How long before Irish reunification?

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Francie, even by your standards, this is quite a bizarre twisting of another poster's posts. Here is the sequence of posts, how that ended with your rolleyes emoji and claiming that I believe the only violent people were the Irish ones is beyond any logic:









You are the one who excuses and explains violence. I don't accept any excuse or any explanation for any illegal violence (once again, to be clear, incidents like Bloody Sunday were clearly illegal).

Ha ha ha. The implication there is you are OK with 'violence' as long as it is legal.
We seen how 'legal violence' worked on this island at the start of the most recent of the cyclical outbreaks.

But anyway.

So what, if there are protests? Every country has protests. The history of northern Ireland would show us that protests in Unionism die down after a while (Anglo Irish Agreement, GFA, Marches, Flegs etc) and that they are if nothing else pragmatic people (hence the very high 75% figure who would accept the outcome of a vote, knowing a great deal of Unionists here on the border, I am not surprised by that figure by the way).

Can you point to anything decreed by government, or voted by a majority where you, blanch152, recommended giving in to 'protests'?

Or is this another position unique to your partitionist view?

facehugger99

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Can you point to anything decreed by government, or voted by a majority where you, blanch152, recommended giving in to 'protests'?

It will be up to each ROI voter in the event of a referendum (which will likely never happen anyway, but let's assume for a moment), to decide how to cast their vote. In short they will weigh up the economic cost, the societal cost and the threat of loyalist violence when making their decision.

Only 37% have claimed to be willing to pay more in a recent opinion poll - of course the true figure will be considerably lower.

Now consider the threat of Loyalist violence and protests preying on voters minds in the run up to such a referendum. The support (if there even is any) for a UI is soft - very soft indeed. It will take very little for people to reconsider if a 6 county land-grab is all really worth it.

The vast majority of Irish voters will weight it all up very carefully. I'm pretty confident which way the percentages will move - I suspect you know too Francie if you're honest with yourself.

Stop moaning ffs

10-15 years

Republic of Ireland is the football team.
Ireland is the country.

Just an FYI

blanch152

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

Republic of Ireland is the football team.
Ireland is the country.

Just an FYI

You are correct, the correct name for the 26 counties is Ireland. The correct name for the six counties is Northern Ireland.

FrancieBrady

facehugger99 wrote: »

It will be up to each ROI voter in the event of a referendum (which will likely never happen anyway, but let's assume for a moment), to decide how to cast their vote. In short they will weigh up the economic cost, the societal cost and the threat of loyalist violence when making their decision.

Again the arrogance to assume that people have not already considered these things.

Only 37% have claimed to be willing to pay more in a recent opinion poll - of course the true figure will be considerably lower.

Again - a completely unbacked up GUESS.

Now consider the threat of Loyalist violence and protests preying on voters minds in the run up to such a referendum. The support (if there even is any) for a UI is soft - very soft indeed. It will take very little for people to reconsider if a 6 county land-grab is all really worth it.

The vast majority of Irish voters will weight it all up very carefully. I'm pretty confident which way the percentages will move - I suspect you know too Francie if you're honest with yourself.

If you remember in the lead up to the GFA - The DUP were threatening in their usual belligerent way 'armageddon' in Ireland if the GFA came in. As were ultra/dissident republican groups.

Did it deter the vast majority here from voting in the common good - not one single bit. Stop the guesswork and deal in FACTS Facehugger.

Stop moaning ffs

10-15 years

I find it rather revealing that people really think democracy would somehow be held up or denied just *in case* a small faction *might* kick off. A faction without the numbers finances or support.
Th first of any types of groups to kick off would face huge backlash nationwide north and south. It would be totally self defeating of any of them to do so.

We won’t live in fear of the imaginary gunman. We never will again.

Please drop this as a debating point, it doesn’t survive contact with reality or stand up to any form of scrutiny.

And speaks to the lack of any salient points of anyone using this one.

facehugger99

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Again the arrogance to assume that people have not already considered these things.

Why would people have considered it when it hasn't been costed out? We know it will cost billions per year, but we don't know exactly how many billions, could be €10bn, could be €15bn. The numbers would need to be crunched in advance - they haven't been yet because there's no point.

So yes, people have not considered the cost because the true cost has not yet been established. People have not considered the liklyhood of Loyalist violence because nobody's talking about a UI or threatening associated violence - it's really weird you think it's arrogant to point this out.

What we do know is that only 37% of people say they will countenance any cost

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Again - a completely unbacked up GUESS.

It's called an opinion Francie - you seem triggered by people having ones that don't align with yours - could I suggest a discussion forum is not the place for you.
Time will tell who's right - I'm pretty confident.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

If you remember in the lead up to the GFA - The DUP were threatening in their usual belligerent way 'armageddon' in Ireland if the GFA came in. As were ultra/dissident republican groups.

Did it deter the vast majority here from voting in the common good - not one single bit. Stop the guesswork and deal in FACTS Facehugger.

The GFA and a UI referendum are so far apart politically, it makes any comparison between the two completely redundant.

FrancieBrady

facehugger99 wrote: »

Why would people have considered it when it hasn't been costed out? We know it will cost billions per year, but we don't know exactly how many billions, could be €10bn, could be €15bn. The numbers would need to be crunched in advance - they haven't been yet because there's no point.

So yes, people have not considered the cost because the true cost has not yet been established. People have not considered the liklyhood of Loyalist violence because nobody's talking about a UI or threatening associated violence - it's really weird you think it's arrogant to point this out.

So how the f*** are YOU doing it, if the costs are NOT known.

Does it ever occur to you that sometimes there are other things in life than COST?

You can guess these things and come to a decision, but others can't?. This is why you don't have a political voice or party to represent you.

It's called an opinion Francie - you seem triggered by people having ones that don't align with yours - could I suggest a discussion forum is not the place for you.
Time will tell who's right - I'm pretty confident.

There is 'confidence' and then there is 'delusion'. I was confident that Monaghan would make the Super 8's, turn out I was delusional and just wrong.

The GFA and a UI referendum are so far apart politically, it makes any comparison between the two completely redundant.

The threats of violence are not any different. Stop deflecting away.

In the face of many threats from different quarter, the EVIDENCE is that Irish people will not be deterred by that if they think the greater good will be served.

bobbysands81

blanch152 wrote: »

You are correct, the correct name for the 26 counties is Ireland. The correct name for the six counties is Northern Ireland.

Also, the correct name for the island is Ireland.

Northern Ireland is part of this island. Northern Ireland is part of Ireland.

James Brown

10-15 years

facehugger99 wrote: »

It will be up to each ROI voter in the event of a referendum (which will likely never happen anyway, but let's assume for a moment), to decide how to cast their vote. In short they will weigh up the economic cost, the societal cost and the threat of loyalist violence when making their decision.

Only 37% have claimed to be willing to pay more in a recent opinion poll - of course the true figure will be considerably lower.

Now consider the threat of Loyalist violence and protests preying on voters minds in the run up to such a referendum. The support (if there even is any) for a UI is soft - very soft indeed. It will take very little for people to reconsider if a 6 county land-grab is all really worth it.

The vast majority of Irish voters will weight it all up very carefully. I'm pretty confident which way the percentages will move - I suspect you know too Francie if you're honest with yourself.

I don't think so. Especially the threat of violence part.
Protests got us an apology for the Paras murdering unarmed civilian protesters. Protesting got us the GFA. Protesting is good and welcome from any quarter IMO.

You have no clue IMO. It would be a major landslide for. The poll you hang onto was specifically asking 'would you pay more tax for...' It's a loaded question.

facehugger99

FrancieBrady wrote: »

So how the f*** are YOU doing it, if the costs are NOT known.

It is known that the cost will be circa €10 - 12bn per annum - in line with the current subvention - probably higher due to increased security costs.

It's not a figure generally known by 'Joe Public - ROI voter' because, it's not something that he needs to worry about at present. He will need to know about it in the event of a referendum though. We know that 63% of Joe Publics weren't willing to commit to paying anything towards a UI though - that's a fact.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Does it ever occur to you that sometimes there are other things in life than COST?

Yes, I want to ensure this country remains a good place to raise children and that it provides a future for them. I will not sacrifice that future for your fundamentalist, pan-nationalist aims. You will be fought at every turn by true patriots such as myself and millions of others.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You can guess these things and come to a decision, but others can't. This is why you don't have a political voice or party to represent you.

Gobbledygook

FrancieBrady wrote: »

There is 'confidence' and then there is 'delusion'. I was confident that Monaghan would make the Super 8's, turn out I was delusional and just wrong.

I don't follow GAA and have no idea what you're on about. I live my life outside an echo chamber. I work with and deal with a wide spectrum of society - your fundamentalist 'at any cost' views are a minority.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The threats of violence are not any different. Stop deflecting away.

In the face of many threats from different quarter, the EVIDENCE is that Irish people will not be deterred by that if they think the greater good will be served.

The threat of violence as a result of the GFA, which was embraced by an overwhelming majority of people's north and south, is completely different than for a divisive border poll. I do not envisage any circumstances that a border poll would be called, much less passed, in many, many decades

Like I say, I'm pretty confident I'll be proven right on that.

blueb

Ulster Says No. It will never happen

came for a gawk..... nope

Stop moaning ffs

10-15 years

The poll results in the thread here disagree with you Hugger.
5-10 years.
You’d imagine there would be a lot more people posting against it but your like a one man campaign as things stand.


Ps previous boards Polls on marriage equality and Repeal, predicted both outcomes very accurately. You might be right. I think you’re gonna be wrong tho

FrancieBrady

facehugger99 wrote: »

It is known that the cost will be circa €10 - 12bn per annum - in line with the current subvention - probably higher due to increased security costs.

It's not a figure generally known by 'Joe Public - ROI voter' because, it's not something that he needs to worry about at present. He will need to know about it in the event of a referendum though. We know that 63% of Joe Publics weren't willing to commit to paying anything towards a UI though - that's a fact.

Again, you present no evidence for your presumptions. It is your 'opinion' that the figure is not known or that they do not realise there will be costs.
Your much trumpeted poll shows an answer that was given when they where asked what they would do if there were 'costs'.
37% for unity with costs
37% against if there are costs

and 26% have not made up their minds.

That is all that single poll gives you the right to say. Anything else is GUESSWORK

Yes, I want to ensure this country remains a good place to raise children and that it provides a future for them. I will not sacrifice that future for your fundamentalist, pan-nationalist aims. You will be fought at every turn by true patriots such as myself and millions of others.

But it isn't just MY aim, it is the aim and aspiration of our constitution, every political party and politician and of the vast majority in any poll that is taken.

Gobbledygook

I was talking about your sheer arrogance that allows you to GUESS things and come to a position on a UI, but you don't allow anybody else to guess, if they come to a contrary position to you. A hypocritical if not utterly senseless argument.

I don't follow GAA and have no idea what you're on about. I live my life outside an echo chamber. I work with and deal with a wide spectrum of society - your fundamentalist 'at any cost' views are a minority.

Yeh, a country that has a constitutional aspiration to a UI, where every political party does too and that routinely returns polls that show a majority aspire to it tto is an 'echo chamber'.

And the football methapor was really that hard to understand? :D

The threat of violence as a result of the GFA, which was embraced by an overwhelming majority of people's north and south, is completely different than for a divisive border poll. I do not envisage any circumstances that a border poll would be called, much less passed, in many, many decades

Like I say, I'm pretty confident I'll be proven right on that.

:D The threats of violence came BEFORE the majorities embraced the GFA. They were undeterred by them, and voted for what they saw as the common good, regardless of the threat or cost. And they were right too.

That distinction might be a bit subtle for you to grasp.

facehugger99

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Again, you present no evidence for your presumptions. It is your 'opinion' that the figure is not known or that they do not realise there will be costs.
Your much trumpeted poll shows an answer that was given when they where asked what they would do if there were 'costs'.
37% for unity with costs
37% against if there are costs

and 26% have not made up their minds.

That is all that single poll gives you the right to say. Anything else is GUESSWORK

We know that 63% weren't willing to commit to paying anything. Let's see if the phrase 'Unification Tax' frightens any of the 37% left.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

But it isn't just MY aim, it is the aim and aspiration of our constitution, every political party and politician and of the vast majority in any poll that is taken.

Irish people are great at aspiring to stuff. We all want to learn Irish and have a Rolls Royce health service - we're not so good at actually doing or paying what's required.

Quite the jarring difference between the polls that include the cost question and the ones that don't, wouldn't you say?

Now why on earth would that be

FrancieBrady

facehugger99 wrote: »

We know that 63% weren't willing to commit to paying anything. Let's see if the phrase 'Unification Tax' frightens any of the 37% left.

So the narrative has changed...that's something I suppose. 'Not willing to commit' is the line now.

Well sorry FH, you are guessing again...26% don't know how they feel about paying extra tax for a UI.

Irish people are great at aspiring to stuff. We all want to learn Irish and have a Rolls Royce health service - we're not so good at actually doing or paying what's required.

Quite the jarring difference between the polls that include the cost question and the ones that don't, wouldn't you say?

Now why on earth would that be

No, I don't find it 'jarring' at all. There are people who will take a headline figure of 10-12-13 billion and just presume that is what it will cost. I.E. there is a lot of mis-information out there circulated by scaremongers such as yourself.

When it is shown to them that cost has other outside contributions and that a UI could be a huge investment I would expect that '37% not willing to pay', to change.
But I am GUESSING that to be the case. We'll see.

blanch152

bobbysands81 wrote: »

Also, the correct name for the island is Ireland.

Northern Ireland is part of this island. Northern Ireland is part of Ireland.

And geographically, we are part of the British Isles, and so on and so forth. Who really cares whether every poster gets it exactly right every time?

Eoin Morgan, Rory McIlroy, Declan Rice, etc. we are seeing every day that nationalist identity is becoming as fluid as gender identity, and still we have the fantasy that it somehow matters whether Northern Ireland is part of the UK or part of Ireland.

Stop moaning ffs

10-15 years

We’re some of us forgetting that if NI stayed within the CU AND SM it would be a massive economic boom for the region. Best of both worlds.
DUP obviously don’t want that.

Follow that through and an all island economy would be a massive economic success for the entire island and Dublin and Belfast could spread foreign direct investment out nationwide to the benefit of all. Especially when it comes to employment.

Those are facts by the way Hugger. Not guesses.

Tangible benefits of a UI rather than your guesses about an imaginary tax

facehugger99

FrancieBrady wrote: »

No, I don't find it 'jarring' at all. There are people who will take a headline figure of 10-12-13 billion and just presume that is what it will cost. I.E. there is a lot of mis-information out there circulated by scaremongers such as yourself.

When it is shown to them that cost has other outside contributions and that a UI could be a huge investment I would expect that '37% not willing to pay', to change.
But I am GUESSING that to be the case. We'll see.

There is no indication on the B&A poll that respondents were told any headline figures on cost - they were simply asked if they'd be willing to pay extra tax - any extra tax - towards a UI.

Only 37% affirmed they would.

You are quite correct that the % willing to pay for it will change if the true cost were ever known - just not in the way you think.:D

There is a huge difference in polls which include the question of cost and those that don't, because the issue of cost is fundamental. There's no getting away from it.

FrancieBrady

facehugger99 wrote: »

There is no indication on the B&A poll that respondents were told any headline figures on cost - they were simply asked if they'd be willing to pay extra tax - any extra tax - towards a UI.

Only 37% affirmed they would.

You are quite correct that the % willing to pay for it will change if the true cost were ever known - just not in the way you think.:D

That works both ways...37% WILL pay tax and 26% have as yet not made up their minds.

It is just more biased blustering tbh and arrogant guesswork on behalf of others.

markodaly

blueb wrote: »

came for a gawk..... nope

This is why we cannot have nice things.

James Brown

10-15 years

blanch152 wrote: »

And geographically, we are part of the British Isles, and so on and so forth. Who really cares whether every poster gets it exactly right every time?

Eoin Morgan, Rory McIlroy, Declan Rice, etc. we are seeing every day that nationalist identity is becoming as fluid as gender identity, and still we have the fantasy that it somehow matters whether Northern Ireland is part of the UK or part of Ireland.

You keep pushing this idea that nationalism is dying off.
Have you been following Brexit? The English seem to be very nationalist and protective of their country. As does the U.S.A.
Are you familiar with the DUP? They seem very fond of their U.K. association.

You can be open to immigrants, enjoy a mix of cultures and still be nationalist. There's nothing sadder than the same shops on every street corner in every city, in every country, but in the least countries have their heritage culture and personalities. We will always have countries, to suggest the idea of nation is fading is bizarre quite frankly. The idea that any countrymen/women would simply shrug their shoulders at a foreign power occupying part of their country is absurd, not to mention having little or no interest in righting such a wrong.

facehugger99

FrancieBrady wrote: »

That works both ways...37% WILL pay tax and 26% have as yet not made up their minds.

It is just more biased blustering tbh and arrogant guesswork on behalf of others.

37% say they will pay more tax - how much more we're not sure. Presumably there's a limit to their largess.

I wouldn't be too confident of all of them writing a cheque when the time comes - talk's cheap.

You'll have to keep all of them on board and get more than half of the others to get over 50% - good luck with that.:D

FrancieBrady

facehugger99 wrote: »

37% say they will pay more tax - how much more we're not sure. Presumably there's a limit to their largess.

I wouldn't be too confident of all of them writing a cheque when the time comes - talk's cheap.

You'll have to keep all of them on board and get more than half of the others to get over 50% - good luck with that.:D

Ha ha, classic!

Those agreeing with your bias are locked on sure things and won't change their minds, but those disagreeing with your bias are open to changing?

:D clinging onto the findings of one poll or what?

Stop moaning ffs

10-15 years

Same poster same misrepresentation of a single poll, repeatedly.
With no other appoint. Not a one.
I think that speaks volumes.

facehugger99

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Ha ha, classic!

Those agreeing with your bias are locked on sure things and won't change their minds, but those disagreeing with your bias are open to changing?

:D clinging onto the findings of one poll or what?

The trends in poll numbers only move in one direction when cost are introduced to the question - it ain't in the direction you're hoping.

As the question of cost becomes less of a hypothetical and more of a reality, there's only one direction the numbers are heading.

My opinion? Sure, but one based on the reality of the data.

FrancieBrady

facehugger99 wrote: »

The trends in poll numbers only move in one direction when cost are introduced to the question - it ain't in the direction you're hoping.

As the question of cost becomes less of a hypothetical and more of a reality, there's only one direction the numbers are heading.

My opinion? Sure, but one based on the reality of the data.

No, I have already said, I know there are those out there who won't pay and will try to ignore it.

I also know that there are those scaremongered into positions on the basis of figures like an ongoing cost of 10-11-12-13 billion.

37% say they will not pay extra tax, 37% say they will and 26%/don't know/or will consider it based on how much.

You can extrapolate noting more out of that single poll, there is no 'trend' unless you have more up to date polls to show us?

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

So the narrative has changed...that's something I suppose. 'Not willing to commit' is the line now.

Well sorry FH, you are guessing again...26% don't know how they feel about paying extra tax for a UI.






No, I don't find it 'jarring' at all. There are people who will take a headline figure of 10-12-13 billion and just presume that is what it will cost. I.E. there is a lot of mis-information out there circulated by scaremongers such as yourself.

When it is shown to them that cost has other outside contributions and that a UI could be a huge investment I would expect that '37% not willing to pay', to change.
But I am GUESSING that to be the case. We'll see.

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.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

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.

I think this further guesswork speaks for itself about a rather sad bias.

James Brown

10-15 years

Imagine if at the last crash there was a poll, 'Would you pay more tax to bail out private bondholders?'
I think, 'Would you pay more tax to save puppies?' would have a hard time gaining traction ffs.