Why the north outside EU changes everything for the island

Peregrinus

Stupify wrote: »

We is the Republic, a United Ireland would cause us a significant reduction in our standard of living. It's not just net flows, we would have to take on NIs national debt also.

NI doesn't have a national debt.

lawred2

mickoneill31 wrote: »

Id like a united Ireland. But there's a lot of backwards thinking up there, just look at the DUP (and by idiots down here who use the term free stater) so I don't see it being feasible any time soon.

There is backwards thinking everywhere... Doesn't mean that they should hold back the majority..

lawred2

Stupify wrote: »

Do any of us even really want a UI at this stage? The north would be a leech on our economy. I actually wouldn't mind a hard border at this stage, it won't hurt us too much in the long run.

well that part is living up to your username alright - of course it would be detrimental in the long term.

The economy will of course grow to a point that the impact to GDP is made up but the lost opportunity cost is impossible to measure. The reality will be is that the economy will undoubtedly perform better without a hard border in place.

lawred2

Stupify wrote: »

We is the Republic, a United Ireland would cause us a significant reduction in our standard of living. It's not just net flows, we would have to take on NIs national debt also.

Actually there would have to be transition arrangement with the UK over a decade if not longer...

You hardly think that it's a case of the UK flicking a switch at midnight and washing their hands of NI. Doesn't work that way.

Stupify

Peregrinus wrote: »

NI doesn't have a national debt.

You're having a laugh if you think they will be able to rejoin us without bringing with them a nice chunk of national debt from the UK.

Stupify

lawred2 wrote: »

Actually there would have to be transition arrangement with the UK over a decade if not longer...

You hardly think that it's a case of the UK flicking a switch at midnight and washing their hands of NI. Doesn't work that way.

Where did I say it would be with the flick of a switch? With a transition period none of what I said would change, we will have to take on some of the UK national debt, our standard of living here will drop.

Stupify

lawred2 wrote: »

well you're living up to your username alright

Typical, don't argue the points and just attack the user.

Peregrinus

Stupify wrote: »

You're having a laugh if you think they will be able to rejoin us without bringing with them a nice chunk of national debt from the UK.

There's precedent. The 26 counties left the UK in 1922 without taking on any of the UK national debt. (And, in 1922, UK national debt was much bigger, relative to GDP, than it is today.)

There's also the fact that the legal default position here is that this debt is the responsibility of HMG in Westminster. It only gets taken on by the Irish government if and to the extent that the Irish government agrees to take it on. Since the UK is committed to supporting a UI if it is the wish of a majority in NI, if a majority in NI do ever opt for a united Ireland I can't see the British turning around and saying "no, only if you agree to pay off our debt". I think that would be completely politically unsustainable.
.

breatheme

I think the UK would be happy enough to rid itself of NI that it may just forget about whatever debt there is. Unless they are super broke after Brexit, then maybe not.

lawred2

Stupify wrote: »

Typical, don't argue the points and just attack the user.

what point?

that a hard border wouldn't hurt 'us' too much?

Well that depends how you define 'us' - I'd define that as Irish people - north and south. We are increasingly interdependent - socially and economically. The GFA has legislated for many cross border administration bodies.

You do know that there would be Irish citizens and Republicans north of this hard border you'd like right?

Stupify

Peregrinus wrote: »

There's precedent. The 26 counties left the UK in 1922 without taking on any of the UK national debt. (And, in 1922, UK national debt was much bigger, relative to GDP, than it is today.)

There's also the fact that the legal default position here is that this debt is the responsibility of HMG in Westminster. It only gets taken on by the Irish government if and to the extent that the Irish government agrees to take it on. Since the UK is committed to supporting a UI if it is the wish of a majority in NI, if a majority in NI do ever opt for a united Ireland I can't see the British turning around and saying "no, only if you agree to pay off our debt". I think that would be completely politically unsustainable.
.

If they don't have to take on any UK national debt that's one thing, doesn't change the fact that the drain NI would have on our economy would reduce our standard of living here and that's the point I'm arguing.

Stupify

breatheme wrote: »

I think the UK would be happy enough to rid itself of NI that it may just forget about whatever debt there is. Unless they are super broke after Brexit, then maybe not.

Definitely might tbh, with the current UK government though who can tell.

Berserker

Edgware wrote: »

When you roll out the Free Stater label you've lost the argument. The Northerners didn't do too much between the 20s and the 70s to improve their circumstances.
Having said that I dont agree with this idea that the Six Counties would be a burden on the Republic. As long as unification was an agreed act I would be optimistic. However if there was a simmering Civil War between Loyalists and Republicans then millions would go down the tubes in security costs. There is ample potential in agriculture, I.T. Tourism Foreign Investment etc to maintain and improve the all island economy

I was going to ask you why would be optimistic if the six counties agreed to leave the UK and join the RoI but I'm more interested in why you think a civil war would cost millions? Security as a whole would need a massive upgrade in a UI, costing billions. Take a look at the cost of policing around the world and top tier police forces require that amount of funding to equip themselves. You would need a whole new police force and army capable of dealing with the terrorist threat from both sides in a UI where NI leaves the UK.

If you want a UI, re-uniting as part of the UK is the only viable option. NI would still be in a position to receiving the funding that it needs to operate from the UK. Unionists would still be part of the UK. Nationalists would be part of the UI. The British security forces have the ability and resources to deal with the threat of terror from the Nationalist community and they could help upgrade the current Irish system.

breatheme wrote: »

I think the UK would be happy enough to rid itself of NI that it may just forget about whatever debt there is. Unless they are super broke after Brexit, then maybe not.

Even if they do and I see no reason to do so, the debt that NI generates would start to pile up from day one in a UI. Add that to the fact that the RoI is still in massive debt, far more than NI and you have a massive financial problem.

lawred2

Stupify wrote: »

If they don't have to take on any UK national debt that's one thing, doesn't change the fact that the drain NI would have on our economy would reduce our standard of living here and that's the point I'm arguing.

In it's current dysfunctional vassal state maybe but the reality is that a northern counterweight to Dublin could only be a good thing for an all Ireland economy in the medium to long term.

There have been a number of studies done by independent bodies on the likely benefits of unification

http://prcg.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Modeling-Irish-Unification-Report.pdf

I'd also expect that there would be a massive international surge in immeasurable good will towards Ireland post unification that would simply be impossible to quantify. Good will that would lead to an increase in FDI as companies seek to be part of a good news story.

But then I'm a glass half full person. Not everyone is.

Stupify

lawred2 wrote: »

what point?

that a hard border wouldn't hurt 'us' too much?

Well that depends how you define 'us' - I'd define that as Irish people - north and south. We are increasingly interdependent - socially and economically. The GFA has legislated for many cross border administration bodies.

You do know that there would be Irish citizens and Republicans north of this hard border you'd like right?

If you read all the other comments I've posted you can see my point. I won't be engaging with you though, anyone who resorts to attacking someone instead of arguing against what they say I won't waste my time with.

lawred2

Stupify wrote: »

If you read all the other comments I've posted you can see my point. I won't be engaging with you though, anyone who resorts to attacking someone instead of arguing against what they say I won't waste my time with.

Don't be so precious. You didn't make a point anywhere. It was a one liner. Barely tabloid level.

Maybe you could show how a hard border wouldn't hurt 'us' in the long run?

By the way - I didn't 'attack' you personally. I said your post lived up to your username.

Berserker

lawred2 wrote: »

In it's current dysfunctional vassal state maybe but the reality is that a northern counterweight to Dublin could only be a good thing for an all Ireland economy in the medium to long term.

There have been a number of studies done by independent bodies on the likely benefits of unification

http://prcg.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Modeling-Irish-Unification-Report.pdf

I'd also expect that there would be a massive international surge in immeasurable good will towards Ireland post unification that would simply be impossible to quantify. Good will that would lead to an increase in FDI as companies seek to be part of a good news story.

Firstly, goodwill doesn't pay the bills and where is this goodwill and FDI going to come from? Your point on NI being a counter balance to Dublin doesn't make any sense. Adding more national debt to national debt isn't going to turn into profit.

lawred2

Berserker wrote: »

Firstly, goodwill doesn't pay the bills and where is this goodwill and FDI going to come from? You point on NI being a counter balance to Dublin doesn't make any sense. Adding more national debt to national debt isn't going to turn into profit.

Belfast would be a counterweight to Dublin.

Stupify

lawred2 wrote: »

Don't be so precious. You didn't make a point anywhere. It was a one liner. Barely tabloid level.

Maybe you could show how a hard border wouldn't hurt 'us' in the long run?

By the way - I didn't 'attack' you personally. I said your post lived up to your username.

Again with the personal insults.

"I did say in the long run, of course short-term there would be damage to the border counties. I don't want a hard border though, as long as some trade deal can be hashed out to our benefit then I'm all for open borders and free trade between us, but we should not capitulate to British demands just to keep a border open with the North."

A previous comment of mine, I don't argue for borders, just that the hard border that is on its way won't impact us too negatively in the long term.

Peregrinus

Stupify wrote: »

If they don't have to take on any UK national debt that's one thing, doesn't change the fact that the drain NI would have on our economy would reduce our standard of living here and that's the point I'm arguing.

Partition has been enormously economically damaging to Ireland as a whole, and to each part of Ireland, considered separately. Yes, right now NI is a bit of a economic basket-case, and massively reliant on transfers from GB, but if you change fundamentally the political and economic circumstances which give rise to that situation you shouldn't also assume that that situation will continue indefinetely.

Some of the economic damage of partition has been alleviated by the Single Market. Brexit now risks re-inflicting that economic damage. If you think we can accept a hard border, and not suffer any decline in our standard of living, then you are wrong.

In short, if standard of living is your concern we're not in a situation whereby we can protect ourselves by sticking our fingers in our ears and going "la-la-la not our problem". If there's a crash-out Brexit and a hard border, there'll be real economic damage both north and south of the border (not to mention in GB, of course). And if the response to that in the North means such a shift that a majority come to favour a united Ireland, then that offers a propspect of repairing some of the economic damage.

I think you're wrong to focus on the current transfers from GB to NI, because (a) they're a produce of the current political situation in NI; a UI is a game-changer in terms of what NI needs; and (b) by focussing on those, you're ignoring the problem we have have to solve, which is the economic damage wrought by reinstated a hard partition of Ireland.

Stupify

lawred2 wrote: »

By the way - I didn't 'attack' you personally. I said your post lived up to your username.

You said I live up to my username, not my post.

lawred2 wrote: »

well you're living up to your username alright

lawred2

Stupify wrote: »

You said I live up to my username, not my post.

ok fair enough - that wasn't intended to be interpreted so literally but I see how it would be - I'll edit

Stupify

lawred2 wrote: »

ok fair enough - that wasn't intended to be interpreted so literally but I see how it would be - I'll edit

I don't see how it could be interpreted any other way.

Berserker

lawred2 wrote: »

Belfast would be a counterweight to Dublin.

Can you expand of that? If we take a look at jobs, for example. Are you planning on taking public sector jobs out of Dublin and making Belfast the public sector hub of a UI? Your only other option would be to transform the private sector in Belfast, which would require a significant cultural shift for people in NI but you'd have to promote Belfast to the detriment to the rest of the island and Dublin in particular. That would lead to countless problems for people in Dublin in terms of day to day living. No need for me to list them for you.

Peregrinus wrote: »

Partition has been enormously economically damaging to Ireland as a whole, and to each part of Ireland, considered separately.

The RoI is one of the wealthiest countries in the OECD at 4th, iirc, in the OECD-28 rankings.

lawred2

Stupify wrote: »

I don't see how it could be interpreted any other way.

And I've edited it. Can you get over yourself now?

Stupify

Peregrinus wrote: »

Partition has been enormously economically damaging to Ireland as a whole, and to each part of Ireland, considered separately. Yes, right now NI is a bit of a economic basket-case, and massively reliant on transfers from GB, but if you change fundamentally the political and economic circumstances which give rise to that situation you shouldn't also assume that that situation will continue indefinetely.

Some of the economic damage of partition has been alleviated by the Single Market. Brexit now risks re-inflicting that economic damage. If you think we can accept a hard border, and not suffer any decline in our standard of living, then you are wrong.

In short, if standard of living is your concern we're not in a situation whereby we can protect ourselves by sticking our fingers in our ears and going "la-la-la not our problem". If there's a crash-out Brexit and a hard border, there'll be real economic damage both north and south of the border (not to mention in GB, of course). And if the response to that in the North means such a shift that a majority come to favour a united Ireland, then that offers a propspect of repairing some of the economic damage.

I think you're wrong to focus on the current transfers from GB to NI, because (a) they're a produce of the current political situation in NI; a UI is a game-changer in terms of what NI needs; and (b) by focussing on those, you're ignoring the problem we have have to solve, which is the economic damage wrought by reinstated a hard partition of Ireland.

The hard border won't be what will cause our reduction in standard of living though, it'll be our loss of free trade with Great Britain, if a hard border was implemented tomorrow but we still had a free trade agreement with the UK there would be hardly any damage for us. This won't happen of course but I just wanted to use it as an example.

If there's a crash out of the UK from the EU our economy will take a huge hit, we won't be able to take another hit by taking on NI too.

Berserker

Stupify wrote: »

The hard border won't be what will cause our reduction in standard of living though, it'll be our loss of free trade with Great Britain, if a hard border was implemented tomorrow but we still had a free trade agreement with the UK there would be hardly any damage for us. This won't happen of course but I just wanted to use it as an example.

If there's a crash out of the UK from the EU our economy will take a huge hit, we won't be able to take another hit by taking on NI too.

People here are playing up on the hard border because of the physical barrier. It'd make no difference to a huge majority of people in the RoI. Keeping the common travel area and having a free trade zone are infinitely more important. If you conducted a poll in Dublin city centre today, I'm confident that most people would be far more concerned about that later than some border which is only going to inconvenience people travelling down from NI or vice versa.

lawred2

Berserker wrote: »

Can you expand of that? If we take a look at jobs, for example. Are you planning on taking public sector jobs out of Dublin and making Belfast the public sector hub of a UI? Your only other option would be to transform the private sector in Belfast, which would require a significant cultural shift in terms of working life for people in NI but you'd have to promote Belfast to the detriment to the rest of the island and Dublin in particular.

Belfast does not need more public sector jobs. But Belfast in a now united Ireland within the EU and with good transport links to Dublin would become an attractive destination for FDI.

I'm interested in this

which would require a significant cultural shift in terms of working life for people in NI

What do you mean?

Berserker

lawred2 wrote: »

Belfast does not need more public sector jobs. But Belfast in a now united Ireland within the EU and with good transport links to Dublin would become an attractive destination for FDI.

To the detriment of the rest of the country though. You can't have the same job in two locations. Also, not sure where the FDI is coming from. Can't see it coming from the US, given the current administration and any new operation setting up in this part of the world would be better served moving to somewhere else in Europe with cheaper operating costs. Finally, a UI wouldn't be part of the EU. It'd need to re-apply to for membership.

lawred2 wrote: »

What do you mean?

As you hinted above, Belfast is heavily reliant on public sector jobs. I used to work up there and they are very public sector orientated in how they work. Working in the private sector is a completely different ball game. We've taken on a few from NI and they've really struggled with the change in working culture, expectations etc.

zapitastas

Berserker wrote: »

To the detriment of the rest of the country though. You can't have the same job in two locations. Also, not sure where the FDI is coming from. Can't see it coming from the US, given the current administration and any new operation setting up in this part of the world would be better served moving to somewhere else in Europe with cheaper operating costs. Finally, a UI wouldn't be part of the EU. It'd need to re-apply to for membership.



As you hinted above, Belfast is heavily reliant on public sector jobs. I used to work up there and they are very public sector orientated in how they work. Working in the private sector is a completely different ball game. We've taken on a few from NI and they've really struggled with the change in working culture, expectations etc.

You are 100% wrong in the claim that a united Ireland would need to reapply. This has already been settled