United Ireland Poll - please vote

blanch152

FileNotFound wrote: »

In fairness, silly as it sounds the like of a potential social welfare cut (not sure it would be the reality but initially money will have to come from somewhere) will have a direct impact on a percentage of the voter base so could potentially be an influence.
Much like reduction in hospital funding for the existing infrastructure.
Additional taxation for the average worker.

All the above would heavily depend on economic circumstances at the time I guess.

The point that is repeatedly ignored by the exclusionary nationalists is that the circle has to be squared somehow, either through tax increases or service cuts, so that we can fund Northern Ireland to the same levels as Ireland. The current €10bn subvention from Westminister only funds it to lower levels of social welfare and public service pay.

The refusal to address this issue is eye-opening.

BonnieSituation

blanch152 wrote: »

Where do I make any assumption?



"They may" and "we could" are not assumptions.

It's like you "aspired" to make an assumption.

Give over.

"We could..."

BonnieSituation

blanch152 wrote: »

The point that is repeatedly ignored by the exclusionary nationalists is that the circle has to be squared somehow, either through tax increases or service cuts, so that we can fund Northern Ireland to the same levels as Ireland. The current €10bn subvention from Westminister only funds it to lower levels of social welfare and public service pay.

The refusal to address this issue is eye-opening.

Jesus, if this refusal is opening your eyes, just how shut were they?

FileNotFound

BonnieSituation wrote: »

But the likes of blanch haven't got the imagination to think that perhaps there's more than one way to solve this conundrum.

Again, this will all be part of a massive undertaking by this State to work out how this will work in the lead up to any poll. But of course, that is anathema to Partitionists.

Like their belligerent friends in loyalism any progress in any department can't be welcomed as that would mean a UI can be achieved.

Indeed I imagine that there will be plenty of discussion on this topic, however given the states history when faced with fiscal challenges, increased taxation in line with decreased spending on public services is the most likely option.

I don't think the people on this thread are against the state looking at solutions to the challenges they have highlighted. I think its the lack of any even proposed alternative that must leave then skeptical.

I suppose as this thread has no answers or even propositions the discussion might as well die until the government have done what you outline above.

blanch152

BonnieSituation wrote: »

But the likes of blanch haven't got the imagination to think that perhaps there's more than one way to solve this conundrum.

Again, this will all be part of a massive undertaking by this State to work out how this will work in the lead up to any poll. But of course, that is anathema to Partitionists.

Like their belligerent friends in loyalism any progress in any department can't be welcomed as that would mean a UI can be achieved.

There are two ways - increase taxes or cut services.

gourcuff

blanch152 wrote: »

There are two ways - increase taxes or cut services.

alot of these discussions assume no economic growth in n.i as part of a united ireland, no benefit from our corporation tax rate etc.

If english mismanagement and neglect of n.i is removed, surely there will be a boost?.

Belfast is a great city with huge potential, it can be a powerhouse to drive growth in n.i.

Static assumptions about the economy in n.i are flawed imo...

BonnieSituation

gourcuff wrote: »

alot of these discussions assume no economic growth in n.i as part of a united ireland, no benefit from our corporation tax rate etc.

If english mismanagement and neglect of n.i is removed, surely there will be a boost?.

Belfast is a great city with huge potential, it can be a powerhouse to drive growth in n.i.

Static assumptions about the economy in n.i are flawed imo...

Partitionist discussions around a UI can only work in a vacuum. It suits their simplistic analysis of all situations.

I mean, blanch has yet again told us that we can only cut services or raise taxes as if this is some sort of epiphany that the rest of us can't quite grasp.

You do have to admire their tenacity though. Repeating the same simplistic partitionist mantras would vore me senseless.

BonnieSituation

FileNotFound wrote: »

Indeed I imagine that there will be plenty of discussion on this topic, however given the states history when faced with fiscal challenges, increased taxation in line with decreased spending on public services is the most likely option.

I don't think the people on this thread are against the state looking at solutions to the challenges they have highlighted. I think its the lack of any even proposed alternative that must leave then skeptical.

I suppose as this thread has no answers or even propositions the discussion might as well die until the government have done what you outline above.

Of course, but where's the fun in that. Watching the daily Partitionist meltdown is fun. Especially seeing as the talking points run in a very familiar pattern. Most tropes get used up every week or so and then repeat themselves.

FrancieBrady

gourcuff wrote: »

alot of these discussions assume no economic growth in n.i as part of a united ireland, no benefit from our corporation tax rate etc.

If english mismanagement and neglect of n.i is removed, surely there will be a boost?.

Belfast is a great city with huge potential, it can be a powerhouse to drive growth in n.i.

Static assumptions about the economy in n.i are flawed imo...

You'll never hear the end of the negativity.

And you are right of course, a decent transition period while both sovereign governments make arrangements/adjustments which will ultimately benefit both will see an island capable of economic growth.
Even if it does grow you will still have the bitter remnants of partitionism telling you how much better it could have been if we hadn't united.
If nationalism is 'exclusionary' wait until you see the partitionists perform.

blanch152

gourcuff wrote: »

alot of these discussions assume no economic growth in n.i as part of a united ireland, no benefit from our corporation tax rate etc.

If english mismanagement and neglect of n.i is removed, surely there will be a boost?.

Belfast is a great city with huge potential, it can be a powerhouse to drive growth in n.i.

Static assumptions about the economy in n.i are flawed imo...

Even the most optimistic SF scenario only sees a small amount of economic growth, and very far from the amount necessary for harmonisation.

The downside risks at the moment are far far higher than the potential for growth.

gourcuff

blanch152 wrote: »

Even the most optimistic SF scenario only sees a small amount of economic growth, and very far from the amount necessary for harmonisation.

The downside risks at the moment are far far higher than the potential for growth.

Really? what scenarios are you referring to?

https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/arid-20388959.html

“GDP in the Republic could rise by €30m to €152m in the year of policy implementation. In total, Irish unification could boost all- island GDP in the first eight years by as much as €35.6bn,” the report concluded.

FileNotFound

Being away for a small bit was nice but just want to recap where we are:

- UI will cost the state and the most likely routes of funding are taxation and cuts to public service spending.
- One has to factor in economic development in the period between now and a potential UI when looking at deficits.
- Nobody on boards can present an alternative to higher tax, lower social welfare, reduced hospital services.
- But many on boards will say there "may" be one and although that cannot be identified, we should wait for the Government to show us it.
- Future economic growth cannot be discounted (So pretty much the same mindset as brexit? Might be better..)
- The Partitionists here still lack the imagination to see the unseeable.
- The Irish unionists on here don't like the partitionists and use the past to support the future.
- Partitionists continue to beat the taxation and cost drum.


Let me know if i missed any changes,

blanch152

gourcuff wrote: »

Really? what scenarios are you referring to?

https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/arid-20388959.html

“GDP in the Republic could rise by €30m to €152m in the year of policy implementation. In total, Irish unification could boost all- island GDP in the first eight years by as much as €35.6bn,” the report concluded.

Boosting all-island GDP by €35bn, and assume a Government tax take of 33% from that, would result after 8 years in the Government being able to cover the cost of the current subvention.

That is all, nothing more. No funding for any harmonisation measures.

dam099

FrancieBrady wrote: »

There won't be a north or a south (jurisdiction wise) in a UI.

I wouldn't have thought that was pre-determined. The model for a UI would need to be decided as part of the unification process and one option might be some form of federal arrangement with some level of devolved government North and South (not saying its the likely outcome but would have thought its something to be considered).

FileNotFound

dam099 wrote: »

I wouldn't have thought that was pre-determined. The model for a UI would need to be decided as part of the unification process and one option might be some form of federal arrangement with some level of devolved government North and South (not saying its the likely outcome but would have thought its something to be considered).

I had never considered the possibility of Ireland having a devolved institution in the North.

Interesting concept, would be likely something Poots would look to given no alternative options.

FrancieBrady

dam099 wrote: »

I wouldn't have thought that was pre-determined. The model for a UI would need to be decided as part of the unification process and one option might be some form of federal arrangement with some level of devolved government North and South (not saying its the likely outcome but would have thought its something to be considered).

I wouldn't see it as a runner tbh.
The people would have just voted by majority to end 100 years of partition, where would the enthusiasm to enable a re-partition come from?

Fionn1952

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I wouldn't see it as a runner tbh.
The people would have just voted by majority to end 100 years of partition, where would the enthusiasm to enable a re-partition come from?

It wouldn't be my chosen outcome personally, but unlike the nonsensical NI Independence talk that was doing the rounds a while back, there's nothing in the GFA which would actually prevent this.

As part of a wholesale root and branch reform and federalisation of Ireland I could see how it could work hypothetically.... Just keeping the current NI setup and trading Westminster for Dublin, not so much.

jimmycrackcorm

mehico wrote: »

This is not confined to SF and their supporters though, most political parties on the island have an aspiration to a UI.

Only SF are in a hurry to rush it before its time though. The reason is obvious in that if people in NI are content in their lives as has largely been the scenario since the GFA, they will be loathed to lose benefits such as the NHS.

BonnieSituation wrote: »

But the likes of blanch haven't got the imagination to think that perhaps there's more than one way to solve this conundrum.

Imagination... That was the calling card of the Brexiteers to imagine how great GB would be outside the EU.

gourcuff wrote: »

alot of these discussions assume no economic growth in n.i as part of a united ireland, no benefit from our corporation tax rate etc.

If english mismanagement and neglect of n.i is removed, surely there will be a boost?.

Belfast is a great city with huge potential, it can be a powerhouse to drive growth in n.i.

Static assumptions about the economy in n.i are flawed imo...

If these benefits accrue from joining the republic, then how come we don't see this Economic equivalent in Donegal, Mayo, the southwest. Belfast is more likely to become the northern equivalent of Limerick with its social problems.

Given NI's current position having access to both EU and UJ markets, surely economic growth is best served to keep its current status?

FrancieBrady

Fionn1952 wrote: »

It wouldn't be my chosen outcome personally, but unlike the nonsensical NI Independence talk that was doing the rounds a while back, there's nothing in the GFA which would actually prevent this.

As part of a wholesale root and branch reform and federalisation of Ireland I could see how it could work hypothetically.... Just keeping the current NI setup and trading Westminster for Dublin, not so much.

Would have to be island wide federalisation. And even then, would Unionists be happy if Ulster was devolved in it's entirety? The very reason the 6 county model was chosen to begin with, would suggest, not. Devolving the 6 counties just prolongs the agony and failure. It's an appeasement of unionism, not a solution.

I just cannot see it being a credible option appealing to anyone tbh.

StupidLikeAFox

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Partitionist discussions around a UI can only work in a vacuum. It suits their simplistic analysis of all situations.

I mean, blanch has yet again told us that we can only cut services or raise taxes as if this is some sort of epiphany that the rest of us can't quite grasp.

You do have to admire their tenacity though. Repeating the same simplistic partitionist mantras would vore me senseless.

The difference is that you want a united ireland at any cost, regardless of the impact on future generations or the current standard of living, which is your prerogative of course

FrancieBrady

StupidLikeAFox wrote: »

The difference is that you want a united ireland at any cost, regardless of the impact on future generations or the current standard of living, which is your prerogative of course

I want one because of the impact on past generations and 'future generations'.

Partition has been a tragic and abject failure for this entire island. That will factor into many people's decision, as will economic considerations.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I want one because of the impact on past generations and 'future generations'.

Partition has been a tragic and abject failure for this entire island. That will factor into many people's decision, as will economic considerations.

Past generations no longer care, why should we?

Future generations have more to be worried about than a united Ireland, in fact they will be wondering why so much energy was wasted on the concept.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Past generations no longer care, why should we?

Future generations have more to be worried about than a united Ireland, in fact they will be wondering why so much energy was wasted on the concept.

Hypocrisy is dripping of that one, from the poster still looking retribution for things done 30 and 40 years ago to selected victims only.

Hamsterchops

All this talk of a United Ireland is great fun, but we're now 3206 pages into this thread going round and around in circles, offering up the same solutions to the same problems, but the fact remains that there are still one million (approx) people up North who do NOT want to become one with this state, they just don't want it.

Leave them alone untill they want it, then invite them in.

gourcuff

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Only SF are in a hurry to rush it before its time though. The reason is obvious in that if people in NI are content in their lives as has largely been the scenario since the GFA, they will be loathed to lose benefits such as the NHS.




Imagination... That was the calling card of the Brexiteers to imagine how great GB would be outside the EU.




If these benefits accrue from joining the republic, then how come we don't see this Economic equivalent in Donegal, Mayo, the southwest. Belfast is more likely to become the northern equivalent of Limerick with its social problems.

Given NI's current position having access to both EU and UJ markets, surely economic growth is best served to keep its current status?

Because cities are drivers of economic growth, innovation and are focal points for job growth - rural areas like mayo are not equivalent to a city in economic impact.

belfast is the 12th-largest city in the United Kingdom and the second-largest in Ireland - limerick is not a good comparison. Belfast supports a broad region stretching to tyrone in n.i.

With cost of living/cost of doing business differentials and dublin dropping down the liveable city rankings as it is its not inconceivable to see firms swap dublin for belfast in a UI.

dam099

Fionn1952 wrote: »

It wouldn't be my chosen outcome personally, but unlike the nonsensical NI Independence talk that was doing the rounds a while back, there's nothing in the GFA which would actually prevent this.

As part of a wholesale root and branch reform and federalisation of Ireland I could see how it could work hypothetically.... Just keeping the current NI setup and trading Westminster for Dublin, not so much.

I'd agree with that, it would also require a major rethink for governance in the South and some form of devolution by region here too. Whether those regions would follow the old provinces not sure as Connaught is probably too small, maybe something based on the regional splits used for EU fund purposes. Not sure it would ever be a runner but I think many models should be considered in the event of an United Ireland.

Fionn1952

Hamsterchops wrote: »

All this talk of a United Ireland is great fun, but we're now 3206 pages into this thread going round and around in circles, offering up the same solutions to the same problems, but the fact remains that there are still one million (approx) people up North who do NOT want to become one with this state, they just don't want it.

Leave them alone untill they want it, then invite them in.

So back to the Unionist veto? No change until 100% of the population are happy with it?

I've no issue with waiting until there is a majority in favour of it, I signed up to the GFA after all.....but even in the event of a hypothetical 60/40 split in favour of Unification, you've got 750k people who do NOT want to become one with this state.....do you propose we ignore the (again, hypothetical) over a million who do?

No one is proposing Unification before it has a democratic mandate.....plenty are proposing all sorts of gymnastics to avoid it if it does reach the point it has a democratic mandate, from requiring supermajorities, Unionist vetoes and indeed some even proposing the creation of an independent state against the wishes of the people there.


Funnily enough the same folk who often call others undemocratic are often behind these suggestions.

FullyComp

gourcuff wrote: »

Because cities are drivers of economic growth, innovation and are focal points for job growth - rural areas like mayo are not equivalent to a city in economic impact.

belfast is the 12th-largest city in the United Kingdom and the second-largest in Ireland - limerick is not a good comparison. Belfast supports a broad region stretching to tyrone in n.i.

With cost of living/cost of doing business differentials and dublin dropping down the liveable city rankings as it is its not inconceivable to see firms swap dublin for belfast in a UI.

So people in the republic could actively lose their jobs in this new utopia. Vote for a UI and lose your country, screw up your children's future and as a bonus, lose your job! What a great idea, I'll be voting yes!

gourcuff

Hamsterchops wrote: »

All this talk of a United Ireland is great fun, but we're now 3206 pages into this thread going round and around in circles, offering up the same solutions to the same problems, but the fact remains that there are still one million (approx) people up North who do NOT want to become one with this state, they just don't want it.

Leave them alone untill they want it, then invite them in.

Where do people get this one million figure from? If that holds the converse must also hold of hundreds of thousands who don't want to be partitioned?

In the last UK general election in 2019:
DUP got 244,127
UUP got 93,123
Alliance got 134,115

broadly similar numbers in the last assembly election

gourcuff

FullyComp wrote: »

So people in the republic could actively lose their jobs in this new utopia. Vote for a UI and lose your country, screw up your children's future and as a bonus, lose your job! What a great idea, I'll be voting yes!

my argument was against the idea that belfast would not see any economic dividend from a UI- thats all really. this dividend would likely come from organic or new growth rather than vast swathes of job transfers.

if you believe all of what you claim will happen, of course you are free to vote for continued partition, you will have one vote the same as the rest of Ireland