RIC and DMP to be commemorated this month

FrancieBrady

feargale wrote: »

Yes, almost as sneaky as calling yourself a socialist in Ireland, and "business friendly" in New York when shaking down armchair terrorists who know nothing about Ireland, or real-life ones in Boston like Whitey Bolger.

You just trying to knock out as many insulting soundbytes as you can?

Because you may be making sense to yourself but I'm a bit lost on the relevance tbh.

James Brown

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You just trying to knock out as many insulting soundbytes as you can?

Because you may be making sense to yourself but I'm a bit lost on the relevance tbh.

I can see we are not yet matured enough as a society something, the tans.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Perhaps your boogeymen need to be portrayed as 'sinister'?

You guys really need to stop trying to censor/or stop the debate. It is going to happen.
Commission your own reports and data. Because just calling all other work 'pie in the sky' is not going to work.

Do the research and then maybe some political party will be brave enough to oppose unification on your behalf.

I have done the research before, and asked where the billions required to harmonise social welfare rates and public service pay rates were going to come from.

Unless, of course, you expect people to take pay cuts and social welfare cuts to pay for a united Ireland.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

I have done the research before,

Sure you have.

blanch, your whole existence is devoted to finding obstacles to a UI. So transparent is that devotion you are the equivalent of the 'romantic UIer' who also exists.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Sure you have.

blanch, your whole existence is devoted to finding obstacles to a UI. So transparent is that devotion you are the equivalent of the 'romantic UIer' who also exists.

It's not just me............

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/irish-unity-poses-greater-risks-to-northern-ireland-than-brexit-does-1.4016373


https://www.irishnews.com/news/northernirelandnews/2019/09/17/news/united-ireland-would-cost-up-to-30-billion-a-year-and-collapse-north-s-economy--1714127/

€30 billion a year is the potential cost.

feargale

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You just trying to knock out as many insulting soundbytes as you can?

Because you may be making sense to yourself but I'm a bit lost on the relevance tbh.

I'm not trying to insult you at all, not for a moment suggesting that you were in any way personally acquainted with Whitey.
As for others being insulted, well I'm reminded of the foreign minister of a country with a brutal regime who I heard interviewed many years ago. When asked about his government's appalling hum

The Rape of Lucretia

blanch152 wrote: »

It's not just me............

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/irish-unity-poses-greater-risks-to-northern-ireland-than-brexit-does-1.4016373


https://www.irishnews.com/news/northernirelandnews/2019/09/17/news/united-ireland-would-cost-up-to-30-billion-a-year-and-collapse-north-s-economy--1714127/

€30 billion a year is the potential cost.

It utterly impossible for the south to go this route. Financially, the only unification of the island option abailable is reintegration of the south into the UK. Sure, unpalatable still to some. But it is the realistic united Ireland option.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

It's not just me............

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/irish-unity-poses-greater-risks-to-northern-ireland-than-brexit-does-1.4016373


https://www.irishnews.com/news/northernirelandnews/2019/09/17/news/united-ireland-would-cost-up-to-30-billion-a-year-and-collapse-north-s-economy--1714127/

€30 billion a year is the potential cost.

:rolleyes: I never said 'it was just you'.

But those reports and their own limitations were discussed on this site already.

It is all grist to the mill and shows if anything that there is no absolute figure.

James Brown

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

It utterly impossible for the south to go this route. Financially, the only unification of the island option abailable is reintegration of the south into the UK. Sure, unpalatable still to some. But it is the realistic united Ireland option.

I think we should invite the U.K. to join an Irish led Celtic union. They'll need introduce the Irish language to their schools mind

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

:rolleyes: I never said 'it was just you'.

But those reports and their own limitations were discussed on this site already.

It is all grist to the mill and shows if anything that there is no absolute figure.

Sinn Fein commissioned studies versus ESRI economist..........ummmm.......is that a hard question?

Up to €30 billion a year is the cost, and at least a lost decade of economic growth. If you think it is still worth it, fair enough, but you would be imposing an awful lot of misery on an awful lot of people for effectively replacing one flag with another.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Sinn Fein commissioned studies versus ESRI economist..........ummmm.......is that a hard question?

Up to €30 billion a year is the cost, and at least a lost decade of economic growth. If you think it is still worth it, fair enough, but you would be imposing an awful lot of misery on an awful lot of people for effectively replacing one flag with another.

Jesus, blanch this isn't rocket science. The 30 billion cost is based on a 12billion subvention still being required year on year.

Nonsense to begin with. But some good info in there too.

facehugger99

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Jesus, blanch this isn't rocket science. The 30 billion cost is based on a 12billion subvention still being required year on year.

Nonsense to begin with. But some good info in there too.

Must be great for the lads who won't need to worry about paying for it to assure the rest of us it'll be grand.

Not going to wash I'm afraid.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Jesus, blanch this isn't rocket science. The 30 billion cost is based on a 12billion subvention still being required year on year.

Nonsense to begin with. But some good info in there too.

Nope, it isn't rocket science.

Anyone proposing a united Ireland is effectively proposing austerity at the level of the 2008 FF government, and two decades to catch up.

No amount of magic money trees or taxes on the rich will pay for that.

efanton

Im fairly new to this forum and its surprising to find that those that appear to be supporting FG, but even then failing miserably, appear to be the most uniformed and least able to support an argument with facts or statistics.

I would have though the FG'ers would have been well able for an intelligent and informed debate, without racing to be first to the gutter.
Come on lads you are letting your side down badly.

Those that are mud slinging really do need to cop on. Personally I could care who you support FG FF SF Lab whoever, but for those us who are here to help make up there minds about how they are going to vote its very apparent that those purporting to to support a government party that claims to be the party of sensible policies and prudence are actually doing their party nothing but harm.

I would hope to think these are a very 'select' group of FineGael supporters and not typical.

blanch152

efanton wrote: »

Im fairly new to this forum and its surprising to find that those that appear to be supporting FG, but even then failing miserably, appear to be the most uniformed and least able to support an argument with facts or statistics.

I would have though the FG'ers would have been well able for an intelligent and informed debate, without racing to be first to the gutter.
Come on lads you are letting your side down badly.

Those that are mud slinging really do need to cop on. Personally I could care who you support FG FF SF Lab whoever, but for those us who are here to help make up there minds about how they are going to vote its very apparent that those purporting to to support a government party that claims to be the party of sensible policies and prudence are actually doing their party nothing but harm.

I would hope to think these are a very 'select' group of FineGael supporters and not typical.

I don't think that you have read very much of the forum. The key characteristic of those who criticise the current government is the absence of facts to back up their argument.

Just look at the recent debate on this page about the costs of Irish unification. The Sinn Fein apologists (they tell me that they are not supporters) don't have a single fact to back up their view that everything will be all right on the night with Irish unity. In fact, those who question the value of unity are the only ones who have produced hard facts to back up their arguments.

This current government's major failing is on climate change, hence my vote for the Greens, but on most other issues from fiscal management to planning guidelines, from pension reform to starting to resolve the housing issues, they have done a very good job, far better than any FF government in living memory.

efanton

blanch152 wrote: »

It's not just me............

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/irish-unity-poses-greater-risks-to-northern-ireland-than-brexit-does-1.4016373


https://www.irishnews.com/news/northernirelandnews/2019/09/17/news/united-ireland-would-cost-up-to-30-billion-a-year-and-collapse-north-s-economy--1714127/

€30 billion a year is the potential cost.

It would be very costly and there's no way of getting round that.

BUT, look at the hundreds million that poured into Germany when it was unified.

The US have always had an interest in Northern Ireland and have been financially supporting a lot of initiatives. Something rarely mention by British or Irish government and certainly rarely mentioned by those in Stormont.

With the 'troubles' and perceived instability a thing of the past it unification did actually take place, there would be significant inward investment.

A large proportion of that 12 billion spent by the British government is spent on policing, and a military presence, not just personnel but the upkeep of military airports and army and naval bases. Most of that could be deducted

Does all the above make it a cheaper proposition to the 12 billion touted (we will go with the 12 billion just for arguments sake)?
It definitely would but it certainly would not half that cost unless the EU came in with a really sweet deal.

Bu honestly, If you told me tomorrow morning that we could have a United Ireland that the Unionists were happy with and it would only cost €5 billion a year, I would go for it.
I know there would have to be cuts elsewhere to accommodate that, but €5 billion is still not a totally massive chunk out the €55 billion collected in tax revenue. It would hurt there is absolutely no doubt about that.
If it was only sustained like that for a few years, I think I could be persuaded.
But seriously if it was going to cost this state any more it simply could not be an option, however much some people would want it.

It would really depend on how much the EU, and USA would be willing to subsidise until social welfare, public services, jobs, tax reform, inward investment, education had stabilised to some sort of manageable state. I think there definitely would be a willingness there to help us through the transition, but we would have to be able to demonstrate very clearly that it was a viable option. That would be hard, very hard.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Nope, it isn't rocket science.

Anyone proposing a united Ireland is effectively proposing austerity at the level of the 2008 FF government, and two decades to catch up.

No amount of magic money trees or taxes on the rich will pay for that.

A UI will be an investment in our futures.

You can pretend that you are a financial wizard until the cows come home and maybe fool some but if you start from an assumption that the cost is going to be 12 billion year on year into perpetuity and that we will have to foot the entire cost and further that there will be no dividend, then you nor anyone else can be taken seriously.

facehugger99

FrancieBrady wrote: »

A UI will be an investment in our futures.

Empty soundbites with no substance.

Perfectly aligns with SF economic proposals.

Meaningless, un-costed nonsense.

Do you work and pay taxes? Will you be the one putting your hand in your pocket to pay for this "investment"?

Telling the Irish electorate they need to pony up and pay for your pipe-dream will not wash.

FrancieBrady

facehugger99 wrote: »

Empty soundbites with no substance.

Perfectly aligns with SF economic proposals.

Meaningless, un-costed nonsense.

Do you work and pay taxes? Will you be the one putting your hand in your pocket to pay for this "investment"?

Telling the Irish electorate they need to pony up and pay for your pipe-dream will not wash.

You do know what an 'investment' normally requires FH?
I spent my life working and still do. I know that anything I 'invested' in paid dividends and is something I can pass on to my children.
Yes, it 'cost' me initially, but I knew what I was doing.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

A UI will be an investment in our futures.

A soundbite to rival "comely maidens dancing at the crossroads" and at a similar level of naive simplicity and economic sense.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You can pretend that you are a financial wizard until the cows come home and maybe fool some but if you start from an assumption that the cost is going to be 12 billion year on year into perpetuity and that we will have to foot the entire cost and further that there will be no dividend, then you nor anyone else can be taken seriously.

They aren't my conclusions, I just paraphrased the work of this man, which I have linked to previously.

https://www.esri.ie/people/john-fitzgerald


I don't think that anyone who has looked at the costs of unification can hold a candle to him. He says that unification could cost €30m a year and I don't think that you are in any position to dispute that.

Furthermore, if you read his work, he has plenty to say on the inadequate nature of the education system in the North, something which you have repeatedly denied needs fixing. Of course, that is a Ministry that has mostly been held by Sinn Fein in recent years, and also one with the most devolved powers. If anything speaks to the inability of Sinn Fein to govern, it is their continued failure to improve the education system in the North.

facehugger99

blanch152 wrote: »

If anything speaks to the inability of Sinn Fein to govern, it is their continued failure to improve the education system in the North.

It is not in their interest to do so.

The demographics of the people who tend to vote for them suggest that the more highly educated a person is, the less likely they will vote SF.

Their policies only appeal to those who lack either the ability or interest to apply some critical thinking.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

A soundbite to rival "comely maidens dancing at the crossroads" and at a similar level of naive simplicity and economic sense.





They aren't my conclusions, I just paraphrased the work of this man, which I have linked to previously.

https://www.esri.ie/people/john-fitzgerald


I don't think that anyone who has looked at the costs of unification can hold a candle to him. He says that unification could cost €30m a year and I don't think that you are in any position to dispute that.

Furthermore, if you read his work, he has plenty to say on the inadequate nature of the education system in the North, something which you have repeatedly denied needs fixing. Of course, that is a Ministry that has mostly been held by Sinn Fein in recent years, and also one with the most devolved powers. If anything speaks to the inability of Sinn Fein to govern, it is their continued failure to improve the education system in the North.

What a complete litany of lies ^ about what i said about education in NI.

He is one voice blanch. And even he admits he is fallible.
https://www.independent.ie/business/irish/banking-inquiry/fitzgerald-my-regrets-over-crash-are-with-me-until-i-die-30985532.html

I can just imagine the derision you would be heaping on his head f it suited you over his failure there.



There are other voices...the ones you refuse to countenance on that very ESRI site who say what I say, that there are unknowns when calculating what will happen and that we don't have a full picture yet.
There are other voices and papers too predicting the effects of Brexit on this debate.

Given his self admitted failures on 'prediction', it would wise to consider what he has to say, but not to promote it as the gospel.


You are all over this site with the negative inputs about one party and one outcome for this island, all you have done here is gather together some info that suits your agenda, Well done.

Fionn1952

blanch152 wrote: »

A soundbite to rival "comely maidens dancing at the crossroads" and at a similar level of naive simplicity and economic sense.





They aren't my conclusions, I just paraphrased the work of this man, which I have linked to previously.

https://www.esri.ie/people/john-fitzgerald


I don't think that anyone who has looked at the costs of unification can hold a candle to him. He says that unification could cost €30m a year and I don't think that you are in any position to dispute that.

Furthermore, if you read his work, he has plenty to say on the inadequate nature of the education system in the North, something which you have repeatedly denied needs fixing. Of course, that is a Ministry that has mostly been held by Sinn Fein in recent years, and also one with the most devolved powers. If anything speaks to the inability of Sinn Fein to govern, it is their continued failure to improve the education system in the North.

Why do I get the impression that the credibility you attribute to experts strongly correlates with how close their conclusions lie to your preconceived opinions, Blanch?

It's good research practice to consider the body of evidence, rather than allowing one researcher's potential biases and flaws to dominate ones opinion. It's a reason we use metastudies in real research.

FrancieBrady

Fionn1952 wrote: »

Why do I get the impression that the credibility you attribute to experts strongly correlates with how close their conclusions lie to your preconceived opinions, Blanch?

It's good research practice to consider the body of evidence, rather than allowing one researcher's potential biases and flaws to dominate ones opinion. It's a reason we use metastudies in real research.

Correct Fionn.
If you are picking economists as your go to 'favs' it would be wise and prudent not to depend on their own biog or CV, that fails completely to mention what they got disastrously wrong.


I am not being overly harsh on the man, just saying that what he has to say is not gospel.

blanch152

Fionn1952 wrote: »

Why do I get the impression that the credibility you attribute to experts strongly correlates with how close their conclusions lie to your preconceived opinions, Blanch?

It's good research practice to consider the body of evidence, rather than allowing one researcher's potential biases and flaws to dominate ones opinion. It's a reason we use metastudies in real research.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Correct Fionn.
If you are picking economists as your go to 'favs' it would be wise and prudent not to depend on their own biog or CV, that fails completely to mention what they got disastrously wrong.


I am not being overly harsh on the man, just saying that what he has to say is not gospel.

Neither post addresses a single issue raised by Fitzgerald, rather they focus on my motives for raising them. If someone can credibly address the issues he raises around the dreadful state of the education system in the North or the fiscal cost of harmonisation, etc. we can have a discussion.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Neither post addresses a single issue raised by Fitzgerald, rather they focus on my motives for raising them. If someone can credibly address the issues he raises around the dreadful state of the education system in the North or the fiscal cost of harmonisation, etc. we can have a discussion.

Why would anyone be arsed debating with somebody who comes out with this bias, routinely?

If anything speaks to the inability of Sinn Fein to govern, it is their continued failure to improve the education system in the North.

We get it blanch... it's all the Taigs fault.

Fionn1952

blanch152 wrote: »

Neither post addresses a single issue raised by Fitzgerald, rather they focus on my motives for raising them. If someone can credibly address the issues he raises around the dreadful state of the education system in the North or the fiscal cost of harmonisation, etc. we can have a discussion.

I'd agree with him on the education side of things actually. Regarding his figures on the cost of harmonisation, my question isnt around his figures (which are projections, and cadged with an, 'up to', making it a worst case scenario projection). They're still essentially a pixel of the big picture- what are the chances of this worst case scenario of his? Is there anything we can do to minimise this possibility, and so on.


Oh and the great big one......why do you place so much stock in his figures, unquestioningly.....yet suddenly develop the urge to carry out an in depth investigation into potential motives/funding/biases when figures are presented which reflect a more positive projection? Should you not apply your same level of scrutiny to ALL projections?

blanch152

Fionn1952 wrote: »

I'd agree with him on the education side of things actually. Regarding his figures on the cost of harmonisation, my question isnt around his figures (which are projections, and cadged with an, 'up to', making it a worst case scenario projection). They're still essentially a pixel of the big picture- what are the chances of this worst case scenario of his? Is there anything we can do to minimise this possibility, and so on.


Oh and the great big one......why do you place so much stock in his figures, unquestioningly.....yet suddenly develop the urge to carry out an in depth investigation into potential motives/funding/biases when figures are presented which reflect a more positive projection? Should you not apply your same level of scrutiny to ALL projections?

Fitzgerald's reputation speaks for itself, he has been a leading light of the ESRI for decades, at a time when its reputation was very high. That lends huge credibility to his analysis.

The other studies that have been referenced have been conducted by less than stellar economists and have mostly been commissioned by Sinn Fein-linked organisations.

If I am wrong on any of that, please show me.

Fionn1952

blanch152 wrote: »

Fitzgerald's reputation speaks for itself, he has been a leading light of the ESRI for decades, at a time when its reputation was very high. That lends huge credibility to his analysis.

The other studies that have been referenced have been conducted by less than stellar economists and have mostly been commissioned by Sinn Fein-linked organisations.

If I am wrong on any of that, please show me.

You're fully aware an appeal to authority is a fallacious argument though, Blanch. By his own reckoning, hes projected a worst case scenario, which you're trying to present as a reasonably expected outcome.

As I said, my criticism isn't of Fitzgerald, it's your cherry picking of experts (and a nice little splodge of misrepresentation of the analysis) that I have issue with. Christ, you've even ignored two sources disputing it within your own linked article. Isn't David McWilliams a reasonably solid economist? Why ignore his insight?

As I said, realistically to build a picture, we should look at multiple models, multiple sources and multiple action plans. You seem to just want to point towards a worst case scenario projection, with no intervention between now and then as justification for not bothering.

James Brown

facehugger99 wrote: »

It is not in their interest to do so.

The demographics of the people who tend to vote for them suggest that the more highly educated a person is, the less likely they will vote SF.

Their policies only appeal to those who lack either the ability or interest to apply some critical thinking.

A few lecturers I know are SF supporters.

At the end of the day Charlie Flanagan was ignorant to push this RIC commemoration nobody asked for and both he and clueless* Varadkar were condescending in their responses to criticism from both the public and members of their own party.

*clueless on the RIC, giving him the benefit of the doubt.