United Ireland, what would you give up or not give up if it where a reality?

[armaghniac]

Im sorry you've lost me, what the hell has ethnic descent got to do with it

Since you don't live in Britain, I assumed that this is how you were British.

[delboy]

If you take out what the farmers got (money down the silage pit), it left about 15bn for infrastructure over a 35 year period.

Nice try, but that was still 20 billion that entered the irish economy.

[delboy]

Im sorry you've lost me, what the hell has ethnic descent got to do with it

Since you don't live in Britain, I assumed that this is how you were British.

No, but luckily living in the United Kingdom allows me to be a british citizen, its a simple enough concept im surprised you've never came across it before.

[armaghniac]

No, but luckily living in the United Kingdom allows me to be a british citizen.

Do you not think that there is something odd about a union that designates people from one part of the union, Northern Ireland, as citizens of the others part, Britain? And are you proud of such an unequal union?

Nice try, but that was still 20 billion that entered the irish economy.

Perhaps. But the Irish economy grew by almost this amount some years, reflecting a very high payback for the EU investment. The proportionally vastly larger British expenditure in NI has done little to increase NI growth.

[delboy]

No, but luckily living in the United Kingdom allows me to be a british citizen.

Do you not think that there is something odd about a union that designates people from one part of the union, Northern Ireland, as citizens of the others part, Britain? And are you proud of such an unequal union?

Nice try, but that was still 20 billion that entered the irish economy.

Perhaps. But the Irish economy grew by almost this amount some years, reflecting a very high payback for the EU investment. The proportionally vastly larger British expenditure in NI has done little to increase NI growth.

In short no, I don't see it as you do, I don't buy into your semantical argument. Im proud to be british, proud to be an ulsterman (as in the historical entity) and proud of my irish ancestory, sorry if this doesn't conform to some nice neat pigeon hole.

The republic certainly did make hay while the sun shone (and feathered a few nests at the same time it would seem). Then again though they didn't have the added problems of people bombing the shit out of the country destroying the infrastructure and ruining the confidence of the people, who nows what might have been.

[mylestheslasher]

No, but luckily living in the United Kingdom allows me to be a british citizen.

Do you not think that there is something odd about a union that designates people from one part of the union, Northern Ireland, as citizens of the others part, Britain? And are you proud of such an unequal union?

Nice try, but that was still 20 billion that entered the irish economy.

Perhaps. But the Irish economy grew by almost this amount some years, reflecting a very high payback for the EU investment. The proportionally vastly larger British expenditure in NI has done little to increase NI growth.

In short no, I don't see it as you do, I don't buy into your semantical argument. Im proud to be british, proud to be an ulsterman (as in the historical entity) and proud of my irish ancestory, sorry if this doesn't conform to some nice neat pigeon hole.

The republic certainly did make hay while the sun shone (and feathered a few nests at the same time it would seem). Then again though they didn't have the added problems of people bombing the shit out of the country destroying the infrastructure and ruining the confidence of the people, who nows what might have been.

The republic most certainly did. It had 800 years of it being raped and pillaged, the creation and sustaining of an uneducated peasant class. It was some achievement to reach from zero to where we are in less than 100 years of independence given where we started.

[delboy]

The republic most certainly did. It had 800 years of it being raped and pillaged, the creation and sustaining of an uneducated peasant class. It was some achievement to reach from zero to where we are in less than 100 years of independence given where we started.

I believe the peroid we are talking about 1973 onwards (in terms of the EU funding) had seen the republic free from what you talk about for quite some time. Northern Ireland however in 1973 had already had a few years of the troubles was in the midst of them and unfortunately had plenty more years of them to come.

[Lazer]

At the end of the day (IMO)as a NI resident i see no economic argument for leaving the UK.

There us one major economic arguement for leaving the UK and that is the current Corporation tax rates.
This is possibly the reason the north is so dependent on the British Governement handouts and public sector jobs.

If you ran a multinational company and had the choice between setting up in the South with a corpoartion tax rate of 12.5% or in the North with a Corporation Tax rate of 21% (minimum). Which would you choose?

[Main Street]

If you take out what the farmers got (money down the silage pit), it left about 15bn for infrastructure over a 35 year period.

Nice try, but that was still 20 billion that entered the irish economy.

Are you  interested in serious debate or just meandering your way around country lanes.
I bring it to your attention again why you brought up this point about the EU subvention and its relation to Irelands economic growth.
In summary, the Eu subventions had very little effect on the main established and accepted reasons for economic growth, namely the deregulated speculation bubble, corporation growth and the growth of Financial services.

[delboy]

If you take out what the farmers got (money down the silage pit), it left about 15bn for infrastructure over a 35 year period.

Nice try, but that was still 20 billion that entered the irish economy.

Are you  interested in serious debate or just meandering your way around country lanes.
I bring it to your attention again why you brought up this point about the EU subvention and its relation to Irelands economic growth.
In summary, the Eu subventions had very little effect on the main established and accepted reasons for economic growth, namely the deregulated speculation bubble, corporation growth and the growth of Financial services.

Its a completely valid point that the 20 billion that went to the farmers will have entered the broader irish economy in all sorts of differnent ways, 20 billion does not just disappear without trace, despite your flippant money down the silage pit comment.

The subvention that northern ireland received was the minimum required to keep NI at a comparable level with their mainland counterparts, an extra 35 Billion above and beyond that figure could well have resulted in vast improvements in infrastructure, the seeding of many businesses etc, especially if there hadn't been people bombing the shit out of the country at the same time.

So far i've seen one strong economic argument put forward and that was from lazer who mentioned corporation tax a few posts back. That said its just a single issue in what is the much broader context of the whole economy. 

[delboy]

60bn?
where did you get that figure from?

The department of foreign affairs website.

'Since membership in 1973, Ireland has received over €60 billion from the EU'

Rudd Gullit would understand the difference between  'Net' and 'Gross' 


http://www.finance.irlgov.ie/Viewtxt.asp?DocID=224&CatID=1&m=&StartDate=01+January+2002

Up to 2002
"Over the period since membership Ireland has received net transfers from the EU of some 35 billion euro".

add €6bn to €7bn to that and you get the total net figure up to 2007.

Gross figures are quoted by Government in pro Lisbon propaganda.

At the end of the day, the republic received 35 Billion (net) from the EU, the UK on the other hand is forking out 4 billion a year to the EU, thats net loss taken into account the abatement and EU funding back into the UK. In other words the republic was being indirectly subsidised by its closest competetitor (as well as the french and germans), not a bad position to find yourself in at all.

Whatever way you cut it the republic did rather handsomely out of the EU handout system. Getting back to the point though the EU handout was brought into the discussion in response to an earlier poster who was bemoaning the handout culture of NI, if the republic felt as strongly as the orginal poster about handouts they should have refused it.

[Main Street]

If you take out what the farmers got (money down the silage pit), it left about 15bn for infrastructure over a 35 year period.

Nice try, but that was still 20 billion that entered the irish economy.

Are you  interested in serious debate or just meandering your way around country lanes.
I bring it to your attention again why you brought up this point about the EU subvention and its relation to Irelands economic growth.
In summary, the Eu subventions had very little effect on the main established and accepted reasons for economic growth, namely the deregulated speculation bubble, corporation growth and the growth of Financial services.

Its a completely valid point that the 20 billion that went to the farmers will have entered the broader irish economy in all sorts of differnent ways, 20 billion does not just disappear without trace, despite your flippant money down the silage pit comment.

The subvention that northern ireland received was the minimum required to keep NI at a comparable level with their mainland counterparts, an extra 35 Billion above and beyond that figure could well have resulted in vast improvements in infrastructure, the seeding of many businesses etc, especially if there hadn't been people bombing the shit out of the country at the same time.

So far i've seen one strong economic argument put forward and that was from lazer who mentioned corporation tax a few posts back. That said its just a single issue in what is the much broader context of the whole economy.

More head in the sand avoidance of rational presentation.
I have outlined the reasons for you.
They are not my reasons or lazers or anybody elses.
They are the accepted reasons for the economic growth of the so called Celtic Tiger by most economists of all beliefs.

[delboy]

Whatever you say Main street, i bow down to, nay worship your superior intellect and submit that you and all the learned economists that you'd didn't bother to quote are unequivacally correct.

35 Billion is a mere trifle and is not to be viewed as some sort of handout/handup

The irish economy is the envy of the world and it will most likely become the dominant economy in the future pushing american and china into the shade.

The uk ecomony is a mere shadow of the powerhouse economy of the republic, the unionist population of NI should wipe the moat from their eye and crawl on hands and knees all the way from belfast to dublin, throw themselves upon the mercy of the beneficent republican government and beg to be allowed to become part of the irish dream. The land of affordable housing and 155 % employment.

Glad we sorted that one out 

[Lazer]

So far i've seen one strong economic argument put forward and that was from lazer who mentioned corporation tax a few posts back. That said its just a single issue in what is the much broader context of the whole economy.

I'll choose to take that as a compliment

[Aerlik]

I would be prepared to see the national flag changed.  An althernative?  Not sure yet.  In the '70s a Federation based on the old provinces and the German Federation was mooted.  Not a bad idea.  Autonomy for each area and a national parliament in Dublin.  However, the size of the country and the fact we have feck all resources is a major factor.