Northern Ireland- a failure 99 years on?

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

The GFA protects us from a return to terrorism. The subvention will always be paid.

No, the GFA does not protect us. And the subvention can fall just as easily as it can rise. A faltering economy in NI will require a higher subvention, will the UK be willing to meet that bill? An unknown.

Unification is a high risk unknown. You have no idea if it would be supported or by how much.

Could you explain how the wording of the question in the poll skewed the findings? It was a straight forward question.

Who said it was 'skewed'? If you ask people would they like to pay more tax, what answer would you expect?

If you present people with a costed investment that they will pay towards and that will bring dividends then the answer will be different even if there is an element of risk. We do it when we take out a mortgage.

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

No, the GFA does not protect us. And the subvention can fall just as easily as it can rise. A faltering economy in NI will require a higher subvention, will the UK be willing to meet that bill? An unknown.



Who said it was 'skewed'? If you ask people would they like to pay more tax, what answer would you expect?

If you present people with a costed investment that they will pay towards and that will bring dividends then the answer will be different even if there is an element of risk. We do it when we take out a mortgage.

The UK will pay the subvention as they always have. It's a tiny piece of expenditure for them.

How does the GFA not protect us? Are you saying the IRA will return if there's a no vote?

Even with your "it's an investment" question the reality is an increase in taxes with a possibility of a benefit.

Support dropping approximately 40% suggests we don't want to take that risk.

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

The UK will pay the subvention as they always have. It's a tiny piece of expenditure for them.

An unknown. Not that long ago NI was a wasteland of deprivation as where many areas of a just as wealthy UK. You know and I know that just because it is a tiny amount in the scheme of things, that is not how it works in reality. The subvention is already under pressure and is being cut.

How does the GFA not protect us? Are you saying the IRA will return if there's a no vote?

The IRA are not the problem. The support the IRA and other terrorists has is. Again it is an unknown what will happen here if the situation is destabilised.

Even with your "it's an investment" question the reality is an increase in taxes with a possibility of a benefit.

Support dropping nearly 40% suggests we don't want to take that risk.

We will see when the question is asked in that way. I.E. after a proposal is made via a white paper laying out the in's and outs.
You will never see majority support for a question asking 'do you want to pay more taxes'.

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

We will see when the question is asked in that way. I.E. after a proposal is made via a white paper laying out the in's and outs.
You will never see majority support for a question asking 'do you want to pay more taxes'.

Do you really think rewording the question will trick people into believing they won't have to pay for it?

Will be interesting to see the reaction form SF and their supporters when the research shows the magnitude of the investment required.

SF think they need to downplay the cost of the subvention to convince the Republic. There isn't much enthusiasm for a UI as there is. Imagine when we see a white paper talking about 10's of bn per year.

ELM327

FrancieBrady wrote: »

An unknown. Not that long ago NI was a wasteland of deprivation as where many areas of a just as wealthy UK. You know and I know that just because it is a tiny amount in the scheme of things, that is not how it works in reality. The subvention is already under pressure and is being cut.



The IRA are not the problem. The support the IRA and other terrorists has is. Again it is an unknown what will happen here if the situation is destabilised.


We will see when the question is asked in that way. I.E. after a proposal is made via a white paper laying out the in's and outs.
You will never see majority support for a question asking 'do you want to pay more taxes'.

The upcoming border poll should (after the UK's learning from Brexit) have the following


1 - Remain as is
2 - Leave - following X,Y,Z clear plan.




The IRA (well, the modern drug gangs that take over the good name of that organization) and the similar unionist terrorist groups are the problem. Whatever happens, the vast majority of both communities and the whole island are against a return to violence.

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

Do you really think rewording the question will trick people into believing they won't have to pay for it?

What?

Will be interesting to see the reaction form SF and their supporters when the research shows the magnitude of the investment required.

SF think they need to downplay the cost of the subvention to convince the Republic. There isn't much enthusiasm for a UI as there is. Imagine when we see a white paper talking about 10's of bn per year.

You imagine away jh79.
I struggling to think how somebody like yourself would have faced into independence with such a pessimism. I sure there were people, thankfully not enough.

ELM327

Hqrry113 wrote: »

The current Irish flag is already perfect a United Ireland the green represents the catholics, orange represents the protestants and the white in the middle represents the peace between them.

That's what the flag stands for.

It may have been originally what the flag was for, but unionists will not accept that.
Same as we don't accept the st patrick's cross in the union jack as representative of Ireland.

FrancieBrady

ELM327 wrote: »

The upcoming border poll should (after the UK's learning from Brexit) have the following


1 - Remain as is
2 - Leave - following X,Y,Z clear plan.




The IRA (well, the modern drug gangs that take over the good name of that organization) and the similar unionist terrorist groups are the problem. Whatever happens, the vast majority of both communities and the whole island are against a return to violence.

Was there ever a 'community' that wanted violence?

You match political instability with economic deprivation and you have a recipe for something nobody wants but happens anyway. Violence. Have we not learned that lesson?

ELM327

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Was there ever a 'community' that wanted violence?

You match political instability with economic deprivation and you have a recipe for something nobody wants but happens anyway. Violence. Have we not learned that lesson?

Yes.
A vocal minority (or majority depending on your POV) of both sides wanted violence and viewed the troubles as a legitimate war against a foreign power.


We've moved past that, to the ballot box. If we do something now to provoke the situation, then we may be back 22 years in terms of progress and peace.

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

What?



You imagine away jh79.
I struggling to think how somebody like yourself would have faced into independence with such a pessimism. I sure there were people, thankfully not enough.

Francie, the poll showed a drop from approx 70 to 30%. That's a lot of people thinking the same way as me.

Doubt "something something 1916" is gonna change their mind.

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

Francie, the poll showed a drop from approx 70 to 30%. That's a lot of people thinking the same way as me.

Doubt "something something 1916" is gonna change their mind.

People change their minds all the time, especially if the information changes. Once upon not too long ago you wouldn't have gotten same sex marriage through to a referendum, never mind an acceptance of it. Look at the career of Leo Varadkar for proof of that. Radically changed his mind in a couple of years.

Your poll was a snapshot answer to a question no majority would ever answer positively.

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

People change their minds all the time, especially if the information changes. Once upon not too long ago you wouldn't have gotten same sex marriage through to a referendum, never mind an acceptance of it. Look at the career of Leo Varadkar for proof of that. Radically changed his mind in a couple of years.

Your poll was a snapshot answer to a question no majority would ever answer positively.

So asking people if they would pay for a UI via taxation will give a different answer to asking people if they would invest in a UI via taxation?

You really think people are that stupid?

ELM327

jh79 wrote: »

So asking people if they would pay for a UI via taxation will give a different answer to asking people if they would invest in a UI via taxation?

You really think people are that stupid?

People are that stupid though.

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

So asking people if they would pay for a UI via taxation will give a different answer to asking people if they would invest in a UI via taxation?

You really think people are that stupid?

When have you ever heard a government ask 'Do you want to pay more tax', if they are going to invest in something?

They don't do it because they know what the answer will be. However if the costs and benefits are laid out people have a different attitude.

Nothing would ever have got done here if that was what people were asked.

grayzer75

jh79 wrote: »

So asking people if they would pay for a UI via taxation will give a different answer to asking people if they would invest in a UI via taxation?

You really think people are that stupid?

I won't be on the backs of tax payers. There'll be a lot of help from the EU and the US when the time comes and the Brits will have to stump up a bit as well.

downcow

Hqrry113 wrote: »

The current Irish flag is already perfect a United Ireland the green represents the catholics, orange represents the protestants and the white in the middle represents the peace between them.

That's what the flag stands for.

Catch yourself on.
Actually don’t. Keep saying that rediculous stuff as it helps the unionist cause

downcow

jh79 wrote: »

How do explain last year's poll where support for a UI dropped to 30% if it led to an increase in taxes?

Financial situation is way worse now too so that number could be even lower now.

Was that an Roi poll. Would you have a link

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

When have you ever heard a government ask 'Do you want to pay more tax', if they are going to invest in something?

They don't do it because they know what the answer will be. However if the costs and benefits are laid out people have a different attitude.

Nothing would ever have got done here if that was what people were asked.

The magnitude of the financial costs make this different. They will be asked to fund something that could take decades to fix.

jh79

downcow wrote: »

Was that an Roi poll. Would you have a link

https://banda.ie/wp-content/uploads/Sunday-Times-Apr-2019-Report.pdf

FrancieBrady

downcow wrote: »

Catch yourself on.
Actually don’t. Keep saying that rediculous stuff as it helps the unionist cause

Just wondering here. You do realise concessions will be expected off unionists

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

The magnitude of the financial costs make this different. They will be asked to fund something that could take decades to fix.

The 'magnitude' of which we dont know yet.

blanch152

grayzer75 wrote: »

I won't be on the backs of tax payers. There'll be a lot of help from the EU and the US when the time comes and the Brits will have to stump up a bit as well.

This isn't 1970 when the size and wealth of the EU and the US meant they would have been in a position to subsidise a united Ireland which was relatively poor. A lot has changed since then, there are a lot more deserving cases in Eastern Europe who haven't received a penny.

It isn't going to happen.

jh79

grayzer75 wrote: »

I won't be on the backs of tax payers. There'll be a lot of help from the EU and the US when the time comes and the Brits will have to stump up a bit as well.

I suspect they will want the taxpayer to fund it to some extent. There doesn't seem to be much of an appetite for that in the Republic.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

This isn't 1970 when the size and wealth of the EU and the US meant they would have been in a position to subsidise a united Ireland which was relatively poor. A lot has changed since then, there are a lot more deserving cases in Eastern Europe who haven't received a penny.

It isn't going to happen.

Is that an official EU position?

Munsterman12

It was a failure the minute the Brits invaded.

declanflynn

jh79 wrote: »

So how does a poor UK economy change the opinions of the those who won't pay extra taxes for a UI? It's a sizeable cohort. Support for a UI drops from 70+% to 30+% if taxes increase.

These numbers are wrong,
a poll carried out on behalf of the Sunday Times by a UK company in January this year has shown that 80% of Irish people want a United Ireland and 40% believe it will happen in the next 10 years.

FrancieBrady

Munsterman12 wrote: »

It was a failure the minute the Brits invaded.

Agreed. 100 years of suppression, religious bigotry, exclusion, tragic violence, Brexit with a health threat thrown in.

Rejoice!

downcow

Munsterman12 wrote: »

It was a failure the minute the Brits invaded.

....and it was all harmony before that lol

downcow

declanflynn wrote: »

These numbers are wrong,
a poll carried out on behalf of the Sunday Times by a UK company in January this year has shown that 80% of Irish people want a United Ireland and 40% believe it will happen in the next 10 years.

Can we have a wee link please

jh79

declanflynn wrote: »

These numbers are wrong,
a poll carried out on behalf of the Sunday Times by a UK company in January this year has shown that 80% of Irish people want a United Ireland and 40% believe it will happen in the next 10 years.

The poll from Apr 19 asked if people wanted a UI too and a similar result to the above was reported. That support fell off a cliff when asked if they would pay extra in taxes (73% dropped to 37%).