How long before Irish reunification?

facehugger99

FrancieBrady wrote: »

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?

There's even a trend in the poll in question.

Percentage in favour if there is no change in tax - 64%.
Percentage in favour if there is a tax increase - 37%

Support doesn't just reduce when the question of paying is introduced - it falls off a cliff.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

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

One person's guesswork is another person's simple common sense.

You might guess that if you let go off a rock, it could float on up to the moon, my common sense tells me that it will fall to the ground and maybe hurt my toe.

FrancieBrady

facehugger99 wrote: »

There's even a trend in the poll in question.

Percentage in favour if there is no change in tax - 64%.
Percentage in favour if there is a tax increase - 37%

Support doesn't just reduce when the question of paying is introduced - it falls off a cliff.

Still very clingy FH.

26% are there to have their minds made up and haven't ruled out paying. That indicates to me a willingness to entertain a tax.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

One person's guesswork is another person's simple common sense.

You might guess that if you let go off a rock, it could float on up to the moon, my common sense tells me that it will fall to the ground and maybe hurt my toe.

You also might guess that if a cost is presented to somebody as 'an investment', like a mortgage, or the high cost of some jewellery that will grow in value, then they will invest in something like that and DO all the time.

I.E: Not everyone is going into this with a voracious appetite for the negative aspects.

blanch152

Matt Barrett wrote: »

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.

Brexit, DUP, Trump. Yes, you can add in the resurgence of Le Pen in France, the nutters in Italy and Germany if you want as well to make the fantasy of a united Ireland a good thing in your mind.

To me, anyone that says a rise of nationalism is a good thing must be bonkers.

I have no issue with cultural nationalism, it is political nationalism, as espoused by Trump, Farage, Adams, Foster, Le Pen etc. that makes me sick. We don't need political nationalism anymore in a modern inclusive democracy.

Country does not mean nation.

Thinking about it, countryism should be used to distinguish those who want to corral nationalism into fixed areas from true multicultural nationalists who welcome all nations.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You also might guess that if a cost is presented to somebody as 'an investment', like a mortgage, or the high cost of some jewellery that will grow in value, then they will invest in something like that and DO all the time.

I.E: Not everyone is going into this with a voracious appetite for the negative aspects.

Are you saying that me paying extra taxes so that €270m can be spent on child benefit is somehow an investment?

Of all the bizarre and weird defences of the cost of a united Ireland, that is right up there.

facehugger99

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.

Good point - it would be an interesting exercise to include say a reduction in the pension, cuts to SW, etc into the question and see how many of the 37% are still so gung-ho about funding it then.

My own feeling is that somewhere between 20 to 25% are so intrinsically wedded to the past they would be prepared to accept a lowering of their own living standards for unification.
I think a lot of these would be of the older generation and that as time passes this percentage will reduce further.

facehugger99

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Still very clingy FH.

26% are there to have their minds made up and haven't ruled out paying. That indicates to me a willingness to entertain a tax.

It indicates to me an unwillingness to answer the question.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Are you saying that me paying extra taxes so that €270m can be spent on child benefit is somehow an investment?

Of all the bizarre and weird defences of the cost of a united Ireland, that is right up there.

I remember having this debate with a poster called Godge who went on a rant about one aspect of the cost of a UI and derided any poster who questioned him.

There is NO-ONE able to tell us what the cost will be until we sit down and find out what the true cost is at the moment and until every single department and agency work out what it will cost to come up with new all island systems of taxation and what that will be spent on.
Then you offset that with how long that cost will accrue, what supports from EU and elsewhere that you can attract, what the UK will be expected or willing to contribute etc and what benefits whole island infrastructure and governance will achieve.
THEN and only then do you say to the people, are you willing to make an investment in this or do you want to remain with the cyclical problems caused by the partition of the island.

Me, you and a few other posters will not be able to do that on Boards.ie. This can ever only be a general discussion.

FrancieBrady

facehugger99 wrote: »

It indicates to me an unwillingness to answer the question.

Well yes, it does actually.

And why do people typically not answer Yes or No questions in anonymous surveys?

Perhaps because they haven't enough info to hand and are open to the idea?



I am most definitely admitting to guessing here: but if you are willing to pay some tax, but the question doesn't say how much that would be, then you are more likely to say Don't Know.

RobMc59

10-15 years

Matt Barrett wrote: »

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.

The problem with your view of things Matt is there is no foreign power occupying Ireland unless you disagree with what your own country has agreed?
Also,are`nt the Unionist people in NI entitled to feel patriotic and want to retain their culture and heritage in their legitimately recognised home-NI?

Stop moaning ffs

10-15 years

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.

Second or third time you’ve made the statement bolded.

Second or third time I’ve asked you to explain it or qualify it.

You’re making a vast baseless assumption about a poll?

An exit poll result taken at polling stations.

People who vote tend to care about society and the taxes they pay.

That’s where the result came from. Not a quick few calls around Cabra


You’re not even trying to hide your thoughts on the people here.
It’s hard to see you mean anything but contempt

facehugger99

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Well yes, it does actually.

And why do people typically not answer Yes or No questions in anonymous surveys?

Perhaps because they haven't enough info to hand and are open to the idea?



I am most definitely admitting to guessing here: but if you are willing to pay some tax, but the question doesn't say how much that would be, then you are more likely to say Don't Know.

You're not guessing, you're reaching.

The percentage of people in favour of a UI collapses when asked will they pay for it - to think that those who are ambivalent about the idea will move in the opposite direction, when the prospect of paying for it becomes more real, is laughable.

FrancieBrady

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

It’s hard to see you mean anything but contempt

Another reason this view has found no traction with either a political party or a political voice except of course with belligerent Unionism.

FrancieBrady

facehugger99 wrote: »

You're not guessing, you're reaching.

The percentage of people in favour of a UI collapses when asked will they pay for it - to think that those who are ambivalent about the idea will move in the opposite direction, when the prospect of paying for it becomes more real, is laughable.

What?

You are guessing now that the 26% are ambivalent? More arrogance.

jm08

20-30 years

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.

Talking about children - I believe there is an over supply of about 60K school places in Northern Ireland. Sorting that mess out should save a few quid.

James Brown

10-15 years

blanch152 wrote: »

Brexit, DUP, Trump. Yes, you can add in the resurgence of Le Pen in France, the nutters in Italy and Germany if you want as well to make the fantasy of a united Ireland a good thing in your mind.

To me, anyone that says a rise of nationalism is a good thing must be bonkers.

I have no issue with cultural nationalism, it is political nationalism, as espoused by Trump, Farage, Adams, Foster, Le Pen etc. that makes me sick. We don't need political nationalism anymore in a modern inclusive democracy.

Country does not mean nation.

Thinking about it, countryism should be used to distinguish those who want to corral nationalism into fixed areas from true multicultural nationalists who welcome all nations.

You inferred it was on the way out, not the quality of it in some nations. You're changing the point to suit your personal negative assessment of nationalism.
Every nation has it's nationalists. Every government is nationalist in nature. It's about who you are as a nation, which is of course subject to change. N.I. is an artificial illegal anomaly IMO.
You just have a chip on your shoulder with your definition of the term nationalism. If your country celebrates it's heritage, has a positive outlook on others, is inclusive, it's positive to be nationalist IMO.

Stop moaning ffs

10-15 years

Let’s not forget about the 67% of conservatives want rid of NI if it means they get brexit.
The conservative and unionist party poll result by the way.

facehugger99

Matt Barrett wrote: »

N.I. is an artificial illegal anomaly IMO.

Your opinion doesn't count in such matters nor change reality.


You are entitled to an opinion that the moon is made of cheese and everyone else is entitled to laugh at you for it.

_blaaz

10-15 years

facehugger99 wrote: »

You're not guessing, you're reaching.

The percentage of people in favour of a UI collapses when asked will they pay for it - to think that those who are ambivalent about the idea will move in the opposite direction, when the prospect of paying for it becomes more real, is laughable.

Given yous are so adament about this not ever passing...your opposition to actually holding one desont make sense?

facehugger99

_blaaz wrote: »

Given yous are so adament about this not ever passing...your opposition to actually holding one desont make sense?

Asked and answered multiple times.

James Brown

10-15 years

facehugger99 wrote: »

Your opinion doesn't count in such matters nor change reality.


You are entitled to an opinion that the moon is made of cheese and everyone else is entitled to laugh at you for it.

But it does. How do you think I would vote on a UI referendum?
The reality is N.I. wasn't created democratically and many would see it like that.
Taking somewhere and instilling your own brand of faux democracy may be accepted, but isn't legitimate IMO. It's only the pretense of democracy that separated N.I. from East Germany.

_blaaz

10-15 years

facehugger99 wrote: »

Asked and answered multiple times.

Tbh youve not answered....only with spurious ranting calling everyone shinners



If you opppsed to paying extra tax (perfectly valid too i guess) , then surely a support of irexit is in your future,given that amount ireland pays into EU will inevitabily rise?

facehugger99

Matt Barrett wrote: »

But it does. How do you think I would vote on a UI referendum?

I'm not really terribly worried how people who don't believe in reality would vote - I doubt there's too many of ye roaming free around the country.

James Brown

10-15 years

facehugger99 wrote: »

I'm not really terribly worried how people who don't believe in reality would vote - I doubt there's too many of ye roaming free around the country.

Funny to be in a discussion forum and resort to claiming no interest when you meet a differing viewpoint.

facehugger99

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Funny to be in a discussion forum and resort to claiming no interest when you meet a differing viewpoint.

I've never had an issue dismissing idiotic opinions either in life or on discussion forums.

blanch152

Matt Barrett wrote: »

N.I. is an artificial illegal anomaly IMO.

You are entitled to that opinion just as someone is entitled to an opinion that if they let go of a rock, it will float up to the moon.

Not all opinions are created equally.

The legal status of Northern Ireland as a part of the UK has been recognised legally in many international agreements, including the Treaties of the EU and the GFA.

Having an opinion that gravity does not exist is equivalent to an opinion that Northern Ireland is somehow illegal.

Now, if you said that you believe that Northern Ireland was morally wrong in how it was created, your opinion might be classified as dubious, rather than just pure wrong when you state that it is illegal.

blanch152

_blaaz wrote: »

Given yous are so adament about this not ever passing...your opposition to actually holding one desont make sense?

My opposition to a referendum is based on the international agreement known as the GFA and the requirement to adhere to the terms of that agreement. It would be ridiculous and absurd (not to mention unreasonable) for a SoS to conclude that a referendum would pass at a time when the share of the vote held by nationalist parties is in a minority and declining election by election.

blanch152

Matt Barrett wrote: »

You inferred it was on the way out, not the quality of it in some nations. You're changing the point to suit your personal negative assessment of nationalism.
Every nation has it's nationalists. Every government is nationalist in nature. It's about who you are as a nation, which is of course subject to change. N.I. is an artificial illegal anomaly IMO.
You just have a chip on your shoulder with your definition of the term nationalism. If your country celebrates it's heritage, has a positive outlook on others, is inclusive, it's positive to be nationalist IMO.

No problem with inclusivity. As a start, I would propose that we make the 12th July a public holiday in Ireland to show our good wishes to our neighbours in the north.

James Brown

10-15 years

facehugger99 wrote: »

I've never had an issue dismissing idiotic opinions either in life or on discussion forums.

Hey, if you're beat you're beat Hugs. No hard feelings.