How long before Irish reunification?

ohnonotgmail

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I accept there maybe a cost...but I see that cost as an investment. Same as my mortgage was a 'cost' but ultimately a good investment in more than economic terms.
I suggest that people are smart enough, experiences enough to see a UI in the same way.

but you dont know what that cost is, both economically and non-economically, so how can people decide if the cost is worth it?

facehugger99

Deleted User wrote: »

Another stunningly erudite contribution, facehugger99. Well done.

Great to have a commentary on each of my posts - obsessed much?

armaghlad

10-15 years

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

we are more than likely ****ed. though thankfully i cant see it happening in my lifetime.

Oh well that’s great. Sit and yap about Shinner economics over something you don’t ever foresee witnessing lol. Good man

ohnonotgmail

armaghlad wrote: »

Oh well that’s great. Sit and yap about Shinner economics over something you don’t ever foresee witnessing lol. Good man

You're right, it is great that i more than likely won't have to deal with the effect of shinnernomics. I am most fortunate indeed.

FrancieBrady

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

but you dont know what that cost is, both economically and non-economically, so how can people decide if the cost is worth it?

Because I have seen modelling (the Irish gov work) that assumes figures and while not fully accurate it is a cost that is worth it in investment terms.
As one who believes that partition is the root of our social and economic problems (some of those, not all) I think it worth ensuring some cost.

I don't pretend there is a nirvana of happy ever after either. We will be faced with the routine problems of surviving in the modern world same as everybody else. And unless you are a Brexiters. I would rather face those as a member of the EU and as a progressive inclusive modern state

ohnonotgmail

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Because I have seen modelling (the Irish gov work) that assumes figures and while not fully accurate it is a cost that is worth it in investment terms.
As one who believes that partition is the root of our social and economic problems (some of those, not all) I think it worth ensuring some cost.

I don't pretend there is a nirvana of happy ever after either. We will be faced with the routine problems of surviving in the modern world same as everybody else. And unless you are a Brexiters. I would rather face those as a member of the EU and as a progressive inclusive modern state

Not fully accurate? they as good as admitted they just made them up.

FrancieBrady

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Not fully accurate? they as good as admitted they just made them up.

No, they didnt just as you invented the notion that we are planning on annexing northern Ireland they openly said all the data is not available but some figures can be assumed and caution is advised.

I.E. you make your own mind up.

I know you probably didn't read beyond the preamble - very Brexity of you that.

There never will be an accurate figure imo btw. There will be a certain leap of faith required to both 'stay' or 'unify'.
Personally my faith would be based on staying in the EU at all costs.

ohnonotgmail

FrancieBrady wrote: »

No, they didnt just as you invented the notion that we are planning on annexing northern Ireland they openly said all the data is not available but some figures can be assumed and caution is advised.

I.E. you make your own mind up.

I know you probably didn't read beyond the preamble - very Brexity of you that.

There never will be an accurate figure imo btw. There will be a certain leap of faith required to both 'stay' or 'unify'.
Personally my faith would be based on staying in the EU at all costs.

this is the quote:

“The problem is that little information is available on the potential economic effects of a unification policy, and there are therefore little means to numerically gauge its effectiveness. This is further complicated by the data deficit in the North.”243

that sounds a lot like making it up to me. and the irony of you calling those that oppose you brexiteers is pretty funny. For you Ideology over economics, exactly as it is with brexiteers.

and on annexing northern ireland this is my original post. You never actually responded to it. i cant imagine you will this time either.

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=110551538&postcount=195

facehugger99

FrancieBrady wrote: »

There never will be an accurate figure imo btw. .

Some admission.

Whole the Shinners might be happy in a land of makey-uppy figures, the rest of the Irish electorate are not so dumb.

FrancieBrady

facehugger99 wrote: »

Some admission.

Whole the Shinners might be happy in a land of makey-uppy figures, the rest of the Irish electorate are not so dumb.

Can you quote and accurate figure for anything? 10-11-12 billions. .keep shouting it. Meanwhile everyone else moves on and away from you.

FrancieBrady

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

this is the quote:


that sounds a lot like making it up to me. and the irony of you calling those that oppose you brexiteers is pretty funny. For you Ideology over economics, exactly as it is with brexiteers.

and on annexing northern ireland this is my original post. You never actually responded to it. i cant imagine you will this time either.

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=110551538&postcount=195

I am away from computer and on a phone. Plenty of relevance to be quoted and I will later. Meanwhile try and read the whole work.

facehugger99

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Can you quote and accurate figure for anything? 10-11-12 billions. .keep shouting it. Meanwhile everyone else moves on and away from you.

It's up to those proposing a change to the status quo to cost it out - that's beyond obvious - off you go.

Let us know what items we currently fund that we'll be cutting back on. Stop when you get to 10 billion.

James Brown

10-15 years

facehugger99 wrote: »

Any opinion poll taken in the ROI which includes the issue of cost shows a resounding majority opposed to a UI scenario.

This will of course be taken into account of the voters of NI. Their choice will be between a 10 billion a year subvention from Mother England or economic devastation as a standalone entity - it's not really going to be a choice at all TBH.

There will never be a border poll IMO.

And if they did same on virtually any topic; Do you want to pay more tax for....
You'd likely get the same result.
I guarantee cost will not enter into it for the vast majority and no politician will have the neck to raise it as an issue for not seeking it. It'll see support never seen before.

FrancieBrady

facehugger99 wrote: »

It's up to those proposing a change to the status quo to cost it out - that's beyond obvious - off you go.

Let us know what items we currently fund that we'll be cutting back on. Stop when you get to 10 billion.

QED...shout 10 billion today...12 billion tomorrow. Yet the polls are trending in one direction only. As much proof that you need that things are moving on without you. New record required? How about, the majority must be much more than 50%.
That's another fav de jour of **** scared partitionists.

_blaaz

10-15 years

facehugger99 wrote: »

Your opinion isn't worth a wet fart in a thunderstorm.

Why not?


Your one ranting and wailing (your meltdown over this is beyond funni btw) and now opposing a referendum.to put your opinions to test


Personally just to see your meltdown would be worth every penny reunification would cost 10 times over

facehugger99

FrancieBrady wrote: »

QED...shout 10 billion today...12 billion tomorrow. Yet the polls are trending in one direction only. As much proof that you need that things are moving on without you. New record required? How about, the majority must be much more than 50%.
That's another fav de jour of **** scared partitionists.

So no details on how you would fund it - not surprising.

The kind of 'sure it'll be grand' approach might go down well in Shinnerbot-central, but this taxpayer, and millions just like me, will want to see the true cost, before making a decision.

It's actually kinda funny you don't think this will be the over-riding concern of the voting public - as Clinton fans will remind you - it's the economy, stupid.

James Brown

10-15 years

facehugger99 wrote: »

So no details on how you would fund it - not surprising.

The kind of 'sure it'll be grand' approach might go down well in Shinnerbot central, but this taxpayer, and millions just like me, will want to see the true cost, before making a decision.

It's actually kinda funny you don't think this will be the over-riding concern of the voting public - as Clinton fans will remind you - it's the economy, stupid.

You're stuck in a loop. A lot more people than the SF support will be voting for it. And as we're pulling numbers out of our arse, I'll pay for the whole thing.
We could always concoct a nice sweet deal for a Maltese resident regarding some unification quango or other and just drop it on the tax payer, no permission asked. The point is, cost will only be an issue for the politicians brave enough to raise it as such. They generally dismiss or sideline such things when it's in their interest to do so.

FrancieBrady

facehugger99 wrote: »

So no details on how you would fund it - not surprising.

The kind of 'sure it'll be grand' approach might go down well in Shinnerbot-central, but this taxpayer, and millions just like me, will want to see the true cost, before making a decision.

It's actually kinda funny you don't think this will be the over-riding concern of the voting public - as Clinton fans will remind you - it's the economy, stupid.

Why are polls that show that the trend is that people want a UI then?

Are you saying they are too stupid to work out there may be a cost?

Your much vaunted single poll must be taken in the context of when the question was asked.

If you change the variables...'what if there is to be a hard border and a return to civil strife' would the cost be worth it...'what if a hard border devastates Irish agriculture and border economies increasing the burden o the Irish state' etc etc. you will get a much different answer.

facehugger99

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Why are polls that show that the trend is that people want a UI then?

Are you saying they are too stupid to work out there may be a cost?

Your much vaunted single poll must be taken in the context of when the question was asked.

If you change the variables...'what if there is to be a hard border and a return to civil strife' would the cost be worth it...'what if a hard border devastates Irish agriculture and border economies increasing the burden o the Irish state' etc etc. you will get a much different answer.

You mean if the IRA start killing innocent people again? Yeah, pretty sure most people in the Republic don't want any thing to do with that kind of sectarian violence.

It's a lot easier to give pavlovian 'yes' response to a hypothetical scenario than to commit to paying billions of tax-euros a year on an outdated pan-nationalist pipe-dream.

Everyone with a shred of intelligence know the 'real' figure in favour of actually paying for a UI is a tiny minority - even you know this Francie lad - deep down, you know this to be true.

James Brown

10-15 years

facehugger99 wrote: »

You mean if the IRA start killing innocent people again? Yeah, pretty sure most people in the Republic don't want any thing to do with that kind of sectarian violence.

It's a lot easier to give pavlovian 'yes' response to a hypothetical scenario than to commit to paying billions of tax-euros a year on an outdated pan-nationalist pipe-dream.

Everyone with a shred of intelligence know the 'real' figure in favour of actually paying for a UI is a tiny minority - even you know this Francie lad - deep down, you know this to be true.

There's not much call. The British Army seem to have stood down their illegal activities.

Cost won't be an issue. It'll be one we need address but it won't stop a yes for unification.

FrancieBrady

facehugger99 wrote: »

You mean if the IRA start killing innocent people again? Yeah, pretty sure most people in the Republic don't want any thing to do with that kind of sectarian violence.

It's a lot easier to give pavlovian 'yes' response to a hypothetical scenario than to commit to paying billions of tax-euros a year on an outdated pan-nationalist pipe-dream.

Everyone with a shred of intelligence know the 'real' figure in favour of actually paying for a UI is a tiny minority - even you know this Francie lad - deep down, you know this to be true.

Nonsense post based on fear and bias again.
Right up to the Taoiseach of this country is fearful of what a border would mean.
If you wish to ignore the context of when a border poll might take place by all means knock yourself out. But don't implicate the rest of the electorate in your head in the sand stupidity.

RobMc59

10-15 years

The idea of a UI is attractive until reality starts to bite-a very sobering article for those who think it will be easily affordable.
https://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/united-ireland-would-see-living-standards-in-republic-fall-by-15-1.3629748

FrancieBrady

RobMc59 wrote: »

The idea of a UI is attractive until reality starts to bite-a very sobering article for those who think it will be easily affordable.
https://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/united-ireland-would-see-living-standards-in-republic-fall-by-15-1.3629748

They are going for the magic figure of 11 billion to make up. :rolleyes: Facehugger should get in with them and save a billion!

_blaaz

10-15 years

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/northern-ireland-could-be-be-financially-better-off-in-a-united-ireland-claims-new-report-37157908.html



It is interesting the.british dont want this report released before brexit?

Reati

_blaaz wrote: »

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/northern-ireland-could-be-be-financially-better-off-in-a-united-ireland-claims-new-report-37157908.html



It is interesting the.british dont want this report released before brexit?

The article says the Irish government are blocking it?

Reati

RobMc59 wrote: »

The idea of a UI is attractive until reality starts to bite-a very sobering article for those who think it will be easily affordable.
https://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/united-ireland-would-see-living-standards-in-republic-fall-by-15-1.3629748

"€11 billion subvention Northern Ireland receives annually from the UK!!!"

That's nearly the entire health care budget for Ireland.

Mother of God. Why even do the Brits want to keep it!?

_blaaz

10-15 years

Reati wrote: »

"€11 billion subvention Northern Ireland receives annually from the UK!!!"

That's nearly the entire health care budget for Ireland.

Mother of God. Why even do the Brits want to keep it!?

It actually costs the brits more than being in the EU aparently

FrancieBrady

_blaaz wrote: »

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/northern-ireland-could-be-be-financially-better-off-in-a-united-ireland-claims-new-report-37157908.html



It is interesting the.british dont want this report released before brexit?

Reati wrote: »

The article says the Irish government are blocking it?

Whoever is blocking it is fine by me. Let Brexit happen if it must. Unity is inevitable, no need to startle horses that are just waiting to be startled.

FrancieBrady

Reati wrote: »

"€11 billion subvention Northern Ireland receives annually from the UK!!!"

That's nearly the entire health care budget for Ireland.

Mother of God. Why even do the Brits want to keep it!?

They don't want it and no longer have a strategic interest. The GFA was tacit withdrawal. They just need an out that doesn't result in it coming back at them.

RobMc59

10-15 years

FrancieBrady wrote: »

They are going for the magic figure of 11 billion to make up. :rolleyes: Facehugger should get in with them and save a billion!

If this article was in the Express I'd ignore it but surely the Irish times is a reputable paper?