Arlene's bigotry shines through

[WT4E]

It's all of the above.

Brexit brings with it many unknowns and Arlene has in her gift (or maybe wee Nige is the brains of the outfit) to make the wee 6 a gateway between both markets post March 2019.
If she does that and NI becomes economically interesting for global firms to have a foot in both camps then the United Ireland debate will be off the table, the small n nationalists won't be interested.

A hard brexit possibly could spell economic disaster for NI as it's already a basket case within the UK with a good bit of investment coming from the EU. With that cut off then Westminster governments may spend their time fire fighting in the more lucrative home counties to appease their voting base marginalising NI even further.
Then small n nationalists and small u unionists may have their heads turned towards Dublin as somewhere else to put bread on their tables.

Very true - Thats why I believe that Arlene is now up there with Wolfe Tone, Pearse, McGuinness as one of the major driving forces behind getting rid of the British - Long may she reign (or not reign as is the case)

[haranguerer]

'How much it will cost' is a popular refrain, but its short-sighted and misses the point. Over the longer term, a single entity Ireland will be a greater economic unit than that of the current two parts, and everyone will reap the benefits of that. It seems particularly strange that those in the North, currently an economic basket case (and path to which can be directly apportioned to partition), would query whether it will be economically worth it - it would appear to be caution of a dangerous level to settle for what you have when the evidence points clearly to how much better you and your descendants could be doing.

Of course most people will just worry about the short term, and if they're told they'll be £100 worse off next year they won't go for it, but even that won't be the case. The economic benefits will become clearer as the situation develops; it will be in the interests of pretty much all those involved for it to happen, so the UK, Ireland, EU, US, will all pump money in to ensure there is the right vote - in other words a unification dividend will sort out the short term grumblers, and the greater economic power of a single Irish unit will deliver in the longer term 

[Applesisapples]

'How much it will cost' is a popular refrain, but its short-sighted and misses the point. Over the longer term, a single entity Ireland will be a greater economic unit than that of the current two parts, and everyone will reap the benefits of that. It seems particularly strange that those in the North, currently an economic basket case (and path to which can be directly apportioned to partition), would query whether it will be economically worth it - it would appear to be caution of a dangerous level to settle for what you have when the evidence points clearly to how much better you and your descendants could be doing.

Of course most people will just worry about the short term, and if they're told they'll be £100 worse off next year they won't go for it, but even that won't be the case. The economic benefits will become clearer as the situation develops; it will be in the interests of pretty much all those involved for it to happen, so the UK, Ireland, EU, US, will all pump money in to ensure there is the right vote - in other words a unification dividend will sort out the short term grumblers, and the greater economic power of a single Irish unit will deliver in the longer term

As a man of a certain age, I need to know that any upward shift in the cost of living which is inevitable will be met in an lift in my income and that my healthcare is guaranteed, I won't get affordable VHI/BUPA.

[haranguerer]

And that will probably be the most common position. I didn't mean to be disparaging by referring to 'short-term grumblers' - people have to look after themselves and ensure they have the best future they can - but I believe those grumbles will be well alleviated by the time a vote comes round, i.e. there will be money available so as to give immediate, rather than merely aspirational economic benefits

[Jim_Murphy_74]

I have written it here before that with demographic trends all onus is on unionist parties to broaden their appeal.  The Shinners need to not drop too many balls (loaves on head etc..) and time will do their job.   Whereas for unionist parties to even delay this they need to get nationalists, with a small n, to buy into the status quo.   However despite some efforts from UUP, each party seems to look over their party to next extreme.  UUP must play to the gallery not to lose (even more) ground to DUP who in turn are watching the TUV.  However, this effort to be top dog within their tribe seems to be at the expense of the unionist cause as a whole.

The second trend I thought would happen was a broader "post nationalism" for Europe as a whole.  However, Brexit has nailed that one (and the DUP have jumped on that bandwagon with gusto).  In fact with the rise of anti-immigration in Eastern Europe nationalism seems to be back in vogue all around.

It's fascinating to watch, especially because there must some within political unionism that can see this but still the car hurtles towards the cliff.  I say that as someone who 5 years ago would have seen no prospect of any major change in the North's political situation in my lifetime but now think change is likely.

/Jim.

[Avondhu star]

'How much it will cost' is a popular refrain, but its short-sighted and misses the point. Over the longer term, a single entity Ireland will be a greater economic unit than that of the current two parts, and everyone will reap the benefits of that. It seems particularly strange that those in the North, currently an economic basket case (and path to which can be directly apportioned to partition), would query whether it will be economically worth it - it would appear to be caution of a dangerous level to settle for what you have when the evidence points clearly to how much better you and your descendants could be doing.

Of course most people will just worry about the short term, and if they're told they'll be £100 worse off next year they won't go for it, but even that won't be the case. The economic benefits will become clearer as the situation develops; it will be in the interests of pretty much all those involved for it to happen, so the UK, Ireland, EU, US, will all pump money in to ensure there is the right vote - in other words a unification dividend will sort out the short term grumblers, and the greater economic power of a single Irish unit will deliver in the longer term

If the U.S.give anything substantial they will want something in return.
Hank in the Rust belt won't want to be subsidising us fornothing

[johnnycool]

'How much it will cost' is a popular refrain, but its short-sighted and misses the point. Over the longer term, a single entity Ireland will be a greater economic unit than that of the current two parts, and everyone will reap the benefits of that. It seems particularly strange that those in the North, currently an economic basket case (and path to which can be directly apportioned to partition), would query whether it will be economically worth it - it would appear to be caution of a dangerous level to settle for what you have when the evidence points clearly to how much better you and your descendants could be doing.

Of course most people will just worry about the short term, and if they're told they'll be £100 worse off next year they won't go for it, but even that won't be the case. The economic benefits will become clearer as the situation develops; it will be in the interests of pretty much all those involved for it to happen, so the UK, Ireland, EU, US, will all pump money in to ensure there is the right vote - in other words a unification dividend will sort out the short term grumblers, and the greater economic power of a single Irish unit will deliver in the longer term

If the U.S.give anything substantial they will want something in return.
Hank in the Rust belt won't want to be subsidising us fornothing

We'll send his bleached chicken and steroid ridden beef to Cork....

[haranguerer]

Or let their military use Shannon airport...

[trailer]

And that will probably be the most common position. I didn't mean to be disparaging by referring to 'short-term grumblers' - people have to look after themselves and ensure they have the best future they can - but I believe those grumbles will be well alleviated by the time a vote comes round, i.e. there will be money available so as to give immediate, rather than merely aspirational economic benefits

You've made some very good points haranguerer.
There are issues in the South that many Northerners would want to see tackled. Housing and homelessness being a major one. The South needs to tackle these effectively. Reunification will throw up lots of hurdles expected and unexpected. Being able to demonstrate an ability to tackle them would be key.

[Snapchap]

It's us in the 26 need to be guaranteed we won't be impoverished by subsidising the 6 Cos basket case.

Does anybody in the south have principles or does absolutely everything come down to money?

[Orior]

It's us in the 26 need to be guaranteed we won't be impoverished by subsidising the 6 Cos basket case.

Good question! Well?

Does anybody in the south have principles or does absolutely everything come down to money?

[Rossfan]

It's us in the 26 need to be guaranteed we won't be impoverished by subsidising the 6 Cos basket case.

Does anybody in the south have principles or does absolutely everything come down to money?

Responding to SF supporter Apples who said he won't be voting for a UI if it hurts his pocket.
But sure why not turn it into another "Free State"  bashing rant.
To the chap worried about housing g and homeless -when the first vote comes around that will be long in the past.

[BennyCake]

50+1 would be very much sustainable. As you point out yourself, a small winning majority doesn't mean a significant minority vehemently opposed. There aren't many referenda, no matter how populist the issue, which go to 70 or 80% support.

Obviously its a necessary principle that a vision be created which unionists as well as nationalists can buy into, but its very dangerous to go along with this talk that there should be a different criteria for re-unification than that already agreed. In fact, the only thing that is likely to get unionists to engage with creating such a vision is the reality of the situation; giving them a get-out clause to focus on instead isn't helpful for anyone.

But it is not only unionists you have to convince.

That's incorrect. There are plenty on the nationalist side who will forget their nationalism if they are hit in the picket

Is that you, Officer Crabtree? 

[6th sam]

It's us in the 26 need to be guaranteed we won't be impoverished by subsidising the 6 Cos basket case.

Does anybody in the south have principles or does absolutely everything come down to money?

Responding to SF supporter Apples who said he won't be voting for a UI if it hurts his pocket.
But sure why not turn it into another "Free State"  bashing rant.
To the chap worried about housing g and homeless -when the first vote comes around that will be long in the past.

Fair point, even As a northerner , I'm with u on this one.
Some northern nationalists could benefit  from reflecting on their antagonism towards the "free state". We're unlikely to get unionists on board for a UI, if we can't even treat fellow nationalists south of the border with respect. We should reflect on reasons why many southern nationalists resent us. We could start by admitting that a fair percentage of northern nationalists have been in favour of partition right from the start!
The  key to a UI , is promoting a respect and equality agenda , which would harness at least 85% support throughout the island and would secure international including UK backing and subsidisation.
Civil war and troubles politics though remembered will become irrelevant by comparison to equality and the economy.
I laugh at the short termism of so-called nationalists from the North who won't countenance a UI if it costs them a single penny. Do they not see that NI is economically a backwater, and the status quo will result in serious financial hardship in the medium and even short term

[Avondhu star]

And that will probably be the most common position. I didn't mean to be disparaging by referring to 'short-term grumblers' - people have to look after themselves and ensure they have the best future they can - but I believe those grumbles will be well alleviated by the time a vote comes round, i.e. there will be money available so as to give immediate, rather than merely aspirational economic benefits

You've made some very good points haranguerer.
There are issues in the South that many Northerners would want to see tackled. Housing and homelessness being a major one. The South needs to tackle these effectively. Reunification will throw up lots of hurdles expected and unexpected. Being able to demonstrate an ability to tackle them would be key.

And that's why it isn't only Sinn Fein needs to welcome unionists. All pro unity parties should be making the case