United Ireland Poll - please vote

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

SF won't be proposing the motion jh79...a government that contains SF may.

Your government (monitored by the referendum commission) will be proposing and supporting the motion.

SF, FG, FF etc can say what they want as individual parties.

If we get to that stage. The cost discussion has started and a lot more will be known in the next year. Opinion polls could leave it dead in the water when the cost becomes widely known.

BonnieSituation

jh79 wrote: »

If we get to that stage. The cost discussion has started and a lot more will be known in the next year. Opinion polls could leave it dead in the water when the cost becomes widely known.

So you keep saying.

Who are you trying to convince?

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

If we get to that stage. The cost discussion has started and a lot more will be known in the next year. Opinion polls could leave it dead in the water when the cost becomes widely known.

And all the while Brexit turmoil continues, Scotland goes further away from the UK.

Loads of variables, loads of plusses and minuses.

jh79

BonnieSituation wrote: »

So you keep saying.

Who are you trying to convince?

At only 22% support with increased taxes, don't need to.

BonnieSituation

jh79 wrote: »

At only 22% support with increased taxes, don't need to.

Right. Are you sure about that?

It's a serious case of "the lady doth protest too much".

jh79

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Right. Are you sure about that?

It's a serious case of "the lady doth protest too much".

Look the opinion polls are not good from your perspective so ignoring the financial aspect is understandable but this is a discussion board.

BonnieSituation

jh79 wrote: »

Look the opinion polls are not good from your perspective so ignoring the financial aspect is understandable but this is a discussion board.

I'm ignoring nothing. But you believe what you want anyway.

I'm just loving the panic that partitionists seem to be constantly living under. But yet they tell us that reunification hasn't a hope...

The assured attitude that you seem to think you're projecting would be more convincing if you didn't repeat the same few talking points every couple of days.

As I said, you seem to be having a hard job convincing yourself of your own beliefs. As it was ever thus.

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

Look the opinion polls are not good from your perspective so ignoring the financial aspect is understandable but this is a discussion board.

Polls move.

Before a Scottish poll was called, those in favour of an independent Scotland numbered in the low 30's and moved to almost winning the thing.

Nobody is ignoring anything.

Although some seem to ignore that majorities now in both jurisdictions want the formal campaigns to begin i.e. They want a border poll.

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Polls move.

Before a Scottish poll was called, those in favour of an independent Scotland numbered in the low 30's and moved to almost winning the thing.

Nobody is ignoring anything.

Although some seem to ignore that majorities now in both jurisdictions want the formal campaigns to begin i.e. They want a border poll.

Not my decision to make but the GFA clearly states "likely to pass" so there can be no complaints with the SoS not calling one.

BonnieSituation

jh79 wrote: »

Not my decision to make but the GFA clearly states "likely to pass" so there can be no complaints with the SoS not calling one.

And round and round we go...

BonnieSituation wrote: »

No-one wants a poll now.

There's almost a Beckettian quality to how Partitionists go on about a border poll:

They don't want one because we haven't prepared for it while also telling us that we shouldn't prepare for it because no one wants it while also telling us that in fact it us, those in favour of a UI that actually fear it and don't want it.

Sorry, who was it you were trying to convince there JH?

jh79

BonnieSituation wrote: »

And round and round we go...



Sorry, who was it you were trying to convince there JH?

Maybe I'm trying to get that 22% down even further!

BonnieSituation

jh79 wrote: »

Maybe I'm trying to get that 22% down even further!

Your capacity to keep up the self-delusion is wonderful I must say.

However, I thought you were.pro-UI with a proper plan?

Now it seems you're a partitionist at all costs. Almost like you've been discussing in bath faith.

I am shocked and appalled. /s

jh79

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Your capacity to keep up the self-delusion is wonderful I must say.

However, I thought you were.pro-UI with a proper plan?

Now it seems you're a partitionist at all costs. Almost like you've been discussing in bath faith.

I am shocked and appalled. /s

Yeah if it costs me nothing (not exactly zero, wouldn't be losing any sleep if it was a couple of %) then why would I care either way.

Obviously, I'd be looking to see where the cost is being recovered from if not income tax. If a party was stupid enough to claim we could increase corporation tax instead I wouldn't be happy about it.

BonnieSituation

jh79 wrote: »

Yeah if it costs me nothing (not exactly zero, wouldn't be losing any sleep if it was a couple of %) then why would I care either way.

Obviously, I'd be looking to see where the cost is being recovered from if not income tax. If a party was stupid enough to claim we could increase corporation tax instead I wouldn't be happy about it.

Grand. So just random hypothetical suppositions on policy is how you make your assessments in life?

Seems haphazard.

briany

The NI SoS is technically at liberty to call a border poll whenever they choose, i.e. when they have ascertained that a majority in the North would be in favour of leaving the UK and join up with RoI. That doesn't necessarily mean they will call one when they have ascertained that a majority in the North would be in favour of holding a border poll, as some of those people wanting the poll could be Unionists thinking they have the numbers and wanting to settle the question for the time being.

No doubt in my mind that the conversation about a United Ireland should begin, though, and really should have been much more fleshed out in the GFA to begin with, but teasing out the details of their worst nightmare was probably too much for the Unionist signatories to bear and would have led to a complete collapse in talks. We have no idea of the timeline from a UI vote to a UI or even whether this would be a new country or not. These are huge things that need defining post haste, and not having everybody going to the polls with a different idea of what a UI would look like a la Brexit.

jh79

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Grand. So just random hypothetical suppositions on policy is how you make your assessments in life?

Seems haphazard.

Well the costs are based on empirical data so a bit more solid. As I've said previously to Francie, how it's paid for will change with each government.

I might like one of the plans but I suppose I will have to factor in that a populist party might replace that plan in the future and feck it up.

Jaysus, maybe my "no tax increases" stance is a bit too risky after all!

blanch152

BonnieSituation wrote: »

I'm ignoring nothing. But you believe what you want anyway.

I'm just loving the panic that partitionists seem to be constantly living under. But yet they tell us that reunification hasn't a hope...

The assured attitude that you seem to think you're projecting would be more convincing if you didn't repeat the same few talking points every couple of days.

As I said, you seem to be having a hard job convincing yourself of your own beliefs. As it was ever thus.

You appear to talk more about "partitionists" and posters than you do about the issue.

I think you are missing the point about who is panicking. There is no need for so-called partitionists to panic unless a border poll is actually passed without any regard to the astronomical cost of a united Ireland. In fact, those who are panicking are the exclusionary nationalists who are panicking that their dream of an Ireland for the Irish is fading rapidly away as nationhood and identity get divorced from territory and become more diverse and more fluid.

FileNotFound

jh79 wrote: »

Well the costs are based on empirical data so a bit more solid. As I've said previously to Francie, how it's paid for will change with each government.

I might like one of the plans but I suppose I will have to factor in that a populist party might replace that plan in the future and feck it up.

Jaysus, maybe my "no tax increases" stance is a bit too risky after all!

There will be a pretty accurate business support expectation with regards to helping NI businesses switch to Euro, increase wages and meet standards.

Then the general year on year deficit is pretty steady which will need plugging.

Then the increase to social welfare in NI which will be covered by the RoI taxpayer.

Just a few solid calculable changes that will mean an X% increase in taxation.


Seems the hardcore republicans get very annoyed here when anyone highlights the obvious reasons why rational people may think before voting.

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

Not my decision to make but the GFA clearly states "likely to pass" so there can be no complaints with the SoS not calling one.

It is as likely to pass as the Scottish referendum was.

Anyone can validate their opinion if they wish.

The SoS, as decreed by the UK's highest court, has no onus on him/her to evidence why they made their decision. The SoS cannot be constrained.

blanch152

FileNotFound wrote: »

There will be a pretty accurate business support expectation with regards to helping NI businesses switch to Euro, increase wages and meet standards.

Then the general year on year deficit is pretty steady which will need plugging.

Then the increase to social welfare in NI which will be covered by the RoI taxpayer.

Just a few solid calculable changes that will mean an X% increase in taxation.


Seems the hardcore republicans get very annoyed here when anyone highlights the obvious reasons why rational people may think before voting.

I actually did an exercise a couple of years ago which compared child benefit rates in the South with those in the North and with the number of beneficiaries calculated the cost to the nearest tens of millions. It drew immediate outrage from the collective, and got worse when I pointed out the alternative was to cut Child Benefit in the South.

These circles can't be squared without costing money.

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

It is as likely to pass as the Scottish referendum was.

Anyone can validate their opinion if they wish.

The SoS, as decreed by the UK's highest court, has no onus on him/her to evidence why they made their decision. The SoS cannot be constrained.

I didn't say the SoS couldn't do it just that he is sticking to the "likely to pass" caveat and because of that there can be no complaints.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

I actually did an exercise a couple of years ago which compared child benefit rates in the South with those in the North and with the number of beneficiaries calculated the cost to the nearest tens of millions. It drew immediate outrage from the collective, and got worse when I pointed out the alternative was to cut Child Benefit in the South.

These circles can't be squared without costing money.

I think you disappeared from that discussion when a whole new Island system was mooted.
You basically had no answer to that, if memory serves.

The belief that we are simply just going to subsume northern Ireland needs to be let go of.

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

I didn't say the SoS couldn't do it just that he is sticking to the "likely to pass" caveat and because of that there can be no complaints.

Nobody is 'complaining'. Now is not the time to call a BP.
Unionism is in internal turmoil as it tries to cope with the position it has walked itself into.

FileNotFound

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I think you disappeared from that discussion when a whole new Island system was mooted.
You basically had no answer to that, if memory serves.

The belief that we are simply just going to subsume northern Ireland needs to be let go of.

So we would need the Gov to develop a whole new system that may potentially inconvenience those relying on it in the Republic?

I suppose that would want to be planned and available or critique before any UI.

Might work in favour of voting Yes or No to UI in the Republic.


Just seems there are more things that would need change the more we discuss and I bet we have barely scraped the surface.


How would the existence of the SCC sound to many in NI?

FrancieBrady

FileNotFound wrote: »

So we would need the Gov to develop a whole new system that may potentially inconvenience those relying on it in the Republic?

I suppose that would want to be planned and available or critique before any UI.

Might work in favour of voting Yes or No to UI in the Republic.


Just seems there are more things that would need change the more we discuss and I bet we have barely scraped the surface.


How would the existence of the SCC sound to many in NI?

We are not in a country where FF/FG have 86% of the vote anymore.

Will people support change and reform/rebuild of institutions of the state that have failed the people?
I think you would be surprised at the appetite for that.

The SCC is an abnormality. We should be striving for a society where it is not needed.

FileNotFound

FrancieBrady wrote: »

We are not in a country where FF/FG have 86% of the vote anymore.

Will people support change and reform/rebuild of institutions of the state that have failed the people?
I think you would be surprised at the appetite for that.

The SCC is an abnormality. We should be striving for a society where it is not needed.

SCC has been a great success so not sure what exactly you are getting at?

Sure where a change improves things people will support - but then thats where the debate hopefully will and should be, will it improve things.

Will a new child benefit scheme, social welfare payments scheme so on and so on.

Then what will the cost of new systems be to the tax payer.

I believe we should lay all the cards on the table and allow an informed decision to be made by people.

I would ask no more than that - then majority rules.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I think you disappeared from that discussion when a whole new Island system was mooted.
You basically had no answer to that, if memory serves.

The belief that we are simply just going to subsume northern Ireland needs to be let go of.

Your memory must be faulty then. There are two possibilities - increase taxes or cut child benefit.

I don't engage with unicorn and rainbow solutions for a land of milk and honey, it would be akin to joining a Flat Earth Society. If you have a concrete solution to two social welfare systems, spit it out, or get off the pulpit.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

We are not in a country where FF/FG have 86% of the vote anymore.

Will people support change and reform/rebuild of institutions of the state that have failed the people?
I think you would be surprised at the appetite for that.

The SCC is an abnormality. We should be striving for a society where it is not needed.

I think you are the one still living in the world of the 1980s when FF/FG had 86% of the vote and we had a constitutional imperative to unite the country. All we have now is a watered-down aspiration to united the people, and if a more watered-down version was put to the electorate, I would put money on it passing.

gormdubhgorm

briany wrote: »

Being a part of a UI is unacceptable to the likes of Poots and Co. Full stop. So there's no point trying to sate them with the idea of remaining in the Commonwealth. The only solution with those people is to help them get a mortgage for a house in Arbroath.

Your suggestion actually would be a possible solution, even though I know is tongue and cheek.

However, it looks like Scotland will achieve independence so the Unionists will be back to square one. Scotland look likely to achieve independence in a clean honourable manner.

If you think about it logically it a UI will be an inverse of what happened on the troubles. Those who are moderate and without warped minds will move.

I know people who got the hell out and moved to the ROI to escape the troubles. I suppose you could call it a brain drain of NI. If there was a UI there would be stampede North from the former ROI looking for cheap housing. Happens on occasion as it is.

But what will happen the Unionist's if there is a UI they will not have the option of simply travelling across the border like their Nationalist counterparts. A move to Scotland will likely be out soon. England or Wales would be their only option.

The Unionists who remain in a UI will be a 'displaced people'. As a Republican poster admitted the Orange in the tricolour is merely a token gesture.

Unionists who remain who want to stay in their homes will include many disaffected, disillusioned youths looking for something to do. All it would take is a nod from certain 'seasoned' veterans and havoc could be caused by just a few thousand people. Where would their main target be? Dublin the seat of power.

Also what will happen SF their whole raison d'etre is a UI will there be any point to them? Or will the aim be to turn the Republic into a 'Socialist 32 County one'. Will SF's role be using their 'expertise' in protectiing the ROI from attack. The new Bobby Storey's of a bright new dawn.

Then there is questions of finances, security, health education etc. Would people in NI want to give up the NHS? What would the cost of a UI be to a Dublin government. Would it be a chance to for the Irish government to do what they tried without success years ago. Real decentralisation. Moving the capital of Ireland to Athone maybe? It worked for the Brazilian's with Brasilia.

Plus even if you do solve all of those issues, there is the question of the flag, the anthem, names of roads. No doubt some will want to use the names of 'former proud republican' or very recent past. That will surely stir resensentment?

Even if all that is solved then there is the question of sport. Those who avid fans of the NI soccer team will have the wind taken out of them. Surely even that alone will breed resentment.

You will have all those issues thrown into one big mess and it could be decades of good work undone. All for what exactly?

jimmycrackcorm

Sadler Peak wrote: »

It amazes me that Irish people will take the piss out of Poots, the DUP and their voters (quite righty imo) but will still vote for a united Ireland.

Why bring fukwits like that into our country ?

It's a NO from me.

*Cough* Danny Healey-Rae *Cough*