How long before Irish reunification? (Part 2) Threadbans in OP

jh79 wrote: »

It has the smallest economy of all regions within the UK, with a Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of €50.8b,

https://ec.europa.eu/growth/tools-databases/regional-innovation-monitor/base-profile/northern-ireland

You miss the point.

You seem to think everything will remain static and operate in a vacuum.

For someone so obsessed with economics, you have a rather blinkered of the concept.

FrancieBrady

markodaly wrote: »

Oh, there are plenty of people who want to have a vote first and depending on a positive result, figure out all the big and small details after, which of course would be a disaster for all concerned. Blindly voting for a 'Yes/No' question of such huge importance brings us back to the Brexit debacle. No one really knew what Yes stood for then.

We should learn from that where everyone knows exactly what voting 'Yes' entails.

Your government - whoever makes it up at the time - will be presenting a white paper on it, as the Scots did. We constitutionally aspire to a UI, so the onus will be on them to present the case for it. Not SF as some seem to think.

markodaly wrote: »

Oh, there are plenty of people who want to have a vote first and depending on a positive result, figure out all the big and small details after, which of course would be a disaster for all concerned. Blindly voting for a 'Yes/No' question of such huge importance brings us back to the Brexit debacle. No one really knew what Yes stood for then.

We should learn from that where everyone knows exactly what voting 'Yes' entails.

I'm really glad that as a nation that has no experience in conducting divisive referenda that we can look at brexit to see how it it shouldn't be done.

Cmon now Mark.

markodaly wrote: »

Then I am neither those men. People can discuss a UI all they want and how it would look, no problem from me, but a UI would not be something I would be voting for tomorrow or in the near future.

Cool cool.

And line up beside the bigots and Belligerents you will so.

Fionn1952

markodaly wrote: »

Oh, there are plenty of people who want to have a vote first and depending on a positive result, figure out all the big and small details after, which of course would be a disaster for all concerned. Blindly voting for a 'Yes/No' question of such huge importance brings us back to the Brexit debacle. No one really knew what Yes stood for then.

We should learn from that where everyone knows exactly what voting 'Yes' entails.

I've been among crowds of the most ardent of Republicans when I lived in West Belfast for a number of years. I've literally never heard anyone make this argument in my life.

While I'm sure a non-zero number of them do exist, it is by no means the normal, it is a total strawman to present it as an argument.

BonnieSituation wrote: »

You miss the point.

You seem to think everything will remain static and operate in a vacuum.

For someone so obsessed with economics, you have a rather blinkered of the concept.

Any benefit of a UI can only be realized if funded properly. That is the situation we will be in on Day 1.

A quick google says 17 years at 5% growth for NI to match the Republic.

Mad_maxx

jh79 wrote: »

Actually another possible cost of unification. Increased interest rates due to the dilution of our economy with the massive population increase with only a 50bn contribution in GDP.

on the contrary , Knocking down boundaries makes a nation more attractive to debt markets

Mad_maxx

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Are you debating Francie or SF?

I'm not sure why you need to bring this weird SF obsession into every post.

You were the very one complaining that SF supporters say that they have a monopoly on a UI discussion. We get it, you're not a fan of Sinn féin or of the concept of social democracy it seems.

Stick to the salient point, because you are capable of making them without resorting to the CA trope of "buh Sinn Féin".

i took SF to task soley on the issue of believing they own the debate surrounding a UI

didnt say anything about SF otherwise , plenty of parties id be slower to vote for even though i would not vote for them

Mad_maxx wrote: »

on the contrary , Knocking down boundaries makes a nation more attractive to debt markets

How so? Market judge interest rates on ability to repay. Diluting your economy obviously isn't going to increase your ability to repay.

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

Any benefit of a UI can only be realized if funded properly. That is the situation we will be in on Day 1.

A quick google says 17 years at 5% growth for NI to match the Republic.

So what is wrong with that in a properly structured and financed investment?

FrancieBrady wrote: »

So what is wrong with that in a properly structured and financed investment?

Nothing, I'll vote yes if a sound proposal materializes. Until then it's a no. Though the point I was making was the extent of the investment needed.

jh79 wrote: »

Any benefit of a UI can only be realized if funded properly. That is the situation we will be in on Day 1.

A quick google says 17 years at 5% growth for NI to match the Republic.

You can't possibly be missing the point at EVERY opportunity.

It's an exhausting way to have a discussion.

We get it, you don't want to out your hand in your pocket. Can we get that in writing?

BonnieSituation wrote: »

You can't possibly be missing the point at EVERY opportunity.

It's an exhausting way to have a discussion.

We get it, you don't want to out your hand in your pocket. Can we get that in writing?

NI has the same potential to be successful as any region or state. It also has the potential to negatively affect the whole Island economy in a unification scenario if the investment is not sufficient to stimulate growth.

Blind faith in unification isn't a position worth considering.

Deleted User wrote: »

Would commonsense not say to you,that after 100 years of abject failure,it wont achieve its potemtial in the uk....while as it stands its negatively affects vast tracts of irish econmy as it is....given the econmic status of the border counties?

Not it wouldnt. Common is often misleading and too simplistic. Just because one status hasnt been a great success, doesnt mean that an alternative will therefore be better.

downcow

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

I want Ireland to be governed by the people that live in Ireland. I want the British border to be consigned to history.

A border poll will decide when people are ready for a UI.

So there is no difference. You are like the Spaniards who insist on governing Basque and Catalonia, Israel’s who want to govern Palestine, and the Americans who think they should govern Canada
It’s disgusting that you draw a line irrespective of UN international boundaries and say you want your people to govern that whole area

jh79 wrote: »

Any benefit of a UI can only be realized if funded properly.

What might these benefits be, and for whom ?

downcow

Annd9 wrote: »

Do you care about people in the south who voted against Gay marriage/abortion or divorce ? Of course you don't because that is democracy .

The Brexit situation showed that the British government do not care what unionists/loyalists think or feel . On the other hand the Irish government have been warning about the North and Brexit from day 1 .
Unionists will say it was self serving , but at least they care about this Island .

At this point I feel unionists/loyalists have to look deep down and ask who or what are they loyal to ? Is it benefiting their community and more importantly their youth staying part of the UK ? All statistics say it is not .

I for one want unionist input into how a new state might be formed and how it can be beneficial to working class people from both sides of the community . They are the people with most in common , not JRM or Boris they don't give two ****s about the north and that is getting clearer every single day !

A serious lack of understanding of what the UK is. Narrow thinking

markodaly wrote: »

Blindly voting for a 'Yes/No' question of such huge importance brings us back to the Brexit debacle.

The main lesson to be learned from Brexit is that voting out of the EU had consequences. Similarly voting to reject a UI would have consequences, like Brexit there certainly would be no return to the status quo so beloved of partitionists.

eire4

Fionn1952 wrote: »

I've been among crowds of the most ardent of Republicans when I lived in West Belfast for a number of years. I've literally never heard anyone make this argument in my life.

While I'm sure a non-zero number of them do exist, it is by no means the normal, it is a total strawman to present it as an argument.

I totally agree. If you really want to you can always find exceptions to anything no matter how wild the topic. For me and everyone I know who aspires to and supports Irish unification knows and wants there to be plenty of pre planning and discussion as to exactly how that will happen when the time comes not the other way around. That is just basic common sense. It is a big undertaking and as such would require much discussion and planning be it major macro issues or minor micro issues.

downcow wrote: »

You are like the Spaniards who insist on governing Basque and Catalonia, Israel’s who want to govern Palestine, and the Americans who think they should govern Canada
It’s disgusting that you draw a line irrespective of UN international boundaries and say you want your people to govern that whole area

No, you are like the French who insisted upon ruling Algeria. The north is not a country or a nation but a part of Ireland cleaved off by the threat of internal terrorism and subsequently 'terrible war' from Britain.

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

The main lesson to be learned from Brexit is that voting out of the EU had consequences. Similarly voting to reject a UI would have consequences, like Brexit there certainly would be no return to the status quo so beloved of partitionists.

Of course voting out of the EU had consequences - thats why they voted for it. Surely that was not a learning experience for you ?!?!?

Voting no is exactly voting for the status quo.

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

The north is not a country or a nation but a part of Ireland cleaved off by the threat of internal terrorism and subsequently 'terrible war' from Britain.

This is a completely nonsense warp. Surely you cannot seriously believe what you have written here ?

It is a part of the UK, on the island of Ireland. It is not part of Ireland, the state. Ireland is the state cleaved off not by the threat, but of actual violence and terrorism, from the UK.

Natterjack from Kerry wrote: »

It is a part of the UK.

It is a contested territory under current UK jurisdiction with a view to unification. We will have border polls until British jurisdiction is ended permanently.

Natterjack from Kerry wrote: »

Voting no is exactly voting for the status quo.

In the north that is true. In the south rejection of a United Ireland will precipitate a constitutional crisis as the current arrangement would no longer be fit for purpose.

RobMc59

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

It is a contested territory under current UK jurisdiction with a view to unification. We will have border polls until British jurisdiction is ended permanently.

In the north that is true. In the south rejection of a United Ireland will precipitate a constitutional crises as the current arrangement would no longer be fit for purpose.

Tom,how is it a contested territory when Ireland has accepted the legitimacy of NI and removed it`s illegal territorial claim?Also,if there was to be an border poll and the result was to remain within the UK do you really think there would be another poll anytime soon?
Edit:I see you changed your post whilst I was still writing.

RobMc59 wrote: »

Tom,how is it a contested territory when Ireland has accepted the legitimacy of NI and removed it`s illegal territorial claim?

The territorial claim was replaced with the GFA which is, in essence, a glide-path to a United Ireland.

FrancieBrady

RobMc59 wrote: »

Tom,how is it a contested territory when Ireland has accepted the legitimacy of NI and removed it`s illegal territorial claim?Also,if there was to be an border poll and the result was to remain within the UK do you really think there would be another poll anytime soon?
Edit:I see you changed your post whilst I was still writing.

'We can give our agreement to be governed but not our consent'.
............................................................................John Hume 1972

Fionn1952

RobMc59 wrote: »

Tom,how is it a contested territory when Ireland has accepted the legitimacy of NI and removed it`s illegal territorial claim?Also,if there was to be an border poll and the result was to remain within the UK do you really think there would be another poll anytime soon?
Edit:I see you changed your post whilst I was still writing.

Without getting too deep in, it certainly isn't a contested territory in legal terms any more.

Should the result be to remain part of the UK, I'd imagine it will be a bit of a levee break moment and would expect to see a poll every 7-10 years thereafter.

To crudely quote the Provos with regards to Maggie Thatcher, we only need to be lucky once.