United Ireland Poll - please vote

downcow

Whatcar212 wrote: »

What's you're question here? I don't condone any of the violence.

I'm pointing out that we have people on here who call the PIRA terrorists but praise the IRA of the war of independence.

I'm not praising one or the other (nor the new IRA for Lyra McKee), I'm just pointing out the obvious (oblivious?) hypocrisy of some posters.

Yeah and I am just pointing out the hypocrisy of those who condone much of what the provos done but condemn all that the Lyra killers done.

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Expect the one I pointed out just a few posts ago that you blithely waved away in order to continue the now trenchant negativity while also increasing the personal invective.

An integrated Ireland would create economies of scale and therefore a more competitive economy which would be much more attractive for our own entrepreneurs and foreign investment.

Also remember that for me 'us' includes all the people of the island.

Remember too, I asked what the advantages were for the Republic...

*Economies of Scale I can see an advantage but not to any great extent. I will have a look at Hubner and Fitzgerald to see what they say.
*Home-grown entrepreneurs much the same as above.
*Can't see any advantage with regards FDI purely from the Republic perspective. NI would see a big increase but can't see any reason why levels would increase in the Republic.

With regards personal invectives. You're no angel either and I'd say it comes more from your side than mine.

Whatcar212

jh79 wrote: »

.
*Can't see any advantage with regards FDI purely from the Republic perspective. NI would see a big increase but can't see any reason why levels would increase in the Republic.

But it would be one country... so a big increase in the NI region would be an increase for the whole country...

jh79

Whatcar212 wrote: »

But it would be one country... so a big increase in the NI region would be an increase for the whole country...

Yes but a massive drop from current levels in the Republic as it is.

A GDP of 335 bn for 6 million becomes 370bn for 8 million people. That is a massive drop and would take decades to recover from.

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

Remember too, I asked what the advantages were for the Republic...

*Economies of Scale I can see an advantage but not to any great extent. I will have a look at Hubner and Fitzgerald to see what they say.
*Home-grown entrepreneurs much the same as above.
*Can't see any advantage with regards FDI purely from the Republic perspective. NI would see a big increase but can't see any reason why levels would increase in the Republic.

With regards personal invectives. You're no angel either and I'd say it comes more from your side than mine.

There will be no 'republic'.

Whatcar212

jh79 wrote: »

Yes but a massive drop from current levels in the Republic as it is.

A GDP of 335 bn for 6 million becomes 370bn for 8 million people. That is a massive drop and would take decades to recover from.

That assume the NI region will contribute 0 though?
Would this big increase in FDI not help towards that?

Realistically there is no way of knowing how much NI will cost until such time that negations happen with the UK. Will the UK be liable for pensions like they were for the EU? What will NI's deficit be once re-adjusted to account for these pensions & the removal of the shared military cost? Removal of NHS & bloat civil service costs?

There is no way of knowing how much it will cost, but it is equally unfair to assume they will contribute 0. Therefore what can be discussed is the potential for growth, investment & expansion. That potential (or lack there of) is the true indicator to the success of a UI

Shebean

Hamsterchops wrote: »

Ten out of ten for your graphics & attachments (well done), they're always very good, as is your Avatar. On the negative side may I say that you overuse several words including Empire, Colonial and apologist. I do understand where you're coming from, but times have changed, the empire has long gone, and GB is not an imminent threat :eek:

No seriously, GB is not a threat even though you keep suggesting that it is, presumably in some kind of Empire conquest capacity?

Talking of fetishes, I guess the old Provos have ditched the dark glasses, black berets, Doc Martins etc ...

They refuse and block murder victims families obtaining justice, smear the dead and engaged in an illegal war in Iraq. They might be a 'legal' institution but it doesn't make them just.

jh79

Whatcar212 wrote: »

That assume the NI region will contribute 0 though?
Would this big increase in FDI not help towards that?

Realistically there is no way of knowing how much NI will cost until such time that negations happen with the UK. Will the UK be liable for pensions like they were for the EU? What will NI's deficit be once re-adjusted to account for these pensions & the removal of the shared military cost? Removal of NHS & bloat civil service costs?

There is no way of knowing how much it will cost, but it is equally unfair to assume they will contribute 0. Therefore what can be discussed is the potential for growth, investment & expansion. That potential (or lack there of) is the true indicator to the success of a UI

Look, the subvention is not the cost of unification it's the massive investment required to fix NI that is the issue. NI is decades behind with practically no FDI.

According to SF we would have to redirect all budget surplus (where will they come from?) for 8 years and pay welfare and PS pay in NI at the Republics levels just to gain 35bn over 8 years or 1.3% per capita!!

Are you honestly going to suggest the net effect of paying for all that and only getting a 1.3% increase will be a profit?

Shebean

jh79 wrote: »

C'mon Francie, nothing has been pointed out several times. Just saying "An All Ireland" economy repeatedly is not an answer. You have not been able to offer one single example of this benefit.

The disadvantages are the dramatic tax increases required to fix NI with no guarantee that it will work.

The day after unification our economy returns to the levels of the last crash due to the huge increase in population with little increase in GDP.

Why?
The markets are fickle indeed. Good will and a sense of possibility could easily cause an upturn. I would expect investment from companies still weary of the stuck in the past north.
Do you believe Ireland won't see another financial crash made worse by austerity and cronyism within the next decade or sooner? We seem to allow a few to get greedy and party and put the burden on the tax payer as part of our financial and economic model.

SF's whole reason for being is a United Ireland

Once that happens, they will splinter into smaller factions within 5-10 years

The exact same thing is going to happen to the SNP over in Scotland if they ever free themselves of the Union

Whatcar212

jh79 wrote: »

Look, the subvention is not the cost of unification it's the massive investment required to fix NI that is the issue. NI is decades behind with practically no FDI.

According to SF we would have to redirect all budget surplus (where will they come from?) for 8 years and pay welfare and PS pay in NI at the Republics levels just to gain 35bn over 8 years or 1.3% per capita!!

Are you honestly going to suggest the net effect of paying for all that and only getting a 1.3% increase will be a profit?

So are you trying to say that after 8 years there will be no additional benefit?
I read that as it will take 8 years to get to a position of growth and it will only improve from there?

In terms of a country, 8 years is extremely short term thinking.

BonnieSituation

downcow wrote: »

Yeah and I am just pointing out the hypocrisy of those who condone much of what the provos done but condemn all that the Lyra killers done.

Is Lyra McKee's murder something you just heard of recently?

Seems to be your go to the last few days.

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

Look, the subvention is not the cost of unification it's the massive investment required to fix NI that is the issue. NI is decades behind with practically no FDI.

According to SF we would have to redirect all budget surplus (where will they come from?) for 8 years and pay welfare and PS pay in NI at the Republics levels just to gain 35bn over 8 years or 1.3% per capita!!

Are you honestly going to suggest the net effect of paying for all that and only getting a 1.3% increase will be a profit?

There isn't technically a 'cost' after we become a UI.

There will just be the cost of running the country as we have now.

jh79

Shebean wrote: »

Why?
The markets are fickle indeed. Good will and a sense of possibility could easily cause an upturn. I would expect investment from companies still weary of the stuck in the past north.
Do you believe Ireland won't see another financial crash made worse by austerity and cronyism within the next decade or sooner? We seem to allow a few to get greedy and party and put the burden on the tax payer as part of our financial and economic model.

Why? Because our GDP becomes diluted to recession era levels due to the sudden increase in population.

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

There isn't technically a 'cost' after we become a UI.

There will just be the cost of running the country as we have now.

Jaysus Francie you're not going to go down that route??

No Unification means no extra spending than what we do now. If you have an alternative to the word "cost" I'll happily use but the point stands either way.

jh79

Whatcar212 wrote: »

So are you trying to say that after 8 years there will be no additional benefit?
I read that as it will take 8 years to get to a position of growth and it will only improve from there?

In terms of a country, 8 years is extremely short term thinking.

The 8 years comes from the SF approved Hubner report. It's flawed as it assumes FDI in NI will match the Republic but it's biggest driver is education and NI is miles behind the Republic.

It also assumes a static worldwide economy so caution is needed there to.

Even if it turns out to be 8 years, I don't see why there would be additional benefits?

To be honest I don't think there needs to be additional benefits. If it's performing at the Republic level then that's a good result. It just the enormous cost of getting there.

Shebean

jh79 wrote: »

Why? Because our GDP becomes diluted to recession era levels due to the sudden increase in population.

You believe.
No point in throwing up potential problems like they are fact. You might be right, you might be wrong. Certainly things will be unstable for a period.

jh79

Shebean wrote: »

You believe.
No point in throwing up potential problems like they are fact. You might be right, you might be wrong. Certainly things will be unstable for a period.

I believe? GDP gets published with every budget and we know the population from the census.

Bizarre comment.

Junkyard Tom

revelman wrote: »

How on earth is GB our biggest threat?

I wouldn't put it past the 'Shire of bastards' in charge in Britain, at the moment, to instigate a conflict in the north again if they thought it would tighten their grip on power in GB.

We saw how recklessly these people spoke/behaved with regards to the GFA when they considered it a possible foil to their Brexit plans. Anyone who thinks we're safe from that lot needs their head examined.

guy2231

downcow wrote: »

Yeah and I am just pointing out the hypocrisy of those who condone much of what the provos done but condemn all that the Lyra killers done.

No hypocrisy at all comparing the provos to a criminal gang who have not killed a single British soldier or policeman all they have killed are civilians.

mehico

jh79 wrote: »

I believe? GDP gets published with every budget and we know the population from the census.

Bizarre comment.

Could be wrong but was assuming the poster was referring to you relying on a report you acknowledge to be flawed to illustrate the quoted figures.

jh79

mehico wrote: »

Could be wrong but was assuming the poster was referring to you relying on a report you acknowledge to be flawed to illustrate the quoted figures.

Maybe, but I purposely picked the SF approved report as it's less likely to be dismissed as biased without justification.

There has been an attempt to create a narrative that the NI economy is a mystery that can only be revealed once a border poll is called. Silly really considering all the necessary data gets published with each budget.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Expect the one I pointed out just a few posts ago that you blithely waved away in order to continue the now trenchant negativity while also increasing the personal invective.

An integrated Ireland would create economies of scale and therefore a more competitive economy which would be much more attractive for our own entrepreneurs and foreign investment.

Also remember that for me 'us' includes all the people of the island.

Ah come on, we still appear to be at the stage of

United Ireland
???????
Profit!!!!

An integrated Ireland won't create economies of scale. It didn't work that way in Germany, it won't in Ireland either. Fantasy stuff again.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Ah come on, we still appear to be at the stage of

United Ireland
???????
Profit!!!!

An integrated Ireland won't create economies of scale. It didn't work that way in Germany, it won't in Ireland either. Fantasy stuff again.

East Germany and NI are similar?

Ah come on!
Fantasy.

Same tactics from both you and jh...anyone makes a positive commenr -- denigrate and call fantasy.

G-A-S!

Red Silurian

As a southerner I believe we have already voted as part of the Good Friday Agreement but if the north want to join us I'd certainly vote positively for that

Shebean

jh79 wrote: »

I believe? GDP gets published with every budget and we know the population from the census.

Bizarre comment.

You claim the nation will suffer like the last crash due to a united Ireland because of GDP. That's a stretch.


Putting aside the last crash was nothing to do with a U.I., and it will likely come around again. If only those in charge of our economics were so fearful of repeating themselves.

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

East Germany and NI are similar?

Ah come on!
Fantasy.

Same tactics from both you and jh...anyone makes a positive commenr -- denigrate and call fantasy.

G-A-S!

Francie, it's just sound bites without any substance.

You're talking about saving millions here and there while billions are pumped in.

Doubt any CEO's that could potentially invest even know the country is partitioned yet you claim they will suddenly invest upon unification. Of course no reason is given as to why.

Shebean

jh79 wrote: »

Maybe, but I purposely picked the SF approved report as it's less likely to be dismissed as biased without justification.

There has been an attempt to create a narrative that the NI economy is a mystery that can only be revealed once a border poll is called. Silly really considering all the necessary data gets published with each budget.

Do you accept that more than flags and anthems will change? We don't know what the country will be shaped like until all involved work out the logistics. We are all talking ifs and buts.

Junkyard Tom

If a 10% rise in GDP was a guaranteed consequence of a UI one or two here would be writing 'this is bad, it'll cause a rise in carbon emissions, child obesity, boy racers, UFO sightings' and so on.

The point is to obstruct a UI.

FUD

jh79

Shebean wrote: »

You claim the nation will suffer like the last crash due to a united Ireland because of GDP. That's a stretch.


Putting aside the last crash was nothing to do with a U.I., and it will likely come around again. If only those in charge of our economics were so fearful of repeating themselves.

Not my "stretch" , Fitzgerald from the ERSI. He took the levels we dropped to and compared them to previous budget and the action we took.

Just to preempt "something, something subvention". This is separate to the subvention.