United Ireland Poll - please vote

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

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.

yeh sure. More exaggeration to continue the negativity.
People invest for multiple reasons and confidence breeds confidence.

An all Ireland economy is a healthy thing.

Doom and gloom are soundbites too by the way.

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

yeh sure. More exaggeration to continue the negativity.
People invest for multiple reasons and confidence breeds confidence.

An all Ireland economy is a healthy thing.

Doom and gloom are soundbites too by the way.

I'm not arguing on whether it's the right thing to do. The thruth is that it will make the average person poorer but we could recover in a few decades.

If you're happy with that, fair enough but lets not pretend it's a financial opportunity for the Republic.

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

I'm not arguing on whether it's the right thing to do. The thruth is that it will make the average person poorer but we could recover in a few decades.

If you're happy with that, fair enough but lets not pretend it's a financial opportunity for the Republic.

The 'republic' will no longer exist jh...do you think it will be consulted after a UI?
It won't, it will be just all of us doing what we do now.

guy2231

Shebean wrote: »

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.

It will change if we want it to as a gesture to unionists if we don't want to we don't have to simple as that.

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The 'republic' will no longer exist jh...do you think it will be consulted after a UI?
It won't, it will be just all of us doing what we do now.

I known but as a poorer nation overall. We should recover in time but there is no advantage for us.

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

I known but as a poorer nation overall. We should recover in time but there is no advantage for us.

Poor partitionists then.

'Us' is all of us on the island including the future us.

StupidLikeAFox

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.

I laughed out loud at this. The subvention alone could cost between 2bn and 6bn extra per year - this will just magically appear, someone else can worry about that

StupidLikeAFox

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

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

Doubt it, I would guess the majority of people raising concerns about a united ireland are doing so for practical rather than ideological reasons.

Besides, if there was a sniff of a 10pc rise in GDP, Arlene Foster would have be belting out A Nation Once Again from the steps of Dublin Castle years ago

FrancieBrady

StupidLikeAFox wrote: »

I laughed out loud at this. The subvention alone could cost between 2bn and 6bn extra per year - this will just magically appear, someone else can worry about that

I'm well on the wrong side of 50, have been through more power swap governments than I care to remember and let me tell you...if the government want to do something, the money or a means to pay for something is ALWAYS there.

guy2231

There is no changing the mind of a hardcore partitionist, this stuff about a tax increase is merely a front for most of the posters on here to try and hide their partitionist agenda.

StupidLikeAFox

guy2231 wrote: »

There is no changing the mind of a hardcore partitionist, this stuff about a tax increase is merely a front for most of the posters on here to try and hide their partitionist agenda.

Why in the name of jaysus would i have a partitionist agenda?? I'd be more than happy to have a united ireland - but I'm not willing to mortgage the next generation for it.

To put it into context, the subvention is an *annual* cost that we would need to assume and conservative estimates pitch that at between 2bn and 6bn. That is around what we spend on agriculture every year, or what we spend on transport each year. Its around what we contribute to Europe each year. We have to find this at a minimum to keep the lights on in NI, before you get into things like social welfare wage equalisation etc.

You can put your head in the sand all you want but this is is real money and that has to come from somewhere.

StupidLikeAFox

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I'm well on the wrong side of 50, have been through more power swap governments than I care to remember and let me tell you...if the government want to do something, the money or a means to pay for something is ALWAYS there.

The money always comes from somewhere, there is no magic money tree unfortunately.

FrancieBrady

StupidLikeAFox wrote: »

The money always comes from somewhere, there is no magic money tree unfortunately.

And never once have I seen a situation were a government proposed doing something has the money not been there.

This isn't a householder deciding to buy the neighbours garden scenario.

blanch152

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!

You can make as many positive comments as you want, but when they are completely without substance, don't be surprised if you are called out like the Emperor with no clothes.

The fantasy of increasing FDI in a united Ireland (when the South is going to have a battle to hold its position) is just nonsense. The facts show that the standard of living of people in the South will decrease after unification. For people in the North, there will be a smaller decrease, but they will suffer too (unless they are on social welfare and benefit from the far more generous rates in the South). You know you might convince some working class Protestants yet.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I'm well on the wrong side of 50, have been through more power swap governments than I care to remember and let me tell you...if the government want to do something, the money or a means to pay for something is ALWAYS there.

I hadn't realised you were that old, pretty much of a similar generation to myself. It will probably cause you heartache that there won't be a united Ireland in our lifetime but I can live with that.

guy2231

blanch152 wrote: »

I hadn't realised you were that old, pretty much of a similar generation to myself. It will probably cause you heartache that there won't be a united Ireland in our lifetime but I can live with that.

Who knows, anyway the thing is a United Ireland is inevitable, Republicans only have to win a referendum once and if it loses wait another few years and then try again, while unionists have to win every single time forever as soon as they lose one it is over.

That's the beauty of the good friday agreement it makes a United Ireland an inevitability.

blanch152

guy2231 wrote: »

Who knows, anyway the thing is a United Ireland is inevitable, Republicans only have to win a referendum once and if it loses wait another few years and then try again, while unionists have to win every single time forever as soon as they lose one it is over.

That's the beauty of the good friday agreement it makes a United Ireland an inevitability.

A United Ireland isn't inevitable, in fact the prospect of it is fading away each and every year. The voters of the North are rejecting the sectarian parties. While SF may get First Minister by default, the performance of Alliance will be the big talking point of the next election.

Republicans may never get any referendum, because the people have moved on, while they are fighting ancient fights.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

I hadn't realised you were that old, pretty much of a similar generation to myself. It will probably cause you heartache that there won't be a united Ireland in our lifetime but I can live with that.

Think I'll call you Mister Negativity.

My Da, a Fermanagh SDLP man, died believing that there would be no solution to the war/conflict, 5 year before the GFA. He would have embraced the GFA as a victory as most nationalists did.

Your negativity will defeat you ultimately in my opinion. Most people err on the side of hope no matter how pessimistic they might feel.

Yourself an jh have had to sink to personal remarks on this thread...you partitionists will do the same in a Border Poll campaign, out will come the toys in Eoghan Harris style.

I think maybe extolling the positives of partition would be a braver stance/gambit?

StupidLikeAFox

FrancieBrady wrote: »

And never once have I seen a situation were a government proposed doing something has the money not been there.

This isn't a householder deciding to buy the neighbours garden scenario.

I've no doubt the govt of the day would find the money - do you think it would be borrowed or through spending cuts or through tax increases?

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Think I'll call you Mister Negativity.

My Da, a Fermanagh SDLP man, died believing that there would be no solution to the war/conflict, 5 year before the GFA. He would have embraced the GFA as a victory as most nationalists did.

Your negativity will defeat you ultimately in my opinion. Most people err on the side of hope no matter how pessimistic they might feel.

Yourself an jh have had to sink to personal remarks on this thread...you partitionists will do the same in a Border Poll campaign, out will come the toys in Eoghan Harris style.

I think maybe extolling the positives of partition would be a braver stance/gambit?

"Sink to personal remarks" , the lack of self awareness is something else.

There will be no need to stoop to Harris's level. With the ERSI saying an increase of 8% in the standard rate of tax just to cover the subvention, interest in the Republic will cool.

Have to laugh about extolling the positves of unification when yourself and JT claiming Armageddon if we don't vote yes!

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

"Sink to personal remarks" , the lack of self awareness is something else.

There will be no need to stoop to Harris's level. With the ERSI saying an increase of 8% in the standard rate of tax just to cover the subvention, interest in the Republic will cool.

Have to laugh about extolling the positves of unification when yourself and JT claiming Armageddon if we don't vote yes!

The ERSI are working on the subsume theory.

I see unification happening after a period of transition where both jurisdictions are readied for full unification.

The scary stories won't work for long jh79. As I said, maybe convinvcing people partition has been a good thing and will continue to be, might be a better plans.

Partitionists come out and be honest, in other words.

BonnieSituation

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The ERSI are working on the subsume theory.

I see unification happening after a period of transition where both jurisdictions are readied for full unification.

The scary stories won't work for long jh79. As I said, maybe convinvcing people partition has been a good thing and will continue to be, might be a better plans.

Partitionists come out and be honest, in other words.

If the job Unionism has been doing for over 200 years is anything to go by, then I'd say they've got their work cut out for them.

If Partition or the Union before it was so good and so we'll supported, you'd have to think that the National question would have been settled at this point.

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The ERSI are working on the subsume theory.

I see unification happening after a period of transition where both jurisdictions are readied for full unification.

The scary stories won't work for long jh79. As I said, maybe convinvcing people partition has been a good thing and will continue to be, might be a better plans.

Partitionists come out and be honest, in other words.

I don't see much of a difference between a transition period and me saying they should sort their economy first to be honest.

I'm sure there will be some help but there is no getting away from the fact that it would cost a huge about of money. It's not scare stories just facts.

The fact we have 10 times the GDP but only 3 times the population tells you everything you need to know about how far behind it is. It took us a long time and lots of investment to achieve it. NI will need the same.

Hopefully Doyle's paper has some scenarios where he predicts the cost with certain % help. I think after that opinion polls will be more reflective of the mood.

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

I don't see much of a difference between a transition period and me saying they should sort their economy first to be honest.

We would be working in tandem with the UK government, which would be totally different to them trying to do it on their on. 100 years they have had and the place is getting worse because the UK is not interested and it is a failed state in terms of governing itself.
The incentive for the British would be getting rid of it successfully without a bloodbath coming back to haunt the,

I'm sure there will be some help but there is no getting away from the fact that it would cost a huge about of money. It's not scare stories just facts.

The fact we have 10 times the GDP but only 3 times the population tells you everything you need to know about how far behind it is. It took us a long time and lots of investment to achieve it. NI will need the same.

Hopefully Doyle's paper has some scenarios where he predicts the cost with certain % help. I think after that opinion polls will be more reflective of the mood.

Running countries costs money - this is nothing like balancing your household budget.

We are not subsuming the north into the south, we are building a new country and in many state run institutions, starting again hopefully from the bottom up. That would be a win win for everyone bar the vested interests.

eire4

jh79 wrote: »

I don't see much of a difference between a transition period and me saying they should sort their economy first to be honest.

I'm sure there will be some help but there is no getting away from the fact that it would cost a huge about of money. It's not scare stories just facts.

The fact we have 10 times the GDP but only 3 times the population tells you everything you need to know about how far behind it is. It took us a long time and lots of investment to achieve it. NI will need the same.

Hopefully Doyle's paper has some scenarios where he predicts the cost with certain % help. I think after that opinion polls will be more reflective of the mood.

Yes and for many years we were a net recipient of money from the EU in terms of investment to get us up to speed so to speak. From joining in 1973 through 2013 the last year we were a net recipient we got about 41B more from the EU then we put in.

downcow

guy2231 wrote: »

Who knows, anyway the thing is a United Ireland is inevitable, Republicans only have to win a referendum once and if it loses wait another few years and then try again, while unionists have to win every single time forever as soon as they lose one it is over.

That's the beauty of the good friday agreement it makes a United Ireland an inevitability.

Nonsense on a number of points.
Do you believe if there had been an agreement that said if the people of Roi ever self determined to rejoin the U.K. then it would be facilitiated - do you think that would make rejoining inevitable? If not then the gfa does not make UI inevitable

Also what do you mean by a ‘united ireland’? The people will be at war with each other (metaphorically speaking, at least). There would be significant devolution and there would be an ongoing campaign for a homeland for a nationless people.
A complete and utter mess!

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Running countries costs money - this is nothing like balancing your household budget.

We are not subsuming the north into the south, we are building a new country and in many state run institutions, starting again hopefully from the bottom up. That would be a win win for everyone bar the vested interests.

Yes, it's nothing like balancing your household budget. That's why I've placed my trust in experts such as Hubner and Fitzgerald.

Who said we are not just subsuming NI and rebuilding the country? Why is that a more attractive proposition? Certainly more expensive and NI doesn't really generate any income so it'll all come from our side.

Jaysus you'd swear we were some 3rd world country. It needs tweaking not rebuilding.

jh79

eire4 wrote: »

Yes and for many years we were a net recipient of money from the EU in terms of investment to get us up to speed so to speak. From joining in 1973 through 2013 the last year we were a net recipient we got about 41B more from the EU then we put in.

I think the Doyle paper that is out in June will cover some of this.

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

Yes, it's nothing like balancing your household budget. That's why I've placed my trust in experts such as Hubner and Fitzgerald.

Who said we are not just subsuming NI and rebuilding the country? Why is that a more attractive proposition? Certainly more expensive and NI doesn't really generate any income so it'll all come from our side.

Jaysus you'd swear we were some 3rd world country. It needs tweaking not rebuilding.

Did you 'place your trust in Fitzgerald back in 2007/8'? Because 'trust' would have been completely misplaced.

And please don't disrespect those destroyed and damaged by the failures of both states with trite remarks about 3rd world countries.

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Did you 'place your trust in Fitzgerald back in 2007/8'? Because 'trust' would have been completely misplaced.

And please don't disrespect those destroyed and damaged by the failures of both states with trite remarks about 3rd world countries.

Saying that Ireland needs rebuilding is ridiculous and disrespects those that live in countries with real problems.

What did Fitzgerald say in 2007/2008?

No offense to you Francie but I'll pay more heed to work of Fitzgerald, Doyle and Hubner than yourself.