Why Ireland s will have to be united economically ?

[Hardy]

Good point! But I'd be afraid of my life to start a second thread.

[ardmhachaabu]

The thread has addressed only the economic argument so far, with the exception of one or two declarations in favour of unity whatever the economic cost. Whether their arguments are right or wrong, the majority seem to consider that the economic outcome would be negative. I'd be interested to hear an airing of the present-day case for a united Ireland beyond the economic considerations., especially from those who are for it at any price.

I would suggest that those who talk down the economics do so out of their own particular ideology and not out of cold facts.  The EU and US would pay money hand over fist for a United Ireland as it would show that conflict resolution processes work...

[armaghniac]

Well if an overall United Ireland has the quality of debate in this one, where the discussion seems to be about the rate of motor tax and petrol, then it won't shed much light on the subject.

[magpie seanie]

I think thats a fair point by Ardmhachaabu. Any reunification would doubtless be assisted by the US and the UK wouldn't be able to withdraw funds completely all at once. They'd be happy financially to be getting rid so would probably be will to pump money in for a while after they leave.

So overall I would see some negative economic aspects in the short to medium term though probably not dire. Long term, if things stayed peaceful it should benefit everyone economically.

[Billys Boots]

I would suggest that those who talk down the economics do so out of their own particular ideology and not out of cold facts.

I would suggest that those who talk up the sociology do so out of their own particular ideology and not out of cold facts.

[nifan]

Lets see how Ireland and the UK handle the economic crisis we are in before surmising who good or bad the economics of a united Ireland would be!

[ardmhachaabu]

I would suggest that those who talk down the economics do so out of their own particular ideology and not out of cold facts.

I would suggest that those who talk up the sociology do so out of their own particular ideology and not out of cold facts.

Sociology? 

Nope, just political facts.  I suggest you engaging brain before quoting people verbatim and changing the odd word to suit yourself.

[Lar Naparka]

Well if an overall United Ireland has the quality of debate in this one, where the discussion seems to be about the rate of motor tax and petrol, then it won't shed much light on the subject.

I suggest that such issues would figure high on most people's agendas.
In hard economic times people are more concerned about providing a livelihood for themselves and their families than they are about what happened in the past.
I've heard from a number of loyalist sources, who are reasonably pragmatic folks, that they see a united Ireland on the cards inside of fifty years.
I'm using 50 as a ballpark figure here; at least two out of five would feel it will come about a lot sooner than that.
The Brits are finding it hard enough to make out for themselves and no longer require military bases in the region. My unionist contacts tell me they know very well that the vast majority of the British public don't feel any sort of solidarity or kinship with them. (Many don't even know they exist or give a hoot that they do, but that's another story.)
The reasoning here is that from an economic point of view, England would be glad to get rid of the whole sorry mess that is Norn Iron and shell out enough money in the short term to bring a united island about. 
Most people down south aren't too happy at being saddled with the likes of , say, Neil Anderson or his equivalents on the other side of the political fence either.
But there is one overriding factor that is pushing all elements on the island together and that is the need to present a united front where it comes to attracting overseas investment.
The IDA and its counterpart up north have been canvassing together on this one for many years and their respective political bosses seem to think the same way. Money talks and multinational concerns don't take too kindly to possible political unrest or cross-border tariffs either.
When things start to pick up in the north again, it will be found that many prime sites in Belfast city centre and other towns around the north will be in the hands of foreign investors who bought them up for a song at the height of the troubles.
Even here in Dublin, without sectarian strife, foreign interests already own most of the city centre.
I think herein is the reason why Ireland will have to unite, whether any of us wants this or not.

[Pangurban]

It says something about the value system currently prevailing in the south, when so much of the emphasis on this discussion centres on second homes, wages and taxes. The appalling neglect of the Education and Health systems rates hardly a mention. The society that fails to properly cater for its young,old and sick, needs to take a long hard look at itself. The lack of investment, particularly in schools, during the years of plenty, is a national scandal. For a FF government, who who preached materialism and fostered greed ,to now appeal to peoples patriotic instincts and call for restraint and sacrifice, iis absolute hypocricsy.

[Pangurban]

Sorry, above posted in wrong thread, meant for Budget thread

[Zapatista]

The thread has addressed only the economic argument so far, with the exception of one or two declarations in favour of unity whatever the economic cost. Whether their arguments are right or wrong, the majority seem to consider that the economic outcome would be negative. I'd be interested to hear an airing of the present-day case for a united Ireland beyond the economic considerations., especially from those who are for it at any price.

I don't think there are to many of them around Hardy. There are many willing to pay a very high price though. I suppose it is equal to those willing to charge a very high price. Then again it could even be less, as the price whatever it is, has yet to be paid. You could argue that the price of partition has been paid though.

[SuperMac]

Well thanks for the replies lads, though I hoped more light could be shed on the long term benefits of a greater economic strength due to a greater population etc. The stupidity of having a border and two currencies on what should basically be a single economic unit. I know some will say you anwering your own question, but it's just vague observations and notions I heard down the years, apart from stating such, I've nothing to back it up. Maybe I'd better stick to arguing the historical aspects.