Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Republican Mandate

245678

Comments

  • #32
    harryr711
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 222 ✭✭harryr711


    bmaxi wrote: »
    You're free to parse it. It also doesn't allow for the numbers employed in the Public service in the north which would be dupicates of those in the Republic. Are we going to be faced once more with a bloated Public Service or are we going to eliminate one set and, at a stroke, reduce net tax take while increasing the burden on the welfare system? It's a no win situation for the Irish taxpayer.
    Absolutely the public sector needs to be looked at, how services can be integrated to avoid unnecessary duplication. Of course, just as when there are public sector cuts in any country the post-tax savings would be less than the cut. I wouldn't agree it's a no win situation though, there are many positive economic impacts to consider as well.


  • #33
    bmaxi
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,859 ✭✭✭bmaxi


    harryr711 wrote: »
    Absolutely the public sector needs to be looked at, how services can be integrated to avoid unnecessary duplication. Of course, just as when there are public sector cuts in any country the post-tax savings would be less than the cut. I wouldn't agree it's a no win situation though, there are many positive economic impacts to consider as well.

    What exactly are these many positive economic impacts?


  • #34
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    bmaxi wrote: »
    Recent figures put the annual running costs of NI as STG £20bn of which £9bn is contributed in taxes, leaving a shortfall of £11bn.( €13bn) to be funded from elsewhere. This is equivalent to a new bank bailout every five years and it's going to take Irish taxpayers a minimum of thirty years to pay off the one we have. I think we can live without that.


    As I thought, an unbalanced assessment of the costs to arrive at the conclusion you want.
    It will be a plus and minus game and I don't think anybody has come up with credible figures yet.


  • #35
    Painted Pony
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 209 ✭✭Painted Pony


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    It will be a plus and minus game.
    That's certainly true. A big plus for the British exchequer and an even bigger minus for the Irish one. ;)


  • #36
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    Painted Pony wrote: »
    That's certainly true. A big plus for the British exchequer and an even bigger minus for the Irish one. ;)

    Not necessarily. In the short term possibly minus but in the long term and correctly managed a huge plus.


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    harryr711
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 222 ✭✭harryr711


    bmaxi wrote: »
    What exactly are these many positive economic impacts?
    From my own point of view and that of the industry I work in, it would be far more attractive to invest into one larger market, without having to deal with two regulatory systems, two tax systems, two legal systems and two currencies. In addition (and perhaps crucially), two smaller markets means lower economies of scale which means lower investment and even lower economies of scale. As things stand there are far more attractive places to invest, and the money that could be invested will go elsewhere in the world.


  • #38
    junder
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,706 ✭✭✭junder


    harryr711 wrote: »
    From my own point of view and that of the industry I work in, it would be far more attractive to invest into one larger market, without having to deal with two regulatory systems, two tax systems, two legal systems and two currencies. In addition (and perhaps crucially), two smaller markets means lower economies of scale which means lower investment and even lower economies of scale. As things stand there are far more attractive places to invest, and the money that could be invested will go elsewhere in the world.

    Do you support Scottish independence?


  • #39
    tdv123
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,292 ✭✭✭tdv123


    Leftist wrote: »
    Yep. That and the lunatics putting up a plaque on the ardoyne road commemorating a man who killed 9 civilians including two children.

    Very confident the majority of the south would vote no to unification. We do not want that animal behaviour.

    Yeah because people in the South before independence never acted like animals.:rolleyes:


  • #40
    Hannibal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,819 ✭✭✭Hannibal


    some ridiculous point being made on the three previous pages.

    Anyway below is highlights of what Sinn Féin Economy spokesperson and MP for Newry/Armagh Conor Murphy said on the subject at the New Ireland conference in London this very weekend.


    “There is no doubt that a planned and agreed approach to economic development across the island of Ireland would have a positive impact on trade, investment, economic growth, workforce skills, productivity, innovation, research and development.
    “Even those politically opposed to reunification do not attempt to contradict this analysis but continue to use unverifiable and unsustainable arguments about dependence on subsistence from the British Exchequer and scare tactics about the ‘South’ not able to afford us.

    “The economic arguments against uniting Ireland being put by those opposed to Irish unity are full of misinformation. Not only is the British Exchequer refusing to provide verifiable figures for revenue generated in the North but proponents of the union with Britain produce figures that they claim a new national government in Ireland would have to replace as though absolutely no revenue is generated in the North at all.

    “A new national Government in Ireland would not automatically have to replace the £10billion subvention that it is claimed the Northern executive receives from the Westminster government.

    “If you scrutinise these figures - which we have been doing for quite a period of time - the £10 billion actually contains up of £6 billion that you wouldn’t be required to spend in an indigenous all-Ireland economy.

    “For instance we wouldn’t be helping fund the exploits of the British army, Imperial museums in England, Scotland and Wales, umpteen members of royalty, their entourages and their dozens of residences and the other myriad of areas that are simply to do with the British establishment.

    “And this doesn’t take account of the savings that would be realised through the elimination of the duplication of every tier and aspect of government on the island of Ireland. It does not make economic sense to have an island nation of 6.5 million people split into two separate tax, currency and legal systems and two separate economies with split populations of 4.6m and 1.9m people in competition with each other.

    Mr Murphy concluded: “A new stronger economy arising from the integration of both existing states into a new, agreed Ireland can deliver sustainable economic prosperity that the present status quo is incapable of delivering. There is a better way for the people of Ireland and it is through taking control of our own sovereign economic and political destiny. I challenge those opposed to Irish Unity to enter the debate based on full disclosure of accurate economic figures and not on the basis of scaremongering and the misrepresentation of revenue streams.“


  • #41
    bmaxi
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,859 ✭✭✭bmaxi


    harryr711 wrote: »
    From my own point of view and that of the industry I work in, it would be far more attractive to invest into one larger market, without having to deal with two regulatory systems, two tax systems, two legal systems and two currencies. In addition (and perhaps crucially), two smaller markets means lower economies of scalei which means lower investment and even lower economies of scale. As things stand there are far more attractive places to invest, and the money that could be invested will go elsewhere in the world.

    Would the investment produce a net 24 billion euro annually to the Irish exchequer? That's the break even figure.


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    wingsof daun
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 273 ✭✭wingsof daun


    RandomName2 wrote: »

    Dissident Republicans don't want it either, for different reasons admittedly from most people, on the grounds that they hate the Dail, politics and peace.

    Sinn Fein would like unification on the basis that it would give them more power - but on the other hand would remove a lot of their reasons for existing in the first place.

    I don't believe anyone hates peace unless they are an Islamic extremist. People might believe in armed struggle against an enemy, but they don't want themselves or their families hurt.
    I think most people in Ireland hate politics... it is corrupt as hell here.
    SF didn't exist to remove British occupation in Ireland, the IRA did.

    The OP concerns are legitamite, we will see history repeating itself, the border poll will eventually decide on a united 32-county Ireland, as is allowed within the GF agreement. A united Ireland will be voted for some time in the future. The British will appease the loyalists like when we voted for Home rule, and will supply them with new arms to keep Ulster British.


  • #43
    harryr711
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 222 ✭✭harryr711


    bmaxi wrote: »
    Would the investment produce a net 24 billion euro annually to the Irish exchequer? That's the break even figure.
    Come on, it's a bit disingenuous to first state that the current deficit would have to come from elsewhere and now you're pointing at the entire budget figure. The industry that I work in would certainly make a dent in tackling a deficit, whatever figure that turns out to be (as I've said, it's not enough just to look at the current headline figure). My industry is a small part of a much larger industry sector, and there is very real potential there for investment from other parts of the sector too.


  • #44
    Leftist
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,230 ✭✭✭Leftist


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    So, given that others 'need it explained' you must have an idea of what it would cost. Have you figures?



    Have you ever had a walk around London and looked at the commemorative statues?

    Did those people plant a bomb in a take away specifically to kill a bunch of civilians? The fact that you even suggest a comparison is enough to show that you agree with this plaque. Absolutely disgusting.
    harryr711 wrote: »
    Oddly enough, it's people with attitudes like yours, those who wish to wash their hands of the 6 counties, who do more than anyone else in driving the growth of anti-GFA republicanism

    Yes of course it is.


  • #45
    bmaxi
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,859 ✭✭✭bmaxi


    harryr711 wrote: »
    Come on, it's a bit disingenuous to first state that the current deficit would have to come from elsewhere and now you're pointing at the entire budget figure. The industry that I work in would certainly make a dent in tackling a deficit, whatever figure that turns out to be (as I've said, it's not enough just to look at the current headline figure). My industry is a small part of a much larger industry sector, and there is very real potential there for investment from other parts of the sector too.

    Of course the whole budget figure would have to be met, it's the running cost not the deficit that counts, the tax figure could only be met if the original finance is there. What you expect us to believe is that there are investors out there with potential access to a market of 400 million people, who are deterred by not having direct access to 1.5 million.


  • #46
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    Leftist wrote: »
    Did those people plant a bomb in a take away specifically to kill a bunch of civilians? The fact that you even suggest a comparison is enough to show that you agree with this plaque. Absolutely disgusting.


    Dresden and Colonge? World War 2 carpet bombing on the orders of Churchill, the killing and burning to death of civillians with the intent of causing terror.

    This is what happens in every war, there is no such thing as a clean moral war. It is nasty filthy stuff and will go out of control unless those vested with the responsibility, do what they are supposed to do.

    Churchill is plaqued and statuted all over Britain btw. I'm sure that is fairly 'disgusting' to people from Dresden and Colonge not to mention those affected by what he got up to elsewhere.


  • #47
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,851 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    harryr711 wrote: »
    From my own point of view and that of the industry I work in, it would be far more attractive to invest into one larger market, without having to deal with two regulatory systems, two tax systems, two legal systems and two currencies. In addition (and perhaps crucially), two smaller markets means lower economies of scale which means lower investment and even lower economies of scale. As things stand there are far more attractive places to invest, and the money that could be invested will go elsewhere in the world.
    That's a compelling argument for uniting all European nations into a single country. I presume you'd be in favour of such a proposal?


  • #48
    harryr711
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 222 ✭✭harryr711


    bmaxi wrote: »
    Of course the whole budget figure would have to be met, it's the running cost not the deficit that counts, the tax figure could only be met if the original finance is there. What you expect us to believe is that there are investors out there with potential access to a market of 400 million people, who are deterred by not having direct access to 1.5 million.
    Nobody said the whole budget figure doesn't have to be met, but obviously every business isn't going to shut it's doors overnight. The crucial number is what the true deficit would be.

    Investors are deterred from investing in Ireland because of the existence of the two separate markets. In my industry, Britain is an attractive market, yet the cost of doing business in the six counties is 15%-40% higher than in Britain before grappling with different legals and logistics. Ireland could be a very attractive place for us to invest if there was a single larger market, single regulator, tax system etc. which would allow us to achieve a better economy of scale and good returns.


  • #49
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    harryr711 wrote: »
    Nobody said the whole budget figure doesn't have to be met, but obviously every business isn't going to shut it's doors overnight. The crucial number is what the true deficit would be.

    Investors are deterred from investing in Ireland because of the existence of the two separate markets. In my industry, Britain is an attractive market, yet the cost of doing business in the six counties is 15%-40% higher than in Britain before grappling with different legals and logistics. Ireland could be a very attractive place for us to invest if there was a single larger market, single regulator, tax system etc. which would allow us to achieve a better economy of scale and good returns.

    You have also got to factor in that Britain cannot and will not be allowed to just walk away. They would have a responsibility to see to it that the transition is economically smooth.
    It is what they want ultimately and they will be proactive in ensuring it works imo, along with the the rest of the world. That will be a considerable aid to success.
    The last thing the British need is an unstable Ireland, their attitude since the GFA is definitely leaning towards a UI as being the longterm solution, they will become the biggest persuaders imo.


  • #50
    Crooked Jack
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,678 ✭✭✭Crooked Jack


    bmaxi wrote: »
    You're free to parse it. It also doesn't allow for the numbers employed in the Public service in the north which would be dupicates of those in the Republic. Are we going to be faced once more with a bloated Public Service or are we going to eliminate one set and, at a stroke, reduce net tax take while increasing the burden on the welfare system? It's a no win situation for the Irish taxpayer.

    Youre making the assumption that reunification would be announced on Monday and happen on Tuesday. The public sector in the north needs to be cut down to an appropriate size, this could be done over a number of years through recruitment stall, retirements and voluntary redundancies. This has to happen anyway, the north can continue to run a public sector this size indefinitely. Far from being a draw back, completely restructuring the Irish public service, north and south, would be one of the advantages of reunification.


  • #51
    Crooked Jack
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,678 ✭✭✭Crooked Jack


    Leftist wrote: »
    Did those people plant a bomb in a take away specifically to kill a bunch of civilians? The fact that you even suggest a comparison is enough to show that you agree with this plaque. Absolutely disgusting.

    You're either deliberately lying or being willfully ignorant. Either way, what happened in Frizzle's chip shop was horrendous and tragic enough without your hyperbole, I cant understand the mentality that thinks something like that isnt horrendous enough and feels the need to lie to make it appear even worse. There's almost a bloodlust element to that type of mentality.


  • Advertisement
  • #52
    Crooked Jack
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,678 ✭✭✭Crooked Jack


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    That's a compelling argument for uniting all European nations into a single country. I presume you'd be in favour of such a proposal?

    Why would you presume that, the two issues are hardly comparable. A united Ireland makes sense, a united one-nation Europe would be unwieldy and probably impossible to govern given the differences between dozens of countries.
    This post and a previous one also highlights one of the dafter tactics of the anti-Republican crowd. Unable to base your argument or challenge an opposing argument on the actual issues at hand you start waffling about Scotland or Europe. It's a distraction tactic and nothing else.


  • #53
    Leftist
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,230 ✭✭✭Leftist


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    Dresden and Colonge? World War 2 carpet bombing on the orders of Churchill, the killing and burning to death of civillians with the intent of causing terror.

    This is what happens in every war, there is no such thing as a clean moral war. It is nasty filthy stuff and will go out of control unless those vested with the responsibility, do what they are supposed to do.

    Churchill is plaqued and statuted all over Britain btw. I'm sure that is fairly 'disgusting' to people from Dresden and Colonge not to mention those affected by what he got up to elsewhere.

    you're actually comparing the allies assualt on Nazi Germany in WW2 to a terrorist to puts a bomb in a chippers and kills a bunch of civilians including kids?

    get a grip. Or an education. Embarrassing.


  • #54
    Leftist
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,230 ✭✭✭Leftist


    Crooked Jack wrote: »
    You're either deliberately lying or being willfully ignorant. Either way, what happened in Frizzle's chip shop was horrendous and tragic enough without your hyperbole, I cant understand the mentality that thinks something like that isnt horrendous enough and feels the need to lie to make it appear even worse. There's almost a bloodlust element to that type of mentality.

    are you for real?

    what the **** are you talking about? he put a bomb in a chippers that was full of civilians, and you can't grasp the idea that they might have been targets?

    I am delighted you are northern irish and not irish. Your attitude is disgusting.


  • #55
    BuilderPlumber
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,378 ✭✭✭BuilderPlumber


    Did independence solve our issues? Not really. The UK is very similar a country to Ireland today and the situation in both is in no way akin to 1920. Should Ireland have remained part of the UK to this day, I'd predict few would want to leave it somehow!

    In Northern Ireland, I think the majority of the people want to remain as they are. Theirs is a hard-earned peace and the last 15-20 years has seen things come a long way. Unification with the rest of Ireland or other such moves would plunge things back to 1993's infamous trick or treat era. Loyalists would never accept it and the IRA would want to rule it themselves. What you'd have then is the Irish army in there and the Irish government calling on the British government and army for help too. You could have some very messy joint British/Irish control of it to keep terrorists at bay.


  • #56
    Crooked Jack
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,678 ✭✭✭Crooked Jack


    Leftist wrote: »
    are you for real?

    what the **** are you talking about? he put a bomb in a chippers that was full of civilians, and you can't grasp the idea that they might have been targets?

    I suggest you read up on the subject a bit. The target was a UDA meeting that was held every week in the room above the chip shop. The bomb had an 11 second fuse, enough time to go in, tell every to clear out, light it, but not give those in the meeting enough time to escape. The bomb detonated prematurely. How do you know this? It killed one of the bomber for fuck sake, you think his intention was to kill himself and all.
    Even the husband of one of the victims acknowledges this.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-24609436
    The other bomber, Sean Kelly, told the crowd he was sorry for the loss of life. Alan McBride, whose wife died in the blast, said his apology was hollow.

    "He (Kelly) went out that day, I have no doubt he was trying to murder UDA men upstairs in that shop, so I'm not suggesting for a minute my wife was the intended target, but she wasn't even considered, her life wasn't even considered that it was worth anything," Mr McBride said.

    Now, before you go off another wee tangent that totally misses the subject, this does not amount to a justification of what happened. As i've said several times, it was horrendous. Im responding to your suggestion that it was a deliberate attack on civilians
    Leftist wrote: »
    I am delighted you are northern irish and not irish. Your attitude is disgusting.

    Yawn


  • #57
    Crooked Jack
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,678 ✭✭✭Crooked Jack


    BuilderPlumber wrote: »
    Did independence solve our issues? Not really. The UK is very similar a country to Ireland today and the situation in both is in no way akin to 1920. Should Ireland have remained part of the UK to this day, I'd predict few would want to leave it somehow!

    In Northern Ireland, I think the majority of the people want to remain as they are. Theirs is a hard-earned peace and the last 15-20 years has seen things come a long way. Unification with the rest of Ireland or other such moves would plunge things back to 1993's infamous trick or treat era. Loyalists would never accept it and the IRA would want to rule it themselves. What you'd have then is the Irish army in there and the Irish government calling on the British government and army for help too. You could have some very messy joint British/Irish control of it to keep terrorists at bay.

    Again, this just betrays blind ignorance towards what is actually meant by a united Ireland. Bottom line is it will happen when people vote for it, nobody is suggesting otherwise, so are you actually suggesting that the democratic will of the people (or what passes for democracy in the north) be ignored...again?


  • #58
    bmaxi
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,859 ✭✭✭bmaxi


    harryr711 wrote: »
    Nobody said the whole budget figure doesn't have to be met, but obviously every business isn't going to shut it's doors overnight. The crucial number is what the true deficit would be.

    Investors are deterred from investing in Ireland because of the existence of the two separate markets. In my industry, Britain is an attractive market, yet the cost of doing business in the six counties is 15%-40% higher than in Britain before grappling with different legals and logistics. Ireland could be a very attractive place for us to invest if there was a single larger market, single regulator, tax system etc. which would allow us to achieve a better economy of scale and good returns.

    Which investors and what market? The single largest customer of Ireland is the UK, so it doesn't seem to be a deterrent to anybody else. I can't grasp what you are getting at, every country in the EU has different logistics and legal systems. Are you really trying to tell me that a 32 county Ireland would make it easier to access the UK market than a 26 county? That just doesn't make logical sense, why would access be easier in that scenario?


  • #59
    junder
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,706 ✭✭✭junder


    Crooked Jack wrote: »
    Why would you presume that, the two issues are hardly comparable. A united Ireland makes sense, a united one-nation Europe would be unwieldy and probably impossible to govern given the differences between dozens of countries.
    This post and a previous one also highlights one of the dafter tactics of the anti-Republican crowd. Unable to base your argument or challenge an opposing argument on the actual issues at hand you start waffling about Scotland or Europe. It's a distraction tactic and nothing else.

    Scotland is very pertinent to this conversation, I find that most republicans support Scottish independence which in actual terms means the creation of two different economic entity's on a small island, and yet turn around and tell us in the context of Northern Ireland that the existence of two sepperate economic entity's on a small island makes no sence.


  • #60
    Leftist
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,230 ✭✭✭Leftist


    Crooked Jack wrote: »
    I suggest you read up on the subject a bit. The target was a UDA meeting that was held every week in the room above the chip shop. The bomb had an 11 second fuse, enough time to go in, tell every to clear out, light it, but not give those in the meeting enough time to escape. The bomb detonated prematurely. How do you know this? It killed one of the bomber for fuck sake, you think his intention was to kill himself and all.
    Even the husband of one of the victims acknowledges this.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-24609436



    Now, before you go off another wee tangent that totally misses the subject, this does not amount to a justification of what happened. As i've said several times, it was horrendous. Im responding to your suggestion that it was a deliberate attack on civilians



    Yawn

    excusing a terrorist attack that killed civilians.

    You'll be doing omagh next. ''they parked in the wrong place''

    like I said, glad we are not the same nationality.


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    Paulie Gualtieri
    Closed Accounts Posts: 420 ✭✭Paulie Gualtieri


    I believe Sinn fein are gaining more support as people are disalusioned with the current government , and can't see any other partys being any different so its not that there's a new rise of republicanism its more the fact of give someone else a turn at the wheel because they can't do any worse than what's there. it might be nice to see a party at power out for the interests of Irish people and not just themselves . but that probably won't happen with people living in the past and not looking to the future.


Advertisement