United Ireland Poll - please vote

Shebean

Nobody has a genuine clue.

All we know is when people want it there will be talks and decisions made. Then we will have a reasonable idea of what it might entail.

Any talk on it being a bad outcome is entirely disingenuous.

We can surmise and have a very rough educated guess.

I believe it will be a global cause of celebration and good will. Positive good will generates investment. We can consign the troubles to history with only the U.K. keeping the stains of their criminality they refuse to address.

FrancieBrady

https://boards.ie/discussion/comment/117633227#Comment_117633227

Is Doyle proposing the plan for a UI? Who knew.

He is actually saying more work needs to be done. So let the work begin.

jh79

https://boards.ie/discussion/comment/117633433#Comment_117633433

But you are claiming that a transition period will counter some of the more significant costs. Given you have no idea what this transition period involves you also have no idea even in theory if it might work. All you have have is a nice sounding term with no substance behind it.

Fitzgerald's forthcoming paper should offer more clarity on harmonization of PS. We already know the result is "dramatic" tax increases. Just a question of what is his idea of dramatic.

FrancieBrady

https://boards.ie/discussion/comment/117633746#Comment_117633746

I do know what it involves - it involves sitting down with the various stakeholders and working out what needs to be done and how long it will take.

This isn't rocket science.

jh79

https://boards.ie/discussion/comment/117633760#Comment_117633760

Yes but are assuming that the outcome will be sufficient to cancel the more significant costs outside of the subvention.

That is just a hope of yours at this stage with no evidence to support it. And hardly a counter argument to predictions based on empirical data.

FrancieBrady

https://boards.ie/discussion/comment/117633959#Comment_117633959

You are 'assuming' that Fitzgerald is correct in his predictions.

Has Fitzgerald always been correct in his predictions?

Fionn1952

https://boards.ie/discussion/comment/117632852#Comment_117632852

And rejecting the will of 50%+1, or going back to the old days of a Unionist veto would be less damaging how?

As I quite clearly said, no one HOPES for a 50%+1 type of margin (in either direction), but ignoring that outcome (or pseudo-ignoring it by waiting until it is clear that for example a supermajority favour it) causes just as many problems, which you seem eager to ignore. Would a UI be good to go and would everything be grand if a border poll passed by such a slim majority? Absolutely not. Could we just continue on as usual without equal or greater consequences should we decide to ignore the results and pretend it never happened? Absolutely not.

The simple fact of the matter is that the GFA exists. That agreement states that should it seem likely to pass, a border poll will be called. If a majority of people in NI and a majority in Ireland wish for Unification to proceed, it will. It doesn't say anything about qualified majorities, Unionist veto, an independent NI or any of the other suggestions that have been made in this thread. As I've said repeatedly, should you wish for any of those alternatives, then your first step should be campaigning for the removal or replacement of the GFA (which, given your post draws a comparison between Nationalists and UKIP, ironically puts you in the same camp as the most hardline of Ulster Loyalists.)

jh79

https://boards.ie/discussion/comment/117633981#Comment_117633981

Not just considering him. Doyle and Hubner too.

Francie you have offered nothing but words such "subsumed" and "transition", no evidence of how it might work or any details for that matter just literally the words . That's how superficial it is.

You really think that your nothing argument gets any better because Fitzgerald got it wrong on a certain aspect of the recession.

Must of done something right over the y ars given his career.

What's his success rate by the way? Was his error and anomaly or part of a pattern?

Nobody is perfect Francie, sure didn't SF predict a United Ireland by 2016.

FrancieBrady

https://boards.ie/discussion/comment/117634201#Comment_117634201

There are many more opinions to be put into the pot jh79, something you refuse to accept.

The fear of allowing the discussion to begin is palpable from yourself and others here.

Fitzgerald is working within self imposed parameters and assuming a lot of things cannot change or that the status quo will remain.

That's fine until someone or something changes those parameters or metrics.

We are just at an early stage here.

jh79

https://boards.ie/discussion/comment/117634230#Comment_117634230

I'll read any paper or link you provide. Just it's hard to get a discussion going when the reply is " it won't be subsumed" or "transition" and literally using the definition of "transition" as your sole reason to dismiss research.

Feeling a bit brave now. When you say self imposed parameters what do you mean? He has to keep some things constant and/or assume other to make the models work and try a few different assumption s to get a range of values.

His self imposed parameters are they by choice to feed a bias, poor judgement in the selection of parameters rather than any intent or factual errors?

Which parameters are you referring to?

FrancieBrady

https://boards.ie/discussion/comment/117634437#Comment_117634437

I am not dismissing research, I am saying that this is just some research which is not definitive. As the subvention used to be waved about as the primary scare, this research may reach the same point and be superseded by other ideas or event.

I fancy the fear is that if a plan or proposal does get discussed and the focus switches to the benefits of a UI, nobody will listen to the scary stuff.

That is why you are so active on something you claim 'not to be worried about'.

jh79

https://boards.ie/discussion/comment/117634510#Comment_117634510

But we won't know which research paper was the definitive one until after fact. Fitzgerald is the most comprehensive and it's a niche subject matter. There won't be very many.

Every paper discussed here had flaws. Doyle's can be reasonably accused of not being realistic in assuming that the British would agree to all Ireland's requests. Fitzgerald does seem to assume the worst of the British. Hubner assuming poor educational outcomes in NI, that took 20 years for Ireland to get right, would have no effect and FDI would instantly grow at the Republic rates was a major one.

As they say in stats "all models are wrong but some are useful". There is no such thing as the correct model.

A better one could come a long but there is no certainy about that. It'll still have flaws either way. We'll be looking at ranges for best and worst case scenario based on all the research and we'll have to decide if the risk is worth it.

jh79

https://boards.ie/discussion/comment/117634510#Comment_117634510

Just on the last bit. Hubner report is about the benefits and I have no issue discussing that paper as you know.

What makes you think I won't be here discussing the merits of any new papers on the benefits in the future?

FrancieBrady

https://boards.ie/discussion/comment/117634716#Comment_117634716

No doubt you'll be here not worrying. 😀

blanch152

https://boards.ie/discussion/comment/117632961#Comment_117632961

Bluster, nonsense and spoofing. A transition period meaning what? Gobbledy-gook isn't an answer.

There is nothing transitional about the GFA. It is an agreement that saw us relinquish our territorial claim and SF/IRA agree to respect democracy (though they haven't been very good at that).

blanch152

https://boards.ie/discussion/comment/117633981#Comment_117633981

Well, we have on one side, one of Ireland's foremost economists saying that this will cost billions, a 10% increase in taxation and on the other side, we have an anonymous internet poster claiming that nobody knows, and who is presenting ZERO evidence that Fitzgerald is wrong. Quite while you are only miles behind.

FrancieBrady

https://boards.ie/discussion/comment/117634951#Comment_117634951

Ask Unionists was the GFA transitional. You are getting laughable now.

FrancieBrady

https://boards.ie/discussion/comment/117634962#Comment_117634962

Has Fitzgerald always been correct?

Ardillaun

The supporters of UI Now are promoting a massive change and a big gamble. It’s up to them to provide the details on their project for us to discuss, particularly what might go wrong - and a LOT could - and what to do if it does. I’m not seeing that kind of detail here.

Ardillaun

One scenario of many to consider: violent Loyalist resistance to UI. There would almost certainly be considerable divergence of opinion between North and South on how to deal with that if casualties become significant. Without external support - and what country would send troops to help us these days? - I doubt the RoI govt would commit to sustaining a campaign of occupation. Repartition would become a serious possibility.

ittakestwo

The loyalists is another scaremongering tactic. Loyalists won't succeed because they will have no support either from the general unionts population or by the British Army like in the past. You will get a few young males who having nothing going for themselves joining a gang that gives access to weapons, just like you do in Dublin or London. But these dumb **** won't be hard to find.

All is not lost for unionists anyway in a UI. The union might still exist on Britain. They will always have the right to move and live within the Union if it still exists. For the ones that like Ireland so much and will choose to stay, presumably they will be less hostile to the capital of thier jurisdiction being on this island where they are chosesing to live.

maccored

https://boards.ie/discussion/comment/117633083#Comment_117633083

cost for what exactly? see my point? If you dont know what you want to build, you wont know the cost.

maccored

https://boards.ie/discussion/comment/117633071#Comment_117633071

SF didnt write the report - that was Dr Kurt Hubner and Dr Renger Herman Van Nieuwkoop surely? Though if you wish to blatantly ignore that SF has been pushing for a discussion for years then you keep those blinkers on

FrancieBrady

https://boards.ie/discussion/comment/117635424#Comment_117635424

Loyalists and their enablers south of the border (who always revert to this 'threat') have threatened violence since before the GFA, and yet nothing with the ability to destablise. Plenty of wrecking their own areas etc.

And again, what would be the point?

Anyone looking at the north right this minute will see a moderate Unionism ignoring the calls to violence from others. Unionism by and large accepted the majority would one day vote for a UI at the GFA. I also believe that Unionism in the main believes the British tacitly withdrew in signing the GFA in the first place. That 'war' is won.

jh79

https://boards.ie/discussion/comment/117635644#Comment_117635644

Again if Pearce can claim benefits based on economic models , the costs can be predicted on the same models

SF have said that Ireland will benefit by 35bn over 8 years. That benefit is based on harmonization of welfare and PS pay (Scenario 3). Welfare is easy to cost and is 3bn on top of the subvention.

PS pay is a bit more difficult but SF have the advantage of being in government in NI and having access to the data that others might not.

dudley72

https://boards.ie/discussion/comment/117635745#Comment_117635745

Sinn Fein could have access to every piece of data, it wouldn't matter I doubt they have the ability to bring together a complicated financial study on the benefits of a United Ireland

FrancieBrady

https://boards.ie/discussion/comment/117635769#Comment_117635769

They have proved they can count better than one of our most 'esteemed' Ministers for Finance though. 😉

jh79

https://boards.ie/discussion/comment/117635650#Comment_117635650

It was commissioned by "Friends of SF", promoted it on their social media and used it as the basis of their document "Economic Benefits of a United Ireland".

So to achieve the economic benefits in Pearce's document how does SF propose to pay for the 3bn in welfare increases beyond the subvention, pay for increasing PS pay and what will they focus on in NI to reduce Public Expenditure by 2/4 % (it's one or the other can't remember.)

jh79

https://boards.ie/discussion/comment/117635769#Comment_117635769

No, they have the ability (well the ability to hire the same experts as all the other parties), they don't want to because they are behind in opinion polls (for unification not Stormont) and fear a document outlining tax increases and cuts to services would likely have a negative affect in the polls and subsequently no chance of a border poll.

FrancieBrady

https://boards.ie/discussion/comment/117635802#Comment_117635802

How does Leo and FG who see a UI in the future suggest it is 'paid for'?

Again you are falling prey to the subsume/maintain the status quo melarky. Who says the PS will be the size of the two of them combined? Who has agreed rates of pay even?

There is a thread here discussing the NHS and some of the ideas there are interesting, why try and replicae that...whay not look to EU models given we area EU country.

Lots to look at an discuss, and depending on the work of somebody who failed to spot us going off a cliff economically is foolhardy. It's not wise to ignore it, same as Doyle and Hubner, but it is wise to treat it as an opinion.