FrancieBrady wrote: » SF won't be proposing the motion jh79...a government that contains SF may. Your government (monitored by the referendum commission) will be proposing and supporting the motion. SF, FG, FF etc can say what they want as individual parties.
jh79 wrote: » If we get to that stage. The cost discussion has started and a lot more will be known in the next year. Opinion polls could leave it dead in the water when the cost becomes widely known.
BonnieSituation wrote: » So you keep saying. Who are you trying to convince?
jh79 wrote: » At only 22% support with increased taxes, don't need to.
BonnieSituation wrote: » Right. Are you sure about that? It's a serious case of "the lady doth protest too much".
jh79 wrote: » Look the opinion polls are not good from your perspective so ignoring the financial aspect is understandable but this is a discussion board.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Polls move. Before a Scottish poll was called, those in favour of an independent Scotland numbered in the low 30's and moved to almost winning the thing. Nobody is ignoring anything. Although some seem to ignore that majorities now in both jurisdictions want the formal campaigns to begin i.e. They want a border poll.
jh79 wrote: » Not my decision to make but the GFA clearly states "likely to pass" so there can be no complaints with the SoS not calling one.
BonnieSituation wrote: » No-one wants a poll now. There's almost a Beckettian quality to how Partitionists go on about a border poll: They don't want one because we haven't prepared for it while also telling us that we shouldn't prepare for it because no one wants it while also telling us that in fact it us, those in favour of a UI that actually fear it and don't want it.
BonnieSituation wrote: » And round and round we go... Sorry, who was it you were trying to convince there JH?
jh79 wrote: » Maybe I'm trying to get that 22% down even further!
BonnieSituation wrote: » Your capacity to keep up the self-delusion is wonderful I must say. However, I thought you were.pro-UI with a proper plan? Now it seems you're a partitionist at all costs. Almost like you've been discussing in bath faith. I am shocked and appalled. /s
jh79 wrote: » Yeah if it costs me nothing (not exactly zero, wouldn't be losing any sleep if it was a couple of %) then why would I care either way. Obviously, I'd be looking to see where the cost is being recovered from if not income tax. If a party was stupid enough to claim we could increase corporation tax instead I wouldn't be happy about it.
BonnieSituation wrote: » Grand. So just random hypothetical suppositions on policy is how you make your assessments in life? Seems haphazard.
BonnieSituation wrote: » I'm ignoring nothing. But you believe what you want anyway. I'm just loving the panic that partitionists seem to be constantly living under. But yet they tell us that reunification hasn't a hope... The assured attitude that you seem to think you're projecting would be more convincing if you didn't repeat the same few talking points every couple of days. As I said, you seem to be having a hard job convincing yourself of your own beliefs. As it was ever thus.
jh79 wrote: » Well the costs are based on empirical data so a bit more solid. As I've said previously to Francie, how it's paid for will change with each government. I might like one of the plans but I suppose I will have to factor in that a populist party might replace that plan in the future and feck it up. Jaysus, maybe my "no tax increases" stance is a bit too risky after all!
FileNotFound wrote: » There will be a pretty accurate business support expectation with regards to helping NI businesses switch to Euro, increase wages and meet standards. Then the general year on year deficit is pretty steady which will need plugging. Then the increase to social welfare in NI which will be covered by the RoI taxpayer. Just a few solid calculable changes that will mean an X% increase in taxation. Seems the hardcore republicans get very annoyed here when anyone highlights the obvious reasons why rational people may think before voting.
FrancieBrady wrote: » It is as likely to pass as the Scottish referendum was. Anyone can validate their opinion if they wish. The SoS, as decreed by the UK's highest court, has no onus on him/her to evidence why they made their decision. The SoS cannot be constrained.
blanch152 wrote: » I actually did an exercise a couple of years ago which compared child benefit rates in the South with those in the North and with the number of beneficiaries calculated the cost to the nearest tens of millions. It drew immediate outrage from the collective, and got worse when I pointed out the alternative was to cut Child Benefit in the South. These circles can't be squared without costing money.
jh79 wrote: » I didn't say the SoS couldn't do it just that he is sticking to the "likely to pass" caveat and because of that there can be no complaints.
FrancieBrady wrote: » I think you disappeared from that discussion when a whole new Island system was mooted. You basically had no answer to that, if memory serves. The belief that we are simply just going to subsume northern Ireland needs to be let go of.
FileNotFound wrote: » So we would need the Gov to develop a whole new system that may potentially inconvenience those relying on it in the Republic? I suppose that would want to be planned and available or critique before any UI. Might work in favour of voting Yes or No to UI in the Republic. Just seems there are more things that would need change the more we discuss and I bet we have barely scraped the surface. How would the existence of the SCC sound to many in NI?
FrancieBrady wrote: » We are not in a country where FF/FG have 86% of the vote anymore. Will people support change and reform/rebuild of institutions of the state that have failed the people? I think you would be surprised at the appetite for that. The SCC is an abnormality. We should be striving for a society where it is not needed.
briany wrote: » Being a part of a UI is unacceptable to the likes of Poots and Co. Full stop. So there's no point trying to sate them with the idea of remaining in the Commonwealth. The only solution with those people is to help them get a mortgage for a house in Arbroath.
Sadler Peak wrote: » It amazes me that Irish people will take the piss out of Poots, the DUP and their voters (quite righty imo) but will still vote for a united Ireland. Why bring fukwits like that into our country ? It's a NO from me.