are tax increases and social welfare cuts. Given that generally income taxes are lower in the South, and social welfare is higher in the South, that will mean pain for most people in the South, not just to pay for the €12 billion, but also for harmonisation.

While you might take comfort in the fact that 37% would be happy for taxes to increase to pay for unity, most of that 37% probably don't pay much income tax so don't really care, but if you asked whether you would be prepared to accept tax increases and social welfare cuts, I bet the 37% would drop through the floor.

Do you want the good news? TV licence in the North is £145.50 (€161.84) but €160 in the South, so only a €1.84 increase in the TV licence.

Fionn1952 wrote: »

Since we're just making up figures, I'll, 'ballpark guess' that it'll cost twelve euro.

Here is my post from earlier in the thread where I set out the cost of harmonising child benefit rates - somewhere in the region of €240 - 300m.

Now obviously, you could cut child benefit rates in the South instead, but that would hardly increase support for a UI?

While certainly not thorough enough to arrive at the final figure of €12bn (I don't believe it was supposed to be, in fairness), at least this has some actual numbers behind it, Blanch. I appreciate that you're actually discussing in good faith, as opposed to Jan's random made up fact and run style!

I would imagine there would be a significant cost factor at present, I think a lot more research is needed to quantify it in any meaningful way- first being what would the actual NI subvention be when figures like paying towards the royals, British nuclear weaponry/military pensions and other such things are removed, what parts of the NI budget at present will be carried forward, are there current UK-wide expenditures which the North will have a continued responsibility for? How much UK debt would be transferred over as Irish debt?

When we have some more in depth knowledge of that, then we can work out harmonisation costs (which would of course be somewhat offset by greater tax collection in the North, be that through VAT or other means), then we could look at whether the cash injection would potentially stimulate the Northern economy enough to wean itself off the tit of handouts.

Purely speculatively, if NI could be pushed back to economic benefit in the mid-term, an argument could be made for supporting the stimulation through governmental lending, which wouldn't necessarily mean an increase in taxes. Of course then you have the increased governmental debt to look at.

Lots of questions (some may be already answered to some extent, as I'm just thinking out loud at this point), which I think makes it impossible to answer any real questions on the unification cost at this point without significant research.

This will certainly have to be taken up if discussions around unity become more serious. Those arguing for unification will likely have to take responsibility here.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Amazed you have to ask that.



Here is Leo Varadkar on what was achieved in the WA on behalf of those who identified as Irish, under the GFA



And for your further education, here is the section of the WA dealing with the Irish dimension.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/the-irish-chapter-of-the-draft-brexit-withdrawal-agreement-1.3697971

Quite the goalpost move there, what jurisdiction are they in now?

Here is your original statement, that we are mandated to "interfere" on behalf of those who see themselves as Irish. I asked you for the relevant part of the GFA that mandated this interference.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

What?

Are you like Dominic Raab and have not read the GFA and the committments and responsibilities therein? We are mandated to 'interfere' on behalf of those who see themselves as Irish.

You cannot ignore them blanch.

What you have posted doesn't have any relationship to your original statement. The citizen provisions of the GFA have been incorporated into domestic law in both the UK and Ireland. Brexit does not change that.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Quite the goalpost move there, what jurisdiction are they in now?

Here is your original statement, that we are mandated to "interfere" on behalf of those who see themselves as Irish. I asked you for the relevant part of the GFA that mandated this interference.



What you have posted doesn't have any relationship to your original statement. The citizen provisions of the GFA have been incorporated into domestic law in both the UK and Ireland. Brexit does not change that.

A No Deal Brexit has the potential to change it. We have every right and have a duty to Irish citizens to 'interfere' to ensure the upholding of the GFA.

And we ARE DOING that. So that kind of makes you point meaningless.

Stop moaning ffs

10-15 years

blanch152 wrote: »

. The citizen provisions of the GFA have been incorporated into domestic law in both the UK and Ireland. Brexit does not change that.

You very obviously aren’t aware of the home offices plans to make everyone in NI British without asking them.


Have a look


https://twitter.com/bbcpolitics/status/1125709245209567232?s=21

blanch152

Fionn1952 wrote: »

While certainly not thorough enough to arrive at the final figure of €12bn (I don't believe it was supposed to be, in fairness), at least this has some actual numbers behind it, Blanch. I appreciate that you're actually discussing in good faith, as opposed to Jan's random made up fact and run style!

I would imagine there would be a significant cost factor at present, I think a lot more research is needed to quantify it in any meaningful way- first being what would the actual NI subvention be when figures like paying towards the royals, British nuclear weaponry/military pensions and other such things are removed, what parts of the NI budget at present will be carried forward, are there current UK-wide expenditures which the North will have a continued responsibility for? How much UK debt would be transferred over as Irish debt?

When we have some more in depth knowledge of that, then we can work out harmonisation costs (which would of course be somewhat offset by greater tax collection in the North, be that through VAT or other means), then we could look at whether the cash injection would potentially stimulate the Northern economy enough to wean itself off the tit of handouts.

Purely speculatively, if NI could be pushed back to economic benefit in the mid-term, an argument could be made for supporting the stimulation through governmental lending, which wouldn't necessarily mean an increase in taxes. Of course then you have the increased governmental debt to look at.

Lots of questions (some may be already answered to some extent, as I'm just thinking out loud at this point), which I think makes it impossible to answer any real questions on the unification cost at this point without significant research.

This will certainly have to be taken up if discussions around unity become more serious. Those arguing for unification will likely have to take responsibility here.

No, you are correct, I wasn't addressing the €12 billion cost, I was addressing some of the extra costs that haven't been accounted for by the 6,8,10,11 or 12 billion estimate for the NI Subsidy.

On the offset point, I was only looking at the extra cost associated with harmonising the child benefit rates. Imagine the €12billion did not exist, that Northern Ireland was self-sufficient (some of the UI fantasists on here have tried to imply that), that would mean that the tax revenue collected now pays for the social welfare now. Merely, by absorbing Northern Ireland, we don't gain any tax revenue as that already pays the existing social welfare.

We then need to assess the cost of harmonising both tax and social welfare. Someone somewhere will end up paying more tax and someone else getting less social welfare than they currently do. Even on VAT, do we have the same zero-rated items as the UK does? We pay VAT at 23%, the UK 20%. Will we cut our VAT rates, losing us tax revenue, or will we increase theirs, resulting in price increases at the tills for ordinary people in Northern Ireland. Will we apply the reduced rate for agriculture to the North, cutting the future tax we get from them? If we do the opposite, our farmers won't like it. Our reduced rate is 13.5% and covers more goods, theirs is 5%.

I don't even want to touch the mess that is income tax.

Unless there are tax rises and social welfare cuts for someone, there will be a cost, and it will be in billions.

I am not too bothered about the €12 billion, whether it is €10 billion or even as low as €6 billion as some claim but the biggest issue in a vote will be those bread and butter issues and people will be asking will my food cost more? Will my take-home pay be less? Will I lose social welfare entitlement?

No referendum will pass without answering those questions. Given that there will be personal costs a referendum might not even pass after answering these questions.

It is quite ironic that the same posters on here (not yourself) who claim that people in the North, including Protestants, will vote for a UI after Brexit because of selfish economic interests deride and insult "partitionists" who point out that people in the South will also vote on the basis of selfish economic interests.

blanch152

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

You very obviously aren’t aware of the home offices plans to make everyone in NI British without asking them.


Have a look


https://twitter.com/bbcpolitics/status/1125709245209567232?s=21

No withdrawal agreement will change that, which is the point. It is utterly irrelevant to Brexit.

ittakestwo

20-30 years

Another point about on the economic subject. The north would get the same low corporation tax as the south after a UI. This pretty much turned Ireland from being a second world country in the 1980's to one of the richest in Europe today. Presumably this would have a positive impact on the North.

janfebmar

ittakestwo wrote: »

Another point about on the economic subject. The north would get the same low corporation tax as the south after a UI. This pretty much turned Ireland from being a second world country in the 1980's to one of the richest in Europe today. Presumably this would have a positive impact on the North.

I do not think the French or Germans want us to be the tax haven of Europe, they are talking about harmonisation of Corporation tax rates as it is.

blanch152

ittakestwo wrote: »

Another point about on the economic subject. The north would get the same low corporation tax as the south after a UI. This pretty much turned Ireland from being a second world country in the 1980's to one of the richest in Europe today. Presumably this would have a positive impact on the North.

So we would lose some of the tax revenue the North gets at the moment from corporation tax.

blinding

10-15 years

Leo and the Irish Political establishment would break world records of running away if the Brits gave them the Six Counties .

There would be no camera quick enough to catch Leo for that photo shoot .

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

No withdrawal agreement will change that, which is the point. It is utterly irrelevant to Brexit.

So you disagree with Leo Varadkar when he outlined what the WA achieved then?

Leo Varadkar wrote:

So, what's been achieved?

1. The Good Friday Agreement in all its parts is protected.

2. Everyone born in Northern Ireland will continue to have the right to Irish and therefore EU citizenship. So, a child born in Belfast or Derry today will have the right to study in Paris, buy property in Spain, work in Berlin or any other part of the European Union. All they have to do is exercise the right to Irish and therefore EU citizenship.

Stop moaning ffs

10-15 years

blanch152 wrote: »

No withdrawal agreement will change that, which is the point. It is utterly irrelevant to Brexit.

Its tied directly into brexitt and whatever outcome to there is especially to the people all the people of Northern Ireland. You should read the case.

Stop moaning ffs

10-15 years

ittakestwo wrote: »

Another point about on the economic subject. The north would get the same low corporation tax as the south after a UI. This pretty much turned Ireland from being a second world country in the 1980's to one of the richest in Europe today. Presumably this would have a positive impact on the North.

Exactly. It would be a massive and badly needed boon to Ni but all ireland too. The dup currently refusing a situation that would allow NI have a foot in both markets. It would be an immediate draw for industry and corporations bringing employment and investment.
But axbirder in the sea somehow threatens their British cosplay notions.

Wait n they see what it’s like post UI. The place will be thriving and they’ll still hate it.

FrancieBrady

blinding wrote: »

Leo and the Irish Political establishment would break world records of running away if the Brits gave them the Six Counties .

There would be no camera quick enough to catch Leo for that photo shoot .

That seem to be last ditch hope of a number of partitionists alright.

Let's face it, they have tried every other tactic in the book, from scaremongering to raising the bar in efforts to handwave it away.

Stop moaning ffs

10-15 years

blinding wrote: »

Leo and the Irish Political establishment would break world records of running away if the Brits gave them the Six Counties .

There would be no camera quick enough to catch Leo for that photo shoot .

You clearly don’t know the man nor have heard him speak on it recently. He’s an opportunist at best and goes where the tide of the public opinion takes him. He was against marriage equality then he suddenly was gay and all for it.

You’re also assuming he’ll be Taoiseach at that time of the UI. He most likely won’t be.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

So you disagree with Leo Varadkar when he outlined what the WA achieved then?

So you agree with everything that Leo Varadkar has said about Sinn Fein?

Why do you continually play these silly games of entrapment? I really don't care what Leo did or didn't say. He was being disingenuous for political reasons, the fact you agree with him, doesn't mean they are the same disingenuous political reasons as yours.

Stop moaning ffs

10-15 years

blanch152 wrote: »

So we would lose some of the tax revenue the North gets at the moment from corporation tax.

In an all ireland economy the taxes flow to government of the whole island. Shouldn’t have to explain that.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

So you agree with everything that Leo Varadkar has said about Sinn Fein?

Why do you continually play these silly games of entrapment? I really don't care what Leo did or didn't say. He was being disingenuous for political reasons, the fact you agree with him, doesn't mean they are the same disingenuous political reasons as yours.

So, tell us why you disagree with him (and almost everyone else) :rolleyes:

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

So, tell us why you disagree with him (and almost everyone else) :rolleyes:

He doesn't actually say that everybody would lose those rights if it wasn't for the WA. All he says is that the WA secures those rights.

That is disingenuous if the rights were never at risk. It is not a lie, but it isn't the truth.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

He doesn't actually say that everybody would lose those rights if it wasn't for the WA. All he says is that the WA secures those rights.

That is disingenuous if the rights were never at risk. It is not a lie, but it isn't the truth.

So what is 'securing those rights' about then?

They are 'interfering' under the GFA (as is now our right and duty) to ensure that the UK upholds the rights of our citizens.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

So what is 'securing those rights' about then?

They are 'interfering' under the GFA (as is now our right and duty) to ensure that the UK upholds the rights of our citizens.

"Securing those rights" is a political ploy. No rights were being diminished by Brexit. Leo knew that the propaganda machines would be deployed in full against him if he did nothing so he did something meaningless to deflect. Standard operating procedures for politicians. I mean the opposition operated to default, calling on him to do it.