United Ireland Poll - please vote

Mantis Toboggan wrote: »

We owe it to the men of 1916 and all who lost their lives in the troubles to create a united Ireland if the opportunity arises.

We owe it to the families we left suffer up north.

James Brown wrote: »

We owe it to the families we left suffer up north.

We? Im 35 i dont remember having any responsibility in the mess that NI currently is.

a very cool kid

Mantis Toboggan wrote: »

They all fought for a cause, for our country, my respect for them is huge I can only wish to have been involved and I include both sides of the civil war.

You wish you were involved in a war??? Better you than me....

MOH

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Very few will answer positively if asked do they want to pay MORE tax.
However, if they are asked if they are willing to make an investment for their own benefit and more importantly, for their children, then they will answer differently.

Yep, that's working out really well at the moment

a very cool kid

MOH wrote: »

Yep, that's working out really well at the moment

The whole NI - ROI hookup benefitting is economically is nonsense when you look at it really. Business wise there have been no barriers to trade or investment between NI and ROI or incentives available in ROI that weren't in NI - and they have fallen miles behind (particularly in the past 30 years).

Why when you change the flag and the currency does NI suddenly become an economic powerhouse?

There's a reason the costs are quite specific and the benefits kind of vague....

If the subvention were half of what is reported you're looking at a 10% tax increase across the board in ROI (58% marginal income tax rate on everything over 35k anyone?).

That's just to keep the lights on as they are now before you increase welfare and civil salaries to ROI levels.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

People who think a proposal for a UI will be couched in terms of 'paying more tax' are also living in dreamland.

Very few will answer positively if asked do they want to pay MORE tax.
However, if they are asked if they are willing to make an investment for their own benefit and more importantly, for their children, then they will answer differently.

We built the state we have on that willingness to look to the future, to see infrastructure spend as an investment etc.

We also need to take into account that the population is jaded bailing out gamblers and FF/FG's 'own'. Not to mention poor quality governance and little value for tax payer money.

a very cool kid

James Brown wrote: »

We also need to take into account that the population is jaded bailing out gamblers and FF/FG's 'own'. Not to mention poor quality governance and little value for tax payer money.

And this increases the tax take by a fifth how exactly?

nolivesmatter wrote: »

Have two countries ever merged together successfully let alone peacefully?

East and West Germany?

walshb wrote: »

Germany was one country that simply divided and reunited.

Completely different to a UI with Irish and British..

Ireland was one country too until 1921......

blanch152

VinLieger wrote: »

We? Im 35 i dont remember having any responsibility in the mess that NI currently is.

Northern Ireland is 100 years old this year. Nobody alive today in Ireland owes anything to the North because of partition.

Generations have passed and while a united Ireland is a nice idea to think about and to hope for, practically too much is different now to make it a realistic objective.

walshb

almostover wrote: »

Ireland was one country too until 1921......

Yes, but Ireland was divided by partition/3rd party...

Germany was Germany. Divided in two. Reunified..

It is not the same as this situation. Loyalist/Unionists consider themselves to be British.

Irish nationalists consider themselves to be Irish.

Germans are Germans. All the same as regards their identity/nationality.

blanch152

almostover wrote: »

Ireland was one country too until 1921......

Ireland hasn't been one country since 1800 when the Act of Union was passed and we became part of the United Kingdom. Prior to 1800, we were only united as a British colony.

Greenlights16

Putting aside all of the stats, hardline figures and economical geeks for a minute -

I'm not even in my 30s yet and my experience as a northerner (Nordie

) living in Ireland for the past number of years is that no one down here gives a toss.

Fair to say why should they, they know no different. Then you have the people up my direction who go on and on about a UI but if you asked them "why do you want one, what would it make better for you?" they wouldn't have a clue.

I just think most people especially my generation in ROI are completely disconnected from the north, unless they have relatives or friends up there. Most people have been abroad and haven't ever driven to belfast. There isn't exactly much persuasion on either side of the border to encourage tourism and learning about the history, bar the odd vague "DiscoverNI" ad on the radio or TV.

Even in NI, in the rural small towns and villages I come from, most of the nationalist community don't really give a toss as far as I can see, but they do love coming down here for holidays and weekends away, barely ever a bad word to say about "The South" as it's referred to by many up there. In fact many can be in awe of it for some strange reason, I bet they wouldn't be after living here for a few years.

To go back to the point of the thread, I really don't know what way a poll would go, a lot of people and business benefit at the moment from loopholes in te tax system etc working on both sides of the border. The younger generation don't care; The oldest generation left are too old to care or just wanted peace, my parents and middle aged people have all gone quiet bar the hardliners.

I actually truly believe (call me bias) that nationalists in NI are a lot more progressive in their thinking and willingness to share communities, it is the hardline and bitter unionists that will NEVER ever change. Ever. Ever. My local hometown, we all played soccer together and never any issues, both backgrounds protestant and catholic, would mix in bars and nightclubs at weekend etc. Us lads would go off and play our GAA at other times. But there was always one or two, just hated us, and that still exists. It is entrenched in them, this deep deep hate to despise anything that comes from the nationalist community or doesn't align with red white and blue way of thinking.

Of course, there are still the eejits from nationalist community who share every hunger striker commemoration post on facebook, refer to everything as "the brits" and their off spring are much the same, backward way of thinking.

I'd like to see one personally but not sure if now is the right time, but I know from talking to people "down here" over the past few years that all they are interested in at the end of the day is how will they be affected in their pockets. They have no sense of wanting to rejoin the country, no national yearning for this to happen, it's just about money. If they will be worse off, they will vote no, you can guarantee it.

Greenlights16

Posters like Blanch152 (whom I've observed across many threads) reinforce my point exactly, and they're entitled to that.

They'd be just as likely to unite with Wales as they would N.I., so this notion across the airwaves this week that everyone would jump at it is nonsense.

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

They riot and murder people when they can’t walk down a road

What do you think they will do when they are backed into a corner facing into a united Ireland?

So let's give in to terrorist threats from unionism / loyalism? The GF agreement set forth the conditions for a vote on a UI. If those conditions come about and if in both jurisdictions a democratic mandate is expressed for a UI then the threat of violence cannot be accepted as a barrier to that.

That position is so weak. Let's spurn democracy because it may lead to violence. Violent threats from unionism to a UI based on a democratic vote shouldn't be tolerated.

There's a lot of sickening political revisionism floating about at the moment.

JimmyVik wrote: »

A lot of people here saying Ireland can afford it.
Tell me how much is going to come out of my pocket and i'll decide whether I can afford it myself.

Hate to break it to you, you're 1 man with 1 vote. Same as the rest of us when the border poll does happen.

drdidlittle wrote: »

For all those wanting a UI. What is your red line in terms of items you will give up to secure a UI?
Join Commenwealth?
Change national anthem?
Red Post boxes?
Chanfe flag etc....

Creating a new education system to address the quality of the grammar and spelling on the island would be my first red line issue

walshb wrote: »

Yes, but Ireland was divided by partition/3rd party...

Germany was Germany. Divided in two. Reunified..

It is not the same as this situation. Loyalist/Unionists consider themselves to be British.

Irish nationalists consider themselves to be Irish.

Germans are Germans. All the same as regards their identity/nationality.

Germany was also partitioned by 3rd parties, was it not? It is a different scenario granted but there is precedence there to reunify a country. The UI conversation is being pitch around how unhappy the staunch unionists will be with the situation if a UI comes about. There's little heed paid to the fact in order for it to be brought about that it requires a democratic mandate. What about those who may vote for it?

a very cool kid wrote: »

And this increases the tax take by a fifth how exactly?

What are you on about?

almostover wrote: »

East and West Germany?

2 Trillion euros is the current estimated cost and Germany can still very easily be split along the old borders via demographics, economics, political affiliations and any number of other metrics.

Here's a great article from last year asking the question of whether its been a success or not.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/03/world/europe/east-west-germany-30-anniversary.html

Politicians will always claim its a success but polling says otherwise

Six in 10 Germans overall see reunification as a success, according to a YouGov survey of 2,034 people. But more than eight in 10 people in the former East Germany consider reunification incomplete, and one in three see it as a failure

And remember they were only divided for 40 years and had 100% approval for reunification, Ireland has been divided for 100 now and Northern Ireland doesn't even get 50% approval when polled for reunification and never will get anywhere near 100. The ROI has about 60-70% approval but that number drops heavily once the difficult questions start being added on.

dam099

VinLieger wrote: »

And remember they were only divided for 40 years and had 100% approval for reunification.

What's your source for that? From what I can tell they didn't have a referendum rather the 2 parliaments voted on it and while with large majorities it wasn't unanimous so 100% approval seems highly unlikely.

(I think your overall point is still pertinent, German support would have been high, in NI its clearly not).

VinLieger wrote: »

2 Trillion euros is the current estimated cost and Germany can still very easily be split along the old borders via demographics, economics, political affiliations and any number of other metrics.

Here's a great article from last year asking the question of whether its been a success or not.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/03/world/europe/east-west-germany-30-anniversary.html

Politicians will always claim its a success but polling says otherwise

And remember they were only divided for 40 years and had 100% approval for reunification, Ireland has been divided for 100 now and Northern Ireland doesn't even get 50% approval when polled for reunification and never will get anywhere near 100. The ROI has about 60-70% approval but that number drops heavily once the difficult questions start being added on.

I've been to Germany many times with work and only to the East once. That in itself tells the story that you're alluding to. Here's one for you though, I've only been to NI once in my 30 years. There was no alternative to reunifying Germany, none, zero, zilch. Why? Because it was done based on an almost total democratic mandate. You can't blame the perceived lack of success of German reunification on the reunification itself. It had to happen. How it happened maybe could have been better.

The debate is similar with a UI. If there's a democratic mandate expressed for it to happen in ROI and NI then it must happen. There is no alternative. All three parties must engage with planning for it, ROI, NI & GB. The cost of reunification will have to be paid for if the border poll mandates a UI.

Germany seems to have done well economically despite the 2 trillion cost of reunification. Perhaps that's because the gains from reunification outweighs the costs.

We in ROI need to start engaging with this UI discussion. It's imperative. Dismissing the idea because individuals don't want to pay more taxes or because the most ardent unionists will be digusted by a UI isn't grounds enough to dismiss the idea of a border poll. We voted for this in the good Friday agreement and its incumbent on all of us now to engage with a border poll and doing the ground work to make the border poll result in a UI.

almostover wrote: »

East and West Germany?

dam099 wrote: »

What's your source for that? From what I can tell they didn't have a referendum rather the 2 parliaments voted on it and while with large majorities it wasn't unanimous so 100% approval seems highly unlikely.

(I think your overall point is still pertinent, German support would have been high, in NI its clearly not).

I swear i saw it somewhere recently but cant find it now, might have been just a turn of phrase now that i look at the specifics around the last election in east Germany as your right it does seem very unlikely.

almostover wrote: »

I've been to Germany many times with work and only to the East once. That in itself tells the story that you're alluding to. Here's one for you though, I've only been to NI once in my 30 years. There was no alternative to reunifying Germany, none, zero, zilch. Why? Because it was done based on an almost total democratic mandate. You can't blame the perceived lack of success of German reunification on the reunification itself. It had to happen. How it happened maybe could have been better.

The debate is similar with a UI. If there's a democratic mandate expressed for it to happen in ROI and NI then it must happen. There is no alternative. All three parties must engage with planning for it, ROI, NI & GB. The cost of reunification will have to be paid for if the border poll mandates a UI.

Germany seems to have done well economically despite the 2 trillion cost of reunification. Perhaps that's because the gains from reunification outweighs the costs.

We in ROI need to start engaging with this UI discussion. It's imperative. Dismissing the idea because individuals don't want to pay more taxes or because the most ardent unionists will be digusted by a UI isn't grounds enough to dismiss the idea of a border poll. We voted for this in the good Friday agreement and its incumbent on all of us now to engage with a border poll and doing the ground work to make the border poll result in a UI.

All fair points however i take small issue with "we voted for the GFA" im 35 and i didnt get to vote for the GFA but that's semantics and we cant rerun these kind of things every few years so yes we as a country did vote for it.

However consider that many people alive today both north and south of the border never voted for or against it and i think the longer this drags on that more and more young people might feel annoyed about being held to something that has the potential to change their lives in such a massive way that they were never asked about and potentially feel no connection to due to it being from a very different point in time for both countries. Yes they can simply vote no in a border poll but there's also a viewpoint to be considered as to why they should even need to do that.

Looking at the simple majority border poll that the GFA mandates for after the fiasco that was Brexit i think its a flawed document. But unfortunately it is what we have.

[Deleted User]

VinLieger wrote: »

And remember they were only divided for 40 years and had 100% approval for reunification, Ireland has been divided for 100 now and Northern Ireland doesn't even get 50% approval when polled for reunification and never will get anywhere near 100. The ROI has about 60-70% approval but that number drops heavily once the difficult questions start being added on.

Not accurate to say 100% approval for reunification, there were actually cohorts of the population in both states opposed to the concept.

Also, aware this is stating the obvious but German reunification involved a western capitalist economy and political system merging with a soviet style planned economy and political system.

thebronze14

Jim2007 wrote: »

It makes no sense for the island to be forced in to a UI regardless of what the North wants if we don’t want it, especially since we’d be the ones to pay for it not just in monitory terms, but in sons and daughters lives lost in trying impose a peace on them. Anyone who thinks lives will not be lost in such an exercise is sadly mistaken.

The biggest threat to a UI is the delusion of SF and it’s supporters in thinking a positive outcome is possible in the near future.

If the people of the south don't want it I agree it shouldn't go ahead but it would be an awful abandoning of the people of this island I feel if we voted no down here

Nesta99

It'd be interesting to know what Unionists would think if polls and subsequent referenda suggested that people from the RoI would reject unification. Say London agrees that criteria are met to trigger a border poll and will be willing to stand by the results, in many ways a betrayal to NI Unionists, only for RoI to say no. Im sure they'd be happy that the the status quo would then remain, but human nature would also to not be so happy at being not wanted - by either side..

thebronze14 wrote: »

If the people of the south don't want it I agree it shouldn't go ahead but it would be an awful abandoning of the people of this island I feel if we voted no down here

We already abandoned them. It's about making it right IMO.
There is no price put on family IMO.

blanch152

Nesta99 wrote: »

It'd be interesting to know what Unionists would think if polls and subsequent referenda suggested that people from the RoI would reject unification. Say London agrees that criteria are met to trigger a border poll and will be willing to stand by the results, in many ways a betrayal to NI Unionists, only for RoI to say no. Im sure they'd be happy that the the status quo would then remain, but human nature would also to not be so happy at being not wanted - by either side..

There is a third choice - an independent Northern Ireland within the Commonwealth.

Northern Ireland is bigger both population-wise and economically than Cyprus, Latvia, Malta and Estonia, all full members of the EU. Luxembourg is smaller by population, but is wealthier. An independent Northern Ireland, member of both the EU and the Commonwealth, would have access automatically to regional EU funding that would not be available in a united Ireland context.