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
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

How long before Irish reunification?

12357…335

Comments

  • #122
    Stop moaning ffs
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,850 ✭✭✭Stop moaning ffs


    10-15 years
    Jupiter Mulligan wrote: »
    Seemingly, the recent 'success' of Alliance was due, to a large extent, to voters from both sides of the sectarian divide voting tactically in constituencies where they knew that their preferred candidate couldn't win.

    That’s brilliant to hear. Especially when it comes to people using their vote and finding out the bet way to do it. Healthy democracy at work.


  • #123
    Jupiter Mulligan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 525 ✭✭✭Jupiter Mulligan


    30-40 years
    Stop moaning ffs wrote: »
    That’s brilliant to hear. Especially when it comes to people using their vote and finding out the bet way to do it. Healthy democracy at work.

    It's grand in council (and European) elections, but it's hard to see it working as well in the (carefully gerrymandered) NIA or Westminster constituencies.

    Although hopefully I'm wrong.


  • #124
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 66,774 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    facehugger99 wrote: »
    Meaningful = a poll that includes the cost implications.

    I believe you've been provided with the relevant links previously Francie.

    No...nobody has properly costed it yet. It cannot be until we know what it actually costs to run.

    And despite the quoting of anything from 8 billion to 12 billion (depending on how anti the notion of a UI you are, apparently) nobody knows the full breakdown. We simply don't know how much of that nebulous figure would transfer across.

    I believe this has been demonstrated to you before.


  • #125
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭[Deleted User]


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    I think it is out of Westminster's hands now. That is the gamechanger.

    You are looking at the slow break-up of the UK, with it being even Stevens on who will sever first - Scotland or northern Ireland.

    Westminster is powerless to stop it.

    while unthinkable, it most certainly is in Westminster's hands and they can stop it.


  • #126
    Stop moaning ffs
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,850 ✭✭✭Stop moaning ffs


    10-15 years
    With all available evidence in a post brexit scenario I’d say Westminster would only be too happy to be rid of NI but they’ll fight tooth and nail to stop Scottish independence.


  • Advertisement
  • #127
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 66,774 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Stop moaning ffs wrote: »
    With all available evidence in a post brexit scenario I’d say Westminster would only be too happy to be rid of NI but they’ll fight tooth and nail to stop Scottish independence.

    Of course some will fight tooth and nail, but the point is they won't be able to stop it if the people decide.


  • #128
    facehugger99
    Registered Users Posts: 7,201 ✭✭✭facehugger99


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    No...nobody has properly costed it yet. It cannot be until we know what it actually costs to run.

    And despite the quoting of anything from 8 billion to 12 billion (depending on how anti the notion of a UI you are, apparently) nobody knows the full breakdown. We simply don't know how much of that nebulous figure would transfer across.

    I believe this has been demonstrated to you before.

    Meh.

    We know it will cost several billions per annum - that's enough to scupper the idea for the vast majority of the Republic's voters.


  • #129
    Stop moaning ffs
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,850 ✭✭✭Stop moaning ffs


    10-15 years
    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Of course some will fight tooth and nail, but the point is they won't be able to stop it if the people decide.

    If Boris fails to deliver brexit (likely) he might well be the last PM of the United Kingdom. And having failed at brexit will never allow Scotland independence.
    The Scots have to ask for permission from him and Parliament to run that referendum remember. No way will he allow it.

    Sickened and somehow laughing at Cameron’s ‘stronger together’ nonsense during the last independence referendum.

    The hypocrisy.


  • #130
    Dyr
    Registered Users Posts: 23,246 ✭✭✭✭Dyr


    ancapailldorcha wrote: »
    The Tories don't give a toss for the North. Ditto for Labour, especially with Corbyn or someone like him set to become PM in the medium term. Less so now that Arlene has stuck her oar in with Brexit. It's a deficit for the UK that numerous PM's including Thatcher, Wilson and Churchill have wanted to be rid of. They just need an acceptable pretense to sell to the public for dumping it that can't be applied to Scotland.

    Aside from the fact, that the Tories might not care for the North but they care quite a bit about the Union, the same question applies: How do the Tories "dump" the North without the consent of the North?

    Simple stuff lads.


  • #131
    RobMc59
    Registered Users Posts: 4,831 ✭✭✭RobMc59


    10-15 years
    Bambi wrote: »
    Aside from the fact, that the Tories might not care for the North but they care quite a bit about the Union, the same question applies: How do the Tories "dump" the North without the consent of the North?

    Simple stuff lads.

    The idea of a UI is good on paper but unless someone is willing to finance it I can't see much appetite for even higher taxes in Ireland-the EU has it's own issues with the rise of right wing political groups and I can't see the US willing to shoulder the financial commitment but who knows-certainly not in the next decade imo.


  • Advertisement
  • #132
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,015 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    10-15 years
    facehugger99 wrote: »
    Meh.

    We know it will cost several billions per annum - that's enough to scupper the idea for the vast majority of the Republic's voters.

    Don't underestimate the apathy of the Irish voter. With Irish Water, e-voting machines, bond holder bailouts, the children's hospital and broadband plan they are use to getting rode and seeing money wasted, it's par for the course with FG and FF.
    This is for a United Ireland, slight difference. What will Phil Hogan threaten us again, with what crappy services, tough to get a house, record breaking numbers of children homeless? :rolleyes:
    TBF, you can be assured of one thing, only one section of Irish society ever suffers and that goes for Brexit, that's the working middle to low income tax payer. In short at least we'd get a United Ireland for our troubles, no pun intended.

    Also do you think no FF'er or FG'er would want the legacy of being the man/woman responsible for uniting Ireland? They'd be crawling on top of each other for the chance because that person will be an Irish legend who's family will sit in the Dail for generations.
    Leo would even get himself a little pair of Aran socks ffs...


  • #133
    facehugger99
    Registered Users Posts: 7,201 ✭✭✭facehugger99


    Matt Barrett wrote: »
    Also do you think no FF'er or FG'er would want the legacy of being the man/woman responsible for uniting Ireland? They'd be crawling on top of each other for the chance because that person will be an Irish legend who's family will sit in the Dail for generations.
    Leo would even get himself a little pair of Aran socks ffs...

    Thankfully such a decision won't come down to an individual politician.


  • #134
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,015 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    10-15 years
    facehugger99 wrote: »
    Thankfully such a decision won't come down to an individual politician.

    The glory will be sought by individual politicians, all of them, combined.
    It would also be the highest voter turn out ever.


  • #135
    ancapailldorcha
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 37,058 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    Bambi wrote: »
    Aside from the fact, that the Tories might not care for the North but they care quite a bit about the Union, the same question applies: How do the Tories "dump" the North without the consent of the North?

    Simple stuff lads.

    The North has no capacity to force the rest of the UK to do anything as far as I can see.

    Conservatives profess to care about the union but that's all show as far as I'm concerned. If they did, they would postpone Brexit until consensus can be reached. Brexit happened because England voted for it. That makes Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales satellite states even if the latter voted for it. The union is dead in all but name.

    The ERG like keeping the DUP around so they can hide under Arlene's skirt and duck responsibility. Beyond that, they'd be happy to kick NI into touch.

    We sat again for an hour and a half discussing maps and figures and always getting back to that most damnable creation of the perverted ingenuity of man - the County of Tyrone.

    H. H. Asquith



  • #136
    Berserker
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,046 ✭✭✭Berserker


    facehugger99 wrote: »
    We know it will cost several billions per annum - that's enough to scupper the idea for the vast majority of the Republic's voters.

    £26bn to be exact. The BBC had a programme about the state finances in NI and where the money goes recently. £26bn will keep NI running, as is, every year.
    RobMc59 wrote: »
    The idea of a UI is good on paper but unless someone is willing to finance it I can't see much appetite for even higher taxes in Ireland-the EU has it's own issues with the rise of right wing political groups and I can't see the US willing to shoulder the financial commitment but who knows-certainly not in the next decade imo.

    Why is it good on paper?


  • #137
    Greyfox
    Registered Users Posts: 3,720 ✭✭✭Greyfox


    Matt Barrett wrote: »
    It would also be the highest voter turn out ever.

    Nonsense, a UI as it currently stands is fairytale stuff. people have better things to be doing than voting for fairytales.


  • #138
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 66,774 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Berserker wrote: »
    £26bn to be exact. The BBC had a programme about the state finances in NI and where the money goes recently. £26bn will keep NI running, as is, every year.



    Why is it good on paper?

    What the, to be perfectly honest, utter economic basket costs currently is not the point. The point will be, what it will cost to run it as part of a UI and how long it will be until it is contributing as other regions contribute and how much better off/worse we are as a bigger country.
    A significant part of that will be not how much better off/worse off we are economically but socially.
    The people will be asked to invest. And I don't think for one second they will turn the idea down and neither do Unionists - they will do their level best to stop it going to a vote.


  • #139
    markodaly
    Registered Users Posts: 13,919 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    In short at least we'd get a United Ireland for our troubles, no pun intended.


    Yes because when all else fails, we can fall back on primitive nationalism.


  • #140
    RobMc59
    Registered Users Posts: 4,831 ✭✭✭RobMc59


    10-15 years
    Berserker wrote: »
    £26bn to be exact. The BBC had a programme about the state finances in NI and where the money goes recently. £26bn will keep NI running, as is, every year.



    Why is it good on paper?
    In theory it sounds a good idea and looks good on a political parties manifesto as does the idea of brexit to a fairly large number of Britons but in the cold light of day they're both expensive undertakings which will probably financially destroy the UK in the case of Brexit and a UI is financially unobtainable for Ireland at this time.


  • #141
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,015 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    10-15 years
    Greyfox wrote: »
    Nonsense, a UI as it currently stands is fairytale stuff. people have better things to be doing than voting for fairytales.

    The idea was put forward that any vote for it mightn't get much traction. Of course we've more urgent issues, the way we do business ensures it. There'll be something to blame the next crash on after we pass Brexit and the upcoming one.
    Simply put the tax payer always gets milked either way. Or do you think Leo would tackle the myriad crises but for, I dunno, let's say Brexit?
    markodaly wrote: »
    Yes because when all else fails, we can fall back on primitive nationalism.

    No, we'll have something to show other than a mystery hole where millions, (billions?) go with every official elected or otherwise going 'Nobody told me' with a shrug of the shoulders.


  • Advertisement
  • #142
    markodaly
    Registered Users Posts: 13,919 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    Matt Barrett wrote: »

    No, we'll have something to show other than a mystery hole where millions, (billions?) go with every official elected or otherwise going 'Nobody told me' with a shrug of the shoulders.

    Which is what exactly?

    The rest of the post is just jibberish, can't make head nor tails of it.


  • #143
    gibgodsman
    Registered Users Posts: 563 ✭✭✭gibgodsman


    It will never happen, there is just far to much to change to make it work. They are 2 very different countries, as much as we don't like to admit it


  • #144
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,015 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    10-15 years
    markodaly wrote: »
    Which is what exactly?

    The rest of the post is just jibberish, can't make head nor tails of it.

    A united Ireland chief.

    Tax payer will be rode either way. Telling the taxpayer a UI will be costly will mean little IMO.


  • #145
    Strumms
    Registered Users Posts: 24,767 ✭✭✭✭Strumms


    It is a case that the English, Scottish and Welch, for the most part wouldn’t care if it sunk into the sea tomorrow. A lot of people down here also would be a bit cautious of the attitudes and actions of certain cross section of the community up there.

    The ‘War’ might be over but there is still in ingrained attitude as to what people feel they may be ‘entitled to’. Unionists and loyalists would be up in arms with a United Ireland. You could throw money at them and indeed security down AND up the length and breadth of the country but for a long time you’ll just be unable to flick that switch in their head. You could have a Union Jack side by side a tricolor at each and every government/state building the length and breadth of the country. The only question from them will be why is there a tri color there..

    The ordinary Unionist is just like you and me, with a different belief system when it comes to politics but the likes of the hardcore , DUP, politicized and other ‘hardcore’ loyalists it’s hate. They are not wired like others.


  • #146
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,015 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    10-15 years
    gibgodsman wrote: »
    It will never happen, there is just far to much to change to make it work. They are 2 very different countries, as much as we don't like to admit it

    N.I. isn't a country and some of it's counties are already in the republic.


  • #147
    irish_goat
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 5,760 Mod ✭✭✭✭irish_goat


    10-15 years
    The north is a basket case because London doesn't care about it. The cost of keeping it running will drastically decrease after reunification as we'll become a normal, functioning economy. On top of that, the UK will still continue to subsidise here as it's in their longterm financial interest to be rid of us and the EU will throw plenty of money our way, particularly in the context of Brexit.


  • #148
    facehugger99
    Registered Users Posts: 7,201 ✭✭✭facehugger99


    irish_goat wrote: »
    The north is a basket case because London doesn't care about it. The cost of keeping it running will drastically decrease after reunification as we'll become a normal, functioning economy. On top of that, the UK will still continue to subsidise here as it's in their longterm financial interest to be rid of us and the EU will throw plenty of money our way, particularly in the context of Brexit.

    Will the unicorns fart rainbows too?


  • #149
    irish_goat
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 5,760 Mod ✭✭✭✭irish_goat


    10-15 years
    Berserker wrote: »
    Why is it good on paper?

    https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/united-irish-economy-could-deliver-boost-of-36bn-388959.html


  • #150
    Berserker
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,046 ✭✭✭Berserker


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    A significant part of that will be not how much better off/worse off we are economically but socially.

    Please elaborate. What social benefits would it bring and how are they going to help people with their daily lives?
    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    The people will be asked to invest. And I don't think for one second they will turn the idea down and neither do Unionists - they will do their level best to stop it going to a vote.

    The people in the RoI have been asked to invest in a few things over the last few years and they haven't warmed to the idea.
    RobMc59 wrote: »
    In theory it sounds a good idea and looks good on a political parties manifesto as does the idea of brexit to a fairly large number of Britons but in the cold light of day they're both expensive undertakings which will probably financially destroy the UK in the case of Brexit and a UI is financially unobtainable for Ireland at this time.

    It's perfect for a political party manifesto for sure. The RoI is booming at the moment, if we look at the state coffers and a UI is financially unobtainable at this time. Taking these two factors into account, it's very hard to imagine when it would be viable. The RoI has a few generations worth of debt to pay off before it could every consider a UI.


  • Advertisement
  • #151
    Greyfox
    Registered Users Posts: 3,720 ✭✭✭Greyfox


    Matt Barrett wrote: »
    A united Ireland chief.

    Tax payer will be rode either way. Telling the taxpayer a UI will be costly will mean little IMO.

    It will matter if people think there just voting for a romantic feeling. What do Irish people actually gain from a UI other then a romantic feeling?


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement