United Ireland Poll - please vote

Hamsterchops

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Blame Mícheal Martin all you want.

The "Shared Island" Unit is just another sop to Unionist and their frail sensibilities.

Probing ideas are all well and good, but with the existence of an already fraught agreement, why would you try to open that wound again?

It doesn't make a lick of sense.

Why not probe repartition and let Antrim and Down off on their own and let Fermanagh, Tyrone, Derry and Armagh rejoin with us and be all happy together?

Let's probe that idea.

Yep could do, as there's nothing wrong with a bit of probing when it comes to these issues, although I'm not so sure downcow or blanch would appreciate you cutting off a few of their counties :cool:

blanch152

ittakestwo wrote: »

When the UK is finally breaking up there will be a call for NI independence by some unionists. Ones like you who have deluded yourself that you aren't Irish even tho you are born and bread in Ireland will never want to see the irish nation back in one jurisdiction as the tole of growing up in a apartheid has long term effects. But for other irish unionists and most nationalist they will go with a UI and this will greatly out number people calling for an independent NI.

I am Irish.

View

Given that the two nationalist parties have a combined vote share of circa 37% in NI, the issue of a UI is effectively dead in the water.

Like it or not, the border on this island is actually one of the older borders in Europe (as most date from post WWII or the 90s), and it is unlikely to disappear anytime soon.

BonnieSituation

View wrote: »

Given that the two nationalist parties have a combined vote share of circa 37% in NI, the issue of a UI is effectively dead in the water.

Like it or not, the border on this island is actually one of the older borders in Europe (as most date from post WWII or the 90s), and it is unlikely to disappear anytime soon.

Ah yes, the oldest border trope.

Early enough in the week for that one.

Dyr

View wrote: »

Given that the two nationalist parties have a combined vote share of circa 37% in NI, the issue of a UI is effectively dead in the water.

Like it or not, the border on this island is actually one of the older borders in Europe (as most date from post WWII or the 90s), and it is unlikely to disappear anytime soon.

Safe as houses. That's why the poor oul Loyalists are terrified that the next First Minister of the tin pot assembly is going to be a Taig.

View

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Ah yes, the oldest border trope.

Early enough in the week for that one.

Your comment doesn’t alter the fact that it is true. And it certainly doesn’t and won’t “make it go away”.

View

Bambi wrote: »

Safe as houses. That's why the poor oul Loyalists are terrified that the next First Minister of the tin pot assembly is going to be a Taig.

I doubt that the religious denomination of the First Minister is going to persuade anyone to rush out and support the prospect of a UI. If anything, I’d suspect a change might work against it since it is hard to argue you are an oppressed religious minority if one of your number holds the top government office.

Whatcar212

Out of curiosity, a question for the partitionists on here:

What is your reason for not wanting a United Ireland? Is it all about the money in your pocket, or is there more to it?

downcow

mehico wrote: »

Yes, there are parallel conversations taking place around both Irish Unity and a shared island. Nobody suggesting a shared island necessarily means unity, though there is inevitably some common ground.

In my view we currently have a shared island

BonnieSituation

downcow wrote: »

In my view we currently have a shared island

It's also your current view that the people of Ballymurphy and Derry were asking for it.

Hamsterchops

BonnieSituation wrote: »

It's also your current view that the people of Ballymurphy and Derry were asking for it.

Well that's helpful, isn't it :rolleyes:

jh79

Whatcar212 wrote: »

Out of curiosity, a question for the partitionists on here:

What is your reason for not wanting a United Ireland? Is it all about the money in your pocket, or is there more to it?

For me it's all about the money. I think making 6 million worse off to change lines on a map and flags on buildings is a stupid move.

I think SF are stain on the country but if they disappeared in the morning it wouldn't change my attitude towards unfication. If they did disappear it would probably make a UI more likely.

FrancieBrady

Irish Unionism reverting to type after decades of the fearful hate filled belligerence of DUPism.

There is nothing to fear in what this man says.
This is who FG should be allying with, not the toxic anti-Irishness of the DUP.
He can, if a majority decide on a UI, be accommodated in a new Ireland. His culture is a part of mine.
Encouraging to see this at this time.

For Beattie, part of this offering is its multiplicity of identities. He has “always viewed myself as Irish . . . clearly I’m British as well but my whole life I’ve identified as Irish.”

He loves the “uniqueness” of being Irish and from Northern Ireland, but still belonging to the United Kingdom, with “Ireland as a country that I want to be our best friend.”

“I say to people, there’s so much that represents me. Gaelic games, the Irish language, shamrock, Guinness, God Save the Queen, the Sash, Ulster rugby, Irish rugby – all of these things represent me. And the point is, how do we show respect not just to each of those aspects, but respect in how we promote our different identities?”

This is only one of the challenges ahead for Beattie. It has been a long time since the UUP stood, apparently unassailable, as the party of unionism. In the last Assembly elections in 2017, it won just 12.9 per cent of the vote and Beattie – the party’s third leader in four years – will be under pressure to demonstrate that he can reverse its decline in the elections due next year.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Irish Unionism reverting to type after decades of the fearful hate filled belligerence of DUPism.

There is nothing to fear in what this man says.
This is who FG should be allying with, not the toxic anti-Irishness of the DUP.
He can, if a majority decide on a UI, be accommodated in a new Ireland. His culture is a part of mine.
Encouraging to see this at this time.

Surely Sinn Fein should take the first step, and ally themselves with him? After all, they run candidates in the same jurisdiction?

FG will have no problem listening to him, after all they have invited UUP reps to previous party conferences.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Surely Sinn Fein should take the first step, and ally themselves with him? After all, they run candidates in the same jurisdiction?

FG will have no problem listening to him, after all they have invited UUP reps to previous party conferences.

SF don't deny him any of what he says he is. They are politically different to him and don't need to ally with him to achieve what they want politically...unlike some in FG and partitionism who will have to ally with belligerent unionism to stop a UI.

Men and women like Beattie are moderates and democrats who meant what they said when they actually signed up to the GFA. As he says, we are all Irish and unique for that reason.

Whatcar212

jh79 wrote: »

For me it's all about the money. I think making 6 million worse off

Can you define worse off? (I doubt anyone would actually see a change in quality of life)

Is there a financial limit to your stance or is it just any personal cost to you at all is not worth it? As in would 100 per year in extra tax be too much? What is your limit?

View

Whatcar212 wrote: »

Out of curiosity, a question for the partitionists on here:

What is your reason for not wanting a United Ireland? Is it all about the money in your pocket, or is there more to it?

You are asking the wrong questions. It is up to people who want to change the status quo to persuade a majority of those in NI - ie including a significant chunk of those who currently identify themselves as unionist (or neither) - to want a united Ireland.

By and large the people shouting about a united Ireland don’t appear interested enough in the people who could form that “significant chunk” to make serious efforts to try and persuade them. I don’t think they are fundamentally interested in them as people, so unsurprisingly they are unsuccessful.

Lastly, irrespective of your views on the issue, the money issue is fundamental, given the enormous amounts of subsidies that NI receive. Right now, NI is a financial black hole that would swallow around half of what the state collects in PAYE tax and which is spent on our hospital, schools etc That’s not a minor issue that can be just wished away no matter how many posters here will try to do so.

Whatcar212

View wrote: »

You are asking the wrong questions. It is up to people who want to change the status quo to persuade a majority of those in NI - ie including a significant chunk of those who currently identify themselves as unionist (or neither) - to want a united Ireland.

No I am asking a question I want an answer to. I don't care for your side rant on who should convince who, that's your own agenda.

I want to know the reasoning of the people on here who have posted re the cost. Is it solely the cost or is there more to it. Be awful to ignore the wishes of a majority of northern Ireland citizens all because you're worried if you can afford that extra pint on a Friday night. (assuming a majority in the north vote for reunification).

jimmycrackcorm

Whatcar212 wrote: »

Can you define worse off? (I doubt anyone would actually see a change in quality of life)

Is there a financial limit to your stance or is it just any personal cost to you at all is not worth it? As in would 100 per year in extra tax be too much? What is your limit?

How about just waiting until NI is economically self-sufficient that it isn't a drain on our resources. It's funny how SF complains about a lack of investment in housing and health when they'd prefer to throw money at integrating NI with no real benefits other than a fuzzy nationalistic feeling.

No one has explained what the hurry is to have unification. It should do better economically with its dual EU/UK market status; demographics point in the right direction, so why not simply wait until the conditions are right.

But I think the reason for the rush now is that the soft nationalist in the north will start to have it too good and won't want to lose those benefits. As I've said before, once people in the North, just as much as the South see how their voting choice will hit them in the pocket, even some northern SF voters will baulk at the choice.

jh79

Whatcar212 wrote: »

Can you define worse off? (I doubt anyone would actually see a change in quality of life)

Is there a financial limit to your stance or is it just any personal cost to you at all is not worth it? As in would 100 per year in extra tax be too much? What is your limit?

For example to maintain quality of life in NI as is without harmonization of PS pay/social welfare etc the Republic would reduce it's own quality of life by 10%.

A report commissioned by SF suggests we go for the substantially more expensive harmonization approach. This would involve cuts to PS numbers in NI and lead to dramatic tax increases here as the dail were told last week. I think this is the right approach by the way.

It's a failed statelet that manages to only generate 35bn a year and runs a huge deficit. Practically a 2 million increase in population overnight. It's not possible to do it without tax increases and reducancies in the public service. Harmonization always means reducancies.

How much I would accept is a hard question to answer. I'd say below 5% but I wouldn't accept that either if our productivity was compromised via corporation tax increases which I suspect SF will target for the populist vote. I'd expect all sections of the population to pay too and not just the squeezed middle.

Shebean

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

How about just waiting until NI is economically self-sufficient that it isn't a drain on our resources. It's funny how SF complains about a lack of investment in housing and health when they'd prefer to throw money at integrating NI with no real benefits other than a fuzzy nationalistic feeling.

No one has explained what the hurry is to have unification. It should do better economically with its dual EU/UK market status; demographics point in the right direction, so why not simply wait until the conditions are right.

But I think the reason for the rush now is that the soft nationalist in the north will start to have it too good and won't want to lose those benefits. As I've said before, once people in the North, just as much as the South see how their voting choice will hit them in the pocket, even some northern SF voters will baulk at the choice.

I can't see N.I. ever being self sufficient. They are an after thought answerable to Westminister.
There will never be a time were the north is doing so well, people interested in such things, will want to unite. And if doing so well, why would their counterparts in the north concerned about such things want to rock the boat?
N.I. will flourish under a united Ireland, as will Ireland.
The rush is every day that passes is more shame on us leaving our fellow Irish people/families is such a situation.

FullyComp

I was up in Downpatrick recently - it seemed to be a tourist hotspot from the ads.

Wow, what a grim town, why in the name of Good God would we want the people who think so little of their own area included on our country. Are there no tidy towns committees/community cleanups? I have to say I was properly dismayed. Beautiful scenery around the area though.

View

Whatcar212 wrote: »

No I am asking a question I want an answer to. I don't care for your side rant on who should convince who, that's your own agenda.

I want to know the reasoning of the people on here who have posted re the cost. Is it solely the cost or is there more to it. Be awful to ignore the wishes of a majority of northern Ireland citizens all because you're worried if you can afford that extra pint on a Friday night. (assuming a majority in the north vote for reunification).

If you want an answer then you have to be prepared to listen when people give you an answer.

As I pointed out, the single biggest obstacle is the financial aspect. That amounts to a hell of a lot more than worrying about “that extra pint on a Friday night”. By my calculations, based on HoC figures, it amounts to somewhere between €1800 and €2500 in additional tax needed from every man,’woman and child in the RoI to subsidise NI’s current level of expenditure (with the two figures differing based on whether it is NI only expenditure or the (NI + additional UK) expenditure with the latter including social welfare, servicing the national debt etc.)

As I the people who talk about a united Ireland have to actually come up with a case to persuade a majority in NI to back it because unless they do the default was, is, and will be, to continue on as is. Until that day occurs, the issue is just a pipe dream.

blanch152

Shebean wrote: »

I can't see N.I. ever being self sufficient. They are an after thought answerable to Westminister.
There will never be a time were the north is doing so well, people interested in such things, will want to unite. And if doing so well, why would their counterparts in the north concerned about such things want to rock the boat?
N.I. will flourish under a united Ireland, as will Ireland.
The rush is every day that passes is more shame on us leaving our fellow Irish people/families is such a situation.

United Ireland
??????
Profit


Is that how it works?

I really wish the United Irelanders would stop taking the rest of us for fools.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

United Ireland
??????
Profit


Is that how it works?

I really wish the United Irelanders would stop taking the rest of us for fools.

Aren't you the poster trumpeting how the power swap has made us one of the top places in the world in which to live?

Why couldn't NI be the same as Munster or Leinster or Connacht?

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Aren't you the poster trumpeting how the power swap has made us one of the top places in the world in which to live?

Why couldn't NI be the same as Munster or Leinster or Connacht?

It would drag us down, Francie, that's why.

Stop taking people for fools all the time. Address the realities of the cost of a united Ireland up front, and stop hiding behind platitudes about investment in unicorns.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

It would drag us down, Francie, that's why.

Stop taking people for fools all the time. Address the realities of the cost of a united Ireland up front, and stop hiding behind platitudes about investment in unicorns.

'Dragging us down' is every bit as much a platitude. I'm confident a transition period arranged between partners who will be very committed to making it work (for their own reasons) will be arranged.

Stop taking people for fools blanch ahead of any plan. The only thing you have in your arsenal is negativity and it ill wear thin quick enough.

bobbysands81

blanch152 wrote: »

It would drag us down, Francie, that's why.

Stop taking people for fools all the time. Address the realities of the cost of a united Ireland up front, and stop hiding behind platitudes about investment in unicorns.

What is the cost of this UI? I hear this all the time but it’s never backed up with figures. Any chance you could back your assertion up with some specific figures instead of generalising?

jimmycrackcorm

bobbysands81 wrote: »

What is the cost of this UI? I hear this all the time but it’s never backed up with figures. Any chance you could back your assertion up with some specific figures instead of generalising?

The minimum will be the billions currently being subvented by Westminister. While there is some debate about the exact figure, there's no getting around the reality that it will mean very heavy taxes to cover day-to-day life, never mind the costs of actual integration.

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

'Dragging us down' is every bit as much a platitude. I'm confident a transition period arranged between partners who will be very committed to making it work (for their own reasons) will be arranged.

Stop taking people for fools blanch ahead of any plan. The only thing you have in your arsenal is negativity and it ill wear thin quick enough.

I think the Doyle paper will have a few scenarios mapped out. Will be interesting to see what level of help would be needed to reduce the tax burden and of course how plausible they are.

Think it's out in June.