The wondrous adventures of Sinn Fein (part 2)

FrancieBrady wrote: »

'Harmonisation'...where you are getting it totally wrong.

You are making assumptions I am not willing or interested in making.

Again take child benefit. There are three choices

(1) Harmonise the rates upwards to the rate in the South, putting an extra cost on taxpayers

(2) Cut the rate in the South to match the North, i.e. harmonise downwards, thereby cutting social welfare to those in need

(3) Discriminate against children born in the North, by maintaining two different rates (though why you would unify to introduce discrimination is beyond me)

Your choice, Francie, pick one of the three policy options, I will work out the cost and the implications, or else, name a fourth policy option. We can start with this simple one, and move on to tougher challenges like SF setting out why it wants to cut nurses pay or increase property taxes and bring in water charges.

blanch152 wrote: »

Yeah, SF looked for the second best option from the start, thankfully we didn't, because, as in any negotiation, you have been eaten for breakfast putting forward your final position as your opening one.

Shows how pathetic SF are.

#notanormalparty

Jaysus....that is some spin. Credibility account exhausted with that sorry excuse.

blanch152 wrote: »

Sorry, Francie, but I have posted evidence of social welfare rates, social welfare numbers, and the resultant cost of harmonisation. I started with child benefit, and gave a few other examples. All costed, all linked to evidence.

You ran away from the discussion.

It would be very easy to do the same with public servants like teachers, nurses etc. Those are the real hard costs of unification, and they are a lot more than €11 billion. So are you going to tell some nurses to take a pay-cut or are you going to tell everyone to pay more tax? Step up to the plate and tell us like it is.

If supporters of unification run away from this debate when it isn't even on the table, they will be hammered in the real debate. County hurling time.

'Harmonisation'...where you are getting it totally wrong.

You are making assumptions I am not willing or interested in making.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You don't know the numbers blanch...you have already made the assumption that we will just absorb NI.

Partitionists as a whole detest the idea of unification because it might spell an end to how things are done in this country.

For me, unification offer the chance to begin again, properly this time. And to learn from the very evident mistakes made by FF FG in running a new country.

Sorry, Francie, but I have posted evidence of social welfare rates, social welfare numbers, and the resultant cost of harmonisation. I started with child benefit, and gave a few other examples. All costed, all linked to evidence.

You ran away from the discussion.

It would be very easy to do the same with public servants like teachers, nurses etc. Those are the real hard costs of unification, and they are a lot more than €11 billion. So are you going to tell some nurses to take a pay-cut or are you going to tell everyone to pay more tax? Step up to the plate and tell us like it is.

If supporters of unification run away from this debate when it isn't even on the table, they will be hammered in the real debate. County hurling time.

Bowie wrote: »

Agreed. I dislike how people such as Bertie and Kenny get all teary eyed over the prospect when leaving office.

I would be very suprised if cost even came into it for many people. You don't put cost above family.
I liken it to East Germany. Many similarities. Of course I had some derision (or shade as the kids say) thrown my way...

...but when I asked for explanation none was forth coming.

Any budget time or change of government most things from welfare to civil servant salaries are subject to change. The Idea that blending the occupied portion of the Ulster counties currently under British rule with the rest of Ulster and Ireland would be undoable is a nonsense.

Enda is also open to the existence of unicorns and the tax-raising potential of rainbows, should evidence be produced. That is where he differs from Sinn Fein. They believe in unicorns, rainbow taxes and a united Ireland without any evidence that they either exist or work.

blanch152 wrote: »

You could argue similarly that we invested in the banks in 2008.

After the cheapest bailout in the world, we could have the cheapest unification in the world.

The numbers don't add up, which is why you refuse to discuss them.

You don't know the numbers blanch...you have already made the assumption that we will just absorb NI.

Partitionists as a whole detest the idea of unification because it might spell an end to how things are done in this country.

For me, unification offer the chance to begin again, properly this time. And to learn from the very evident mistakes made by FF FG in running a new country.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Feck sake...did 'Brexit' not show you, plain as day, that the parties in the North have no say when it comes to their future in reality. Only we had the power to follow through(once Enda's FG were convinced) on what SF advocated from the start - 'special status' - then they's be in a much worse place.

Yeah, SF looked for the second best option from the start, thankfully we didn't, because, as in any negotiation, you have been eaten for breakfast putting forward your final position as your opening one.

Shows how pathetic SF are.

#notanormalparty

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I never said I do. I am happy to await proposals when they come.

The financial aspect is a secondary one for me anyhow. NO reason in the world that it cannot be couched as an investment and I am much more interested in the wellness and social benefits that will bring. I believe there are many many like me.

So until we see actual figures from the British I won't waste my time on figures, ta very much.

You could argue similarly that we invested in the banks in 2008.

After the cheapest bailout in the world, we could have the cheapest unification in the world.

The numbers don't add up, which is why you refuse to discuss them.

RandomViewer

Fionn1952 wrote: »

You wouldn't happen to apply the same logic to all the tax Ulster born folk like myself working in Dublin are paying being transferred to Munster, would you?

Such a lack of self awareness....if only Munster taxes were spent in Munster your roads and hospitals would certainly be in worse nick.

Tax is kind of hard to judge when you figure Dunnes,Tesco,Vodafone etc..all pay their tax centrally in Dublin when that money is collected countrywide,

Brendan Bendar

Finty Lemon wrote: »

Well done Lynn Boylan on publishing the energy poverty report. The statistical rigour and intellectual weight behind the document is of the highest calibre that SF can offer, augmented in part no doubt, by the heavyweight mind of Eoin O Broin.
It is definitely worth a read. I cried anyway.

Jaysus!

I was waiting for that......tear-jerker is it?

Finty Lemon

Well done Lynn Boylan on publishing the energy poverty report. The statistical rigour and intellectual weight behind the document is of the highest calibre that SF can offer, augmented in part no doubt, by the heavyweight mind of Eoin O Broin.
It is definitely worth a read. I cried anyway.

Fionn1952

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Course not, it's expected that a capital city would prop up the rest of the country. The regions should not have to prop up other regions, especially when the three main cities in one region are linked by roads from the 1950's. I have no expectation of Connacht taxes coming south, or in reality "non-Pale" Leinster taxes coming south either. Munster needs massive infrastructural investment in schools, healthcare and transport as it is. Any taxes generated in industry heavy places like Limerick, Shannon or Cork should be kept within Munster, at the very least until Munster's infrastructure is up to code.

Similarly, I fully expect a federal body of some sort for Munster if Ulster is allowed to keep Stormont (or whatever it is renamed).

Ah so just good old fashioned mé féin-ism. Happy to stick the hand out but not to put a hand in your own pocket.

I'm sure it's great going out for a pint with you!

Fionn1952 wrote: »

You wouldn't happen to apply the same logic to all the tax Ulster born folk like myself working in Dublin are paying being transferred to Munster, would you?

Such a lack of self awareness....if only Munster taxes were spent in Munster your roads and hospitals would certainly be in worse nick.

Course not, it's expected that a capital city would prop up the rest of the country. The regions should not have to prop up other regions, especially when the three main cities in one region are linked by roads from the 1950's. I have no expectation of Connacht taxes coming south, or in reality "non-Pale" Leinster taxes coming south either. Munster needs massive infrastructural investment in schools, healthcare and transport as it is. Any taxes generated in industry heavy places like Limerick, Shannon or Cork should be kept within Munster, at the very least until Munster's infrastructure is up to code.

Similarly, I fully expect a federal body of some sort for Munster if Ulster is allowed to keep Stormont (or whatever it is renamed).

Fionn1952 wrote: »

You wouldn't happen to apply the same logic to all the tax Ulster born folk like myself working in Dublin are paying being transferred to Munster, would you?

Such a lack of self awareness....if only Munster taxes were spent in Munster your roads and hospitals would certainly be in worse nick.

It's the invasion of the Brexiteer logic and we saw how that went.

Fionn1952

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Certainly, as a Munsterman, no Munster taxes should leave here to go to any other province, we've enough to worry about with crap roads between our cities, and crap hospitals etc.

You wouldn't happen to apply the same logic to all the tax Ulster born folk like myself working in Dublin are paying being transferred to Munster, would you?

Such a lack of self awareness....if only Munster taxes were spent in Munster your roads and hospitals would certainly be in worse nick.

a very cool kid wrote: »

Nope and neither do you, so it's worst case scenario until there is something concrete on the table.

It's a bit ridiculous in some ways, gambling all our citizens livelihoods on the idea that we're going to get the Brits to **** off and then get them to pay us to do it.

I never said I do. I am happy to await proposals when they come.

The financial aspect is a secondary one for me anyhow. NO reason in the world that it cannot be couched as an investment and I am much more interested in the wellness and social benefits that will bring. I believe there are many many like me.

So until we see actual figures from the British I won't waste my time on figures, ta very much.

a very cool kid

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The reality is, you have no idea what might be proposed ...really...you don't.

Nope and neither do you, so it's worst case scenario until there is something concrete on the table.

It's a bit ridiculous in some ways, gambling all our citizens livelihoods on the idea that we're going to get the Brits to **** off and then get them to pay us to do it.

a very cool kid wrote: »

Well if Enda said it....

The reality is though that it'd cost a fortune without massive economic advancement in the region.

The EU are not going to pay our bills folks and neither is the UK for a UI (Is it even a free Ireland if someone else is paying?)

The reality is, you have no idea what might be proposed ...really...you don't.

a very cool kid

Bowie wrote: »

Agreed. I dislike how people such as Bertie and Kenny get all teary eyed over the prospect when leaving office.

I would be very suprised if cost even came into it for many people. You don't put cost above family.
I liken it to East Germany. Many similarities. Of course I had some derision (or shade as the kids say) thrown my way...

...but when I asked for explanation none was forth coming.

Any budget time or change of government most things from welfare to civil servant salaries are subject to change. The Idea that blending the occupied portion of the Ulster counties currently under British rule with the rest of Ulster and Ireland would be undoable is a nonsense.

Well if Enda said it....

The reality is though that it'd cost a fortune without massive economic advancement in the region.

The EU are not going to pay our bills folks and neither is the UK for a UI (Is it even a free Ireland if someone else is paying?)

James Brown

Deleted User wrote: »

We need to have these conversations though. Otherwise it's just romantic shíte-talk about dreams etc.

Agreed. I dislike how people such as Bertie and Kenny get all teary eyed over the prospect when leaving office.

I would be very suprised if cost even came into it for many people. You don't put cost above family.
I liken it to East Germany. Many similarities. Of course I had some derision (or shade as the kids say) thrown my way...

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

Like a post war Germany? Ah come on now. That's just crazy talk. You surely are saying that in jest...

blanch152 wrote: »

Historical revisionism reaches a new high with this island today being compared to post-war Germany!!!!

...but when I asked for explanation none was forth coming.

This is not the first time that Enda Kenny has touted the possibility of a united Ireland having previously mentioned it as a possibility in September.

“The possibility of unity by consent must be maintained as a valid democratic option into the future,” he told the annual meeting of the British-Irish Association in Oxford. “That means that, if there were democratic consent to Irish unity at some time in the future, there must be a mechanism to ensure that democratic decision can be implemented within the European Union, as was the case in Germany."

At a summit on the EU’s plan for negotiating with Britain as it leaves the bloc, Irish Prime Minister Enda Kenny asked fellow members to acknowledge that Northern Ireland would, like East Germany in 1990, automatically enter the EU in the event of unification with existing member state.

Any budget time or change of government most things from welfare to civil servant salaries are subject to change. The Idea that blending the occupied portion of the Ulster counties currently under British rule with the rest of Ulster and Ireland would be undoable is a nonsense.

a very cool kid

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Yes, I agree. With the stakeholders though and those who have the actual figures, not with bitter and negative partitionists on a website. No reason NI cannot become a contributor to the public purse like any other region on the island after some adjustment.

The numbers don't change just because "partitionists" are quoting them though .

FWIW, the NI government have a unique opportunity for economic advancement that could make a UI possible. They will probably screw it up though and find someone to blame.

Bowie wrote: »

You are talking about FF/FG* I assume.

*see numerous crashes, cronyism, fraud, NCH, IW etc. etc.

These guys have themselves deluded that they are 'Masters Of The Universe' or something. Vanity indeed.

James Brown

mattser wrote: »

Fiscal reality isn't their strongest point, Blanch.

You are talking about FF/FG* I assume.

*see numerous crashes, cronyism, fraud, NCH, IW etc. etc.

Deleted User wrote: »

We need to have these conversations though. Otherwise it's just romantic shíte-talk about dreams etc.

Yes, I agree. With the stakeholders though and those who have the actual figures, not with bitter and negative partitionists on a website. No reason NI cannot become a contributor to the public purse like any other region on the island after some adjustment.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Nobody is proposing we go for a UI tomorrow. Settle lads.

We need to have these conversations though. Otherwise it's just romantic shíte-talk about dreams etc.

Deleted User wrote: »

The finances definitely don't suit (the Republic of) Ireland. We're into our second recession in a decade, the idea we can afford to take on one of the poorest places in Europe is bizarre. There's emotional reasons, and maybe long term rational reasons for a United Ireland but right now there's no good financial reason to take it on. Unless the EU pays us big, big money a United Ireland will crash the economy here. As it is, most of Ireland is supported by taxes raised in Dublin afaik, bit optimistic we can stretch that money much further considering we can't even afford 24/7 cardiac care in Waterford, or a motorway from Cork to Limerick (finally in planning, I think).

The economies of scale argument doesn't hold up, imo. NI was part of the EU for the last 25 years as a peaceful place. If the economies of scale of being part of the EU couldn't make the place work, there's no reason to hope being part of a United Ireland will fix it.

All the above said, maybe the shipping lanes above NI are worth it to the EU, I don't know enough about them.

Certainly, as a Munsterman, no Munster taxes should leave here to go to any other province, we've enough to worry about with crap roads between our cities, and crap hospitals etc.

Nobody is proposing we go for a UI tomorrow. Settle lads.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Enda was initially against 'special status' but changed his mind after Dáil debates on the topic.

I agree..and would add, the only people a UI doesn't suit now is belligerent Unionists and partitionists. It suits Ireland, The rest of the EU and Britain if the complication that partition has been since inception, is gone.

The finances definitely don't suit (the Republic of) Ireland. We're into our second recession in a decade, the idea we can afford to take on one of the poorest places in Europe is bizarre. There's emotional reasons, and maybe long term rational reasons for a United Ireland but right now there's no good financial reason to take it on. Unless the EU pays us big, big money a United Ireland will crash the economy here. As it is, most of Ireland is supported by taxes raised in Dublin afaik, bit optimistic we can stretch that money much further considering we can't even afford 24/7 cardiac care in Waterford, or a motorway from Cork to Limerick (finally in planning, I think).

The economies of scale argument doesn't hold up, imo. NI was part of the EU for the last 25 years as a peaceful place. If the economies of scale of being part of the EU couldn't make the place work, there's no reason to hope being part of a United Ireland will fix it.

All the above said, maybe the shipping lanes above NI are worth it to the EU, I don't know enough about them.

Certainly, as a Munsterman, no Munster taxes should leave here to go to any other province, we've enough to worry about with crap roads between our cities, and crap hospitals etc.

Deleted User wrote: »

FG did very well to secure the backstop alright, though think that came under Leo not Enda? I don't particularly like Leo but that's a mark in his credit.

Personally think we're heading to a United Ireland because the EU want it (for control of shipping lanes to the North of NI and Scotland) so they are happy enough to give NI the current deal, even though it could potentially be good enough for NI to make a United Ireland harder to achieve (ie, why give up the best of both worlds for the best of one world etc).

Interesting times.

Enda was initially against 'special status' but changed his mind after Dáil debates on the topic.

I agree..and would add, the only people a UI doesn't suit now is belligerent Unionists and partitionists. It suits Ireland, The rest of the EU and Britain if the complication that partition has been since inception, is gone.

mattser

blanch152 wrote: »

So you still have no answers as to where we will find the money to harmonise social welfare, taxation and public service pay without someone footing the bill.

As I thought, away with you to the unicorns and rainbows to get the tax to pay for it.

Fiscal reality isn't their strongest point, Blanch.