United Ireland Poll - please vote

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

To be fair i just assumed previous polls were higher but looking at wiki our support for a UI has been flaky for the last decade, very up and down.

Big drop since the last poll anyways and at 51% prior to a discussion on tax increases, welfare cuts etc not a good starting point.

Over 20 points ahead of a No vote is not a good 'starting point'?

Remember too the significant differences in the 'question' asked in the 2 polls. The 70% result was given when it was a straight question, 'would you vote for a UI?'
Yesterday's poll asked 'Would you vote for a UI today?'

I wouldn't vote for a UI today because I don't have a plan or proposal to review.

Fionn1952

jh79 wrote: »

To be fair i just assumed previous polls were higher but looking at wiki our support for a UI has been flaky for the last decade, very up and down.

Big drop since the last poll anyways and at 51% prior to a discussion on tax increases, welfare cuts etc not a good starting point.

Could you provide the poll you're referring to in your most recent posts?

If it showed somewhere in the 70% ballpark you've suggested in support, I'd imagine the vote excluded don't knows (for context, the Lucidtalk poll you refer to showing 51% support, if presented in this manner would actually be 65% yes excluding the don't knows, so not as significantly different as you suggest.)

The very up or down really depends on how the question is phrased. I doubt support has actually had any seismic shifts either way in the last decade, but polling questions can look that way depending on phrasing of the question - we could get pretty close to full support if we asked some vague, 'some day' type of question, and probably single figure support if we present a cliff-edge transition tomorrow resulting in a doomsday scenario, both socially and economically, to present two extremes.

jh79

Fionn1952 wrote: »

Could you provide the poll you're referring to in your most recent posts?

If it showed somewhere in the 70% ballpark you've suggested in support, I'd imagine the vote excluded don't knows (for context, the Lucidtalk poll you refer to showing 51% support, if presented in this manner would actually be 65% yes excluding the don't knows, so not as significantly different as you suggest.)

Last one was LucidTalk too. 70+ dropping to 30 odd if taxes involved. Already discussed here or the other thread.

Looks like they dropped into the don't know camp.

Will be interesting to see what the numbers drop too after we have a Claire Byrne Live show talking about 20/30 bn a year in tax increases / cuts to services predicted to be required.

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

Last one was LucidTalk too. 70+ dropping to 30 odd if taxes involved. Already discussed here or the other thread.

That poll was in 2015 before Brexit.

jh79

jh79 wrote: »

Last one was LucidTalk too. 70+ dropping to 30 odd if taxes involved. Already discussed here or the other thread.

Looks like they dropped into the don't know camp.

Will be interesting to see what the numbers drop too after we have a Claire Byrne Live show talking about 20/30 bn a year in tax increases / cuts to services predicted to be required.

Sorry, you are right , the BA poll shows 51%. 70% must be excluding unknowns.

So no change really from the BA poll.

Crooked Jack

Some remarkable results in that poll for nationalism and some worrying ones for unionism.
An increased remain vote, pretty much 50/50 support for the protocol, only 40% think the centenary of partition is something worth celebrating, 43% support for reunification TODAY, before we've even had a debate on the issue, and, crucially, already majority support for reunification with the under 45s.

I suppose the question is, given that even unionism seems to accept that the six county statelet is now a short term project, wouldn't the smart thing for them to do be to begin carving out their place in a new Ireland, rather than fighting it to the bitter end and ending up in it one day with no planning or forethought?

Crooked Jack

jh79 wrote: »

Last one was LucidTalk too. 70+ dropping to 30 odd if taxes involved. Already discussed here or the other thread.

Looks like they dropped into the don't know camp.

Will be interesting to see what the numbers drop too after we have a Claire Byrne Live show talking about 20/30 bn a year in tax increases / cuts to services predicted to be required.

"If" is a big word there. We've already seen multiple independent studies show that reunification will be an economic boon for the entire island.

jh79

Crooked Jack wrote: »

"If" is a big word there. We've already seen multiple independent studies show that reunification will be an economic boon for the entire island.

Only figure i've seen is a 35 bn increase in GDP meaning a significant drop per capita given the 40% increase in population.

Also that study assumes FDI in NI will increase like in the Republic. Highly unlikely given that education is worse in NI and that drives FDI.

jh79

Crooked Jack wrote: »

"If" is a big word there. We've already seen multiple independent studies show that reunification will be an economic boon for the entire island.

Roughly speaking GDP for the island would need to increase by 245 bn to maintain our current GDP per capita.

Crooked Jack

jh79 wrote: »

Only figure i've seen is a 35 bn increase in GDP meaning a significant drop per capita given the 40% increase in population.

Also that study assumes FDI in NI will increase like in the Republic. Highly unlikely given that education is worse in NI and that drives FDI.

Well you havent been looking. There have been two major reports by Dr. Kurt Hubner, an expert in European integration at the University of British Columbia, both of which posited multiple scenarios, all of which found varying degrees of economic boosts being the result of reunification.

Economist Michael Burke also presented his report, The Economic Case for Irish Unity, to the EU where he argued that not only was reunification "affordable" it was absolutely necessary if the country were to ever reach its full economic potential.

There are also reports from SF, the Oireachtas and books on the subject from the likes of Kevin Meagher, former special advisor to brit Secretary of State for the north, Shaun Woodward.

There's a hug amount of info out there so I'm surprised youve only seen one report making that claim.

jh79

Crooked Jack wrote: »

Well you havent been looking. There have been two major reports by Dr. Kurt Hubner, an expert in European integration at the University of British Columbia, both of which posited multiple scenarios, all of which found varying degrees of economic boosts being the result of reunification.

Economist Michael Burke also presented his report, The Economic Case for Irish Unity, to the EU where he argued that not only was reunification "affordable" it was absolutely necessary if the country were to ever reach its full economic potential.

There are also reports from SF, the Oireachtas and books on the subject from the likes of Kevin Meagher, former special advisor to brit Secretary of State for the north, Shaun Woodward.

There's a hug amount of info out there so I'm surprised youve only seen one report making that claim.

Hubner was the one that failed to take into account poor educational outcomes in NI when predicting FDI.

Do any of the studies show us maintaining our current GDP per capita?

Hamsterchops

I think it an awful shame that the polls are so close, it's like ... well, if a border poll shows 51% of people in NI vote to leave the UK, then you've got 49% who don't agree!

All this margin of error this way or that, at least with Germany there was no issue with East Germany becoming one with the West, here on this island there really is a sizable population up North who do not want to leave the UK, like they really don't want to be separated, and yet if a border poll creeps over the line they will have to leave the UK.

Shame we can't make the Republic more attractive to them like West Germany was to East Germany.

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

Only figure i've seen is a 35 bn increase in GDP meaning a significant drop per capita given the 40% increase in population.

Also that study assumes FDI in NI will increase like in the Republic. Highly unlikely given that education is worse in NI and that drives FDI.

If that was the Trinity study by Morgentroth? then it was flawed from the beginning, as it assumed the 'north' would simply be assimilated into what is here already and that the subvention is what would be needed going forward. It didn't acknowledge that the subvention is not what it actually costs and reductions have to be made for defence spending etc etc.

Fionn1952

jh79 wrote: »

Roughly speaking GDP for the island would need to increase by 245 bn to maintain our current GDP per capita.

Source on that? Even ignoring the fact that the Irish GDP per capita is inflated and just taking it as a realistic and representative number, the GDP per capita difference between the two is around €35000. Given the North has a population of 1.885M people, increasing the GDP per capita in the North to match would come in at €35000x1.885M which is €65,974,000,000.

Even if the GDP of NI was zero, going from 0 per capita to the Irish figure of ~€65000 gives a total around half the figure you've quoted, and even the most hard headed of critics of the NI economy wouldn't try and suggest their GDP per capita is zero.

Am I missing something here that is quadrupling the figure?

FrancieBrady

Hamsterchops wrote: »

I think it an awful shame that the polls are so close, it's like ... well, if a border poll shows 51% of people in NI vote to leave the UK, then you've got 49% who don't agree!

All this margin of error this way or that, at least with Germany there was no issue with East Germany becoming one with the West, here in this island there really is a sizable population up North who do not want to leave the UK, like they really don't want to be separated, and yet if a border poll creeps over the line they will have to leave the UK.

Shame we can't make the Republic more attractive to them like West Germany was to East Germany.

Only 27% say they 'would never' vote for a UI.

That indicates to me that the vast majority 73% are open to persuasion either way.
They may vote against but are willing to accept a majority decision...that number hasn't changed as it was similar in agreement with the GFA, which has acceptance of the majority decision built into it.

The majority in both jurisdictions think partition was a bad idea. I think the time is long past to stop trying to construct veto's and allow democracy.

RavenBea17b

Asking from a maybe different perspective, what do you think NI joining the Republic could or would bring?
I for one feel that SF in NI and various other parties including Independents and Greens would certainly shake up the political behaviours and importantly accountability in the Republic. A big one for me, apart from political accountability would be health.
A different type of health system. People in the North certainly would on the whole want to continue with many of the NHS principles - including not pay up front to see a GP, more over the counter medications available - not restricted to pharmacy purchase only, purchase in supermarket etc. Prescriptions (fees) A joined up approach to cross county regulations, as an example ambulance movements. Perhaps less Dublin focus, spread things around the country a bit more. Harmonise state retirement age contribution rates. Working water infrastructure, the amount of boil notifications that have repeatedly appeared over time is beyond shocking in this, the 21st century.

Any thoughts on this ?

jh79

Fionn1952 wrote: »

Source on that? Even ignoring the fact that the Irish GDP per capita is inflated and just taking it as a realistic and representative number, the GDP per capita difference between the two is around €35000. Given the North has a population of 1.885M people, increasing the GDP per capita in the North to match would come in at €35000x1.885M which is €65,974,000,000.

Even if the GDP of NI was zero, going from 0 per capita to the Irish figure of ~€65000 gives a total around half the figure you've quoted, and even the most hard headed of critics of the NI economy wouldn't try and suggest their GDP per capita is zero.

Am I missing something here that is quadrupling the figure?

I took our current GDP and adjusted it for a 40% increase in population.

Gave it another go but using 4.9 and 1.9 and took away the 35 bn from NI to get 116bn.

Predicted to cost up to 30bn per year in tax increase or cuts based on similar dilution of our economy during the bust .

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/

Will be interesting to see his forthcoming paper as part of that University project

FrancieBrady

A very reasonable argument for why devolution is not and won't be a sustainable model going forward.

http://www.progressivepulse.org/ireland/why-devolved-government-doesnt-work-when-someone-else-pays-the-bills-a-guest-post-by-rogue-one

Hamsterchops

FrancieBrady wrote: »

A very reasonable argument for why devolution is not and won't be a sustainable model going forward.

http://www.progressivepulse.org/ireland/why-devolved-government-doesnt-work-when-someone-else-pays-the-bills-a-guest-post-by-rogue-one

But then what about devolved Storming Assembly run from Dublin instead of London, wouldn't the same issues arise? Unless in the event of a United Ireland Storming is totally scrapped, and the whole show (the whole island) is financed, governed and run from Dublin.

BonnieSituation

Hamsterchops wrote: »

I think it an awful shame that the polls are so close, it's like ... well, if a border poll shows 51% of people in NI vote to leave the UK, then you've got 49% who don't agree!

All this margin of error this way or that, at least with Germany there was no issue with East Germany becoming one with the West, here on this island there really is a sizable population up North who do not want to leave the UK, like they really don't want to be separated, and yet if a border poll creeps over the line they will have to leave the UK.

Shame we can't make the Republic more attractive to them like West Germany was to East Germany.

Finger on the pulse as always

FrancieBrady

Hamsterchops wrote: »

But then what about devolved Storming Assembly run from Dublin instead of London, wouldn't the same issues arise? Unless in the event of a United Ireland Storming is totally scrapped, and the whole show (the whole island) is financed, governed and run from Dublin.

Devolution has failed. It is time to accept that. It cannot govern itself in other words.

How much evidence is required??? 100 years of partition is enough.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Big claims on the basis of one poll is the problem jh79. The trend is the important thing.
And the trend is that a UI is more likely than not. Hence so many thinking it will happen inside 25 years.

It is pure arrogance to assume that people are ignoring/are not aware of possible costs.

Yes, the trend.


In a poll by Lucid Talk in January 48% of people in Northern Ireland believed there would be a united Ireland in 10 years, by the time of this poll is has dropped to 32%. That is a huge shift, well beyond confidence intervals or differences about sampling methods and questions.

The January 2020 poll on a united Ireland showed 47% in the North favouring staying in the UK vis-a-vis 45% voting for a united Ireland, a gap of 2%, which was actually as low as 1.4% before rounding. You will find many posts on earlier threads proclaiming a united Ireland is here. Now the gap has widened to 6 percentage points, again, a trend that goes beyond confidence intervals.

The momentum for a united Ireland has been lost through this pandemic. It will be interesting when historians look back at this period and reflect on the reasons for the change in momentum away from a united Ireland.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Devolution has failed. It is time to accept that. It cannot govern itself in other words.

How much evidence is required??? 100 years of partition is enough.

The Alliance Party don't think that devolution has failed. They think that the two sectarian parties have failed, I tend to agree with them.

Fionn1952

jh79 wrote: »

I took our current GDP and adjusted it for a 40% increase in population.

Gave it another go but using 4.9 and 1.9 and took away the 35 bn from NI to get 116bn.

Predicted to cost up to 30bn per year in tax increase or cuts based on similar dilution of our economy during the bust .

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/

Will be interesting to see his forthcoming paper as part of that University project

I suspect you're not converting to common currency and applying some odd rounding, among other issues with the maths on this.

Instead of working with offhand recollections of numbers, I've looked up the most recent I can find)

GDP of Ireland is $90,183 per capita (€75,105) per OECD data in 2020

For NI the most recent figures I can find are 2019 from the UK ONS putting the GDP per capita at £25,981 (€30,199).

That gives a difference of €44,906. To increase the GDP for all 1.885M people in the North by €44,906 and bring them up to the equivalent GDP per capita comes in at €84,647,810,000.

Genuinely I can't for the life of me see how you're calculating this at €116bn, let alone the €245bn you originally quoted. You've managed to stick an extra ~35% onto your 'conservative' figure, and a spectacular ~188% exaggeration on your original number!

That's before we even touch the inflated figure that is our GDP, how our wealth is exaggerated by multinationals, making the raw comparison of GDP pretty useless even if you weren't grossly exaggerating the actual numbers.

BonnieSituation

Fionn1952 wrote: »

I suspect you're not converting to common currency and applying some odd rounding, among other issues with the maths on this.

Instead of working with offhand recollections of numbers, I've looked up the most recent I can find)

GDP of Ireland is $90,183 per capita (€75,105) per OECD data in 2020

For NI the most recent figures I can find are 2019 from the UK ONS putting the GDP per capita at £25,981 (€30,199).

That gives a difference of €44,906. To increase the GDP for all 1.885M people in the North by €44,906 and bring them up to the equivalent GDP per capita comes in at €84,647,810,000.

Genuinely I can't for the life of me see how you're calculating this at €116bn, let alone the €245bn you originally quoted. You've managed to stick an extra ~35% onto your 'conservative' figure, and a spectacular ~188% exaggeration on your original number!

That's before we even touch the inflated figure that is our GDP, how our wealth is exaggerated by multinationals, making the raw comparison of GDP pretty useless even if you weren't grossly exaggerating the actual numbers.

Best to use our GNI* number instead. Still won't explain JH79's exaggerations though.

Fionn1952

blanch152 wrote: »

The Alliance Party don't think that devolution has failed. They think that the two sectarian parties have failed, I tend to agree with them.

One could argue that the existence and strength of the two major parties in the North is a symptom rather than a cause. Certainly I can assure you it wasn't sunshine and rainbows growing up there before those two parties were of significance.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

The Alliance Party don't think that devolution has failed. They think that the two sectarian parties have failed, I tend to agree with them.

The Alliance would say that as I am sure SF and the DUP would. But the facts are there for all to see and laid bare in that article.

blanch152

Fionn1952 wrote: »

I suspect you're not converting to common currency and applying some odd rounding, among other issues with the maths on this.

Instead of working with offhand recollections of numbers, I've looked up the most recent I can find)

GDP of Ireland is $90,183 per capita (€75,105) per OECD data in 2020

For NI the most recent figures I can find are 2019 from the UK ONS putting the GDP per capita at £25,981 (€30,199).

That gives a difference of €44,906. To increase the GDP for all 1.885M people in the North by €44,906 and bring them up to the equivalent GDP per capita comes in at €84,647,810,000.

Genuinely I can't for the life of me see how you're calculating this at €116bn, let alone the €245bn you originally quoted. You've managed to stick an extra ~35% onto your 'conservative' figure, and a spectacular ~188% exaggeration on your original number!

That's before we even touch the inflated figure that is our GDP, how our wealth is exaggerated by multinationals, making the raw comparison of GDP pretty useless even if you weren't grossly exaggerating the actual numbers.

€84bn is still a large enough number to make any taxpayer in the South pause for more than a moment.

FrancieBrady

Fionn1952 wrote: »

One could argue that the existence and strength of the two major parties in the North is a symptom rather than a cause. Certainly I can assure you it wasn't sunshine and rainbows growing up there before those two parties were of significance.

This is the great lie...let's ignore the abject failure that went on before, when the UUP and the SDLP were the two most voted for. A tragic bloody mess is what it was.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

A very reasonable argument for why devolution is not and won't be a sustainable model going forward.

http://www.progressivepulse.org/ireland/why-devolved-government-doesnt-work-when-someone-else-pays-the-bills-a-guest-post-by-rogue-one

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The Alliance would say that as I am sure SF and the DUP would. But the facts are there for all to see and laid bare in that article.

This is how propaganda works.

Firstly, something is claimed to be a very reasonable argument, without any evidence to support that.
Secondly, later it is claimed as fact.

The subtle shift in language is key to establishing the propaganda.