Author Topic: A United Ireland. Opening up the discussion.  (Read 158295 times)

Franko

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2010
    • View Profile
Re: A United Ireland. Opening up the discussion.
« Reply #180 on: November 24, 2015, 07:50:29 PM »
Oh I know how it works.  My post quoted both your post and easytiger's.

I only referred to you directly in the second part of the post.

Just admit you didn't read it so as everyone can move on from this.

Your post quoted everything.  ;D ;D

This isn't too hard. I responded to easy tiger's post, with my post.

Your post then respond to mine. But we are supposed to know, without any indication that you also responded to one other post, and only one, contained in the list of quoted posts, without telling us which one it was.

Even better you left the bold sentences intact, so it looked initially that you might be referring to them, but as none of them came from me, that didn't make sense either.

Yes it did.  Including easytiger's post.  It took a while but we got there in the end.

The indication was that I said "both" statements.  Since you had only made one, logic would dictate that there may be another somewhere out there in the ether.  And in fact, just to make it easy for you, I left it in the very next line above your statement.  If that wasn't enough, they were the only posts in the thread I quoted since my previous post. You didn't read it and gave a smartarse response based on that.  But as it was in fact you who had been remiss, you are now left looking a little silly.  Oopsie.

What exactly are you claiming that I didn't read?

Stop, you're making it worse.

I thought you wouldn't be able to answer that without looking foolish.  ;D

And you know what thought did...  ;)

Yea. He thought an opinion was a fact.  ;D

Or that putting a smiley face at the end of a sentence made it funny...

muppet

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 25089
    • View Profile
Re: A United Ireland. Opening up the discussion.
« Reply #181 on: November 24, 2015, 08:12:09 PM »
Oh I know how it works.  My post quoted both your post and easytiger's.

I only referred to you directly in the second part of the post.

Just admit you didn't read it so as everyone can move on from this.

Your post quoted everything.  ;D ;D

This isn't too hard. I responded to easy tiger's post, with my post.

Your post then respond to mine. But we are supposed to know, without any indication that you also responded to one other post, and only one, contained in the list of quoted posts, without telling us which one it was.

Even better you left the bold sentences intact, so it looked initially that you might be referring to them, but as none of them came from me, that didn't make sense either.

Yes it did.  Including easytiger's post.  It took a while but we got there in the end.

The indication was that I said "both" statements.  Since you had only made one, logic would dictate that there may be another somewhere out there in the ether.  And in fact, just to make it easy for you, I left it in the very next line above your statement.  If that wasn't enough, they were the only posts in the thread I quoted since my previous post. You didn't read it and gave a smartarse response based on that.  But as it was in fact you who had been remiss, you are now left looking a little silly.  Oopsie.

What exactly are you claiming that I didn't read?

Stop, you're making it worse.

I thought you wouldn't be able to answer that without looking foolish.  ;D

And you know what thought did...  ;)

Yea. He thought an opinion was a fact.  ;D

Or that putting a smiley face at the end of a sentence made it funny...

Like the last bit in bold?  :D
MWWSI 2017

Franko

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2010
    • View Profile
Re: A United Ireland. Opening up the discussion.
« Reply #182 on: November 24, 2015, 08:26:38 PM »
Oh I know how it works.  My post quoted both your post and easytiger's.

I only referred to you directly in the second part of the post.

Just admit you didn't read it so as everyone can move on from this.

Your post quoted everything.  ;D ;D

This isn't too hard. I responded to easy tiger's post, with my post.

Your post then respond to mine. But we are supposed to know, without any indication that you also responded to one other post, and only one, contained in the list of quoted posts, without telling us which one it was.

Even better you left the bold sentences intact, so it looked initially that you might be referring to them, but as none of them came from me, that didn't make sense either.

Yes it did.  Including easytiger's post.  It took a while but we got there in the end.

The indication was that I said "both" statements.  Since you had only made one, logic would dictate that there may be another somewhere out there in the ether.  And in fact, just to make it easy for you, I left it in the very next line above your statement.  If that wasn't enough, they were the only posts in the thread I quoted since my previous post. You didn't read it and gave a smartarse response based on that.  But as it was in fact you who had been remiss, you are now left looking a little silly.  Oopsie.

What exactly are you claiming that I didn't read?

Stop, you're making it worse.

I thought you wouldn't be able to answer that without looking foolish.  ;D

And you know what thought did...  ;)

Yea. He thought an opinion was a fact.  ;D

Or that putting a smiley face at the end of a sentence made it funny...

Like the last bit in bold?  :D

No, not like that at all actually.

muppet

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 25089
    • View Profile
Re: A United Ireland. Opening up the discussion.
« Reply #183 on: November 24, 2015, 08:42:30 PM »

No, not like that at all actually.

Why is that? Are they not both smileys? Or is your comment: 'And you know what thought did...' not meant to be funny?

I know I heard it before, probably around 6th class.
MWWSI 2017

Franko

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2010
    • View Profile
Re: A United Ireland. Opening up the discussion.
« Reply #184 on: November 24, 2015, 09:12:58 PM »

No, not like that at all actually.

Why is that? Are they not both smileys? Or is your comment: 'And you know what thought did...' not meant to be funny?

I know I heard it before, probably around 6th class.

I think the term is emoticon actually.  It's a bit of a play on words but the bottom line is that they are used to convey a range of emotions.  You'll notice that, as I've already pointed out, the one I used is quite different to your 5 (on this page, of this thread).

You seem to use these quite regularly across most threads.  What's the cue for dropping one in?  Is it when you think you've landed a proverbial killer blow on one of your adversaries?  Or do you just think that what you're saying is just really funny and you'd like to tell everyone else to find it funny too?  It's just that I don't see too many others joining in on the laughter where your posts are concerned?  Maybe you could enlighten me?

muppet

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 25089
    • View Profile
Re: A United Ireland. Opening up the discussion.
« Reply #185 on: November 24, 2015, 09:37:52 PM »

No, not like that at all actually.

Why is that? Are they not both smileys? Or is your comment: 'And you know what thought did...' not meant to be funny?

I know I heard it before, probably around 6th class.

 ;D It's a bit of a play on words but the bottom line is that they are used to convey a range of emotions.  You'll notice that, as I've already pointed out, the one I used is quite different to your 5 (on this page, of this thread).

You seem to use these quite regularly across most threads.  What's the cue for dropping one in?  Is it when you think you've landed a proverbial killer blow on one of your adversaries?  Or do you just think that what you're saying is just really funny and you'd like to tell everyone else to find it funny too?  It's just that I don't see too many others joining in on the laughter where your posts are concerned?  Maybe you could enlighten me?

Brilliant, you finally found Google.

And now we have a fact or two.

However, YOU used the word Smiley, as you can see below. You were correct, as smiley is also a perfectly acceptable word. The problem is I suspect you thought a smiley only referred to something with a smile. But at least this time you checked your facts and found that they were both smileys. Which of course didn't suit the hole you had just dug.

Hence your jump to the word 'emoticon'. But they are both also emoticons so that word changes nothing.

Quote
Or that putting a smiley face at the end of a sentence made it funny..

You see, they are both 'smiley' faces. And you finally figured that out.  ;D
MWWSI 2017

Franko

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2010
    • View Profile
Re: A United Ireland. Opening up the discussion.
« Reply #186 on: November 24, 2015, 10:14:06 PM »

No, not like that at all actually.

Why is that? Are they not both smileys? Or is your comment: 'And you know what thought did...' not meant to be funny?

I know I heard it before, probably around 6th class.

 ;D It's a bit of a play on words but the bottom line is that they are used to convey a range of emotions.  You'll notice that, as I've already pointed out, the one I used is quite different to your 5 (on this page, of this thread).

You seem to use these quite regularly across most threads.  What's the cue for dropping one in?  Is it when you think you've landed a proverbial killer blow on one of your adversaries?  Or do you just think that what you're saying is just really funny and you'd like to tell everyone else to find it funny too?  It's just that I don't see too many others joining in on the laughter where your posts are concerned?  Maybe you could enlighten me?

Brilliant, you finally found Google.

And now we have a fact or two.

However, YOU used the word Smiley, as you can see below. You were correct, as smiley is also a perfectly acceptable word. The problem is I suspect you thought a smiley only referred to something with a smile. But at least this time you checked your facts and found that they were both smileys. Which of course didn't suit the hole you had just dug.

Hence your jump to the word 'emoticon'. But they are both also emoticons so that word changes nothing.

Quote
Or that putting a smiley face at the end of a sentence made it funny..

You see, they are both 'smiley' faces. And you finally figured that out.  ;D

A wonderful lesson.  Unfortunately, the predominant feature of the one I used was a wink (not a w**k, calm down, step away from the Kleenex), which makes it very different to the one you so regularly employ.  This being the obvious case, your wonderful lesson is rendered bullshit.  I'm sorry that you wasted your time, when realisation of this basic truth would have saved you the bother.

Now, back to those questions I was asking - how do the rest of us know when to add in one of these faces?  Being such a general authority on everything, I'm sure you'll be fit to give us a few answers...

smelmoth

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1176
    • View Profile
Re: A United Ireland. Opening up the discussion.
« Reply #187 on: November 24, 2015, 10:24:55 PM »
Surprised no one has picked-up on this, though I don't suppose it fits with the standard that we can't afford it:

http://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/unification-of-ireland-could-bring-in-36-5bn-in-eight-years-1.2435505

Unification of Ireland ‘could bring in €36.5bn in eight years’


New study claims unification could lead to a significant boost in GDP for the island

Political and economic unification of Ireland could potentially deliver a €35.6 billion boost in GDP for the island in the first eight years, according to a US study of reunification by two prominent academics.

The economic research, launched in New York, suggests economic unification could possibly deliver a more sizeable boost in economic output and incomes in the North, with a predicted 4-7.5 per cent long-term improvement in GDP.

The study, which involved a number of researchers led by Dr Kurt Hübner, director of the Institute for European Studies at the University of British Columbia, also highlighted that the Republic would see a more modest boost of between 0.7 to 1.2 per cent in GDP per capita.

Economic models
The Modelling Irish Unification study, launched at the Harvard Club in Manhattan, examines three unification scenarios, using economic models developed by Dr Renger Herman van Nieuwkoop, a professor of economics at ETH Zürich.

These models assume five key scenarios which would play out as a result of unification.

First was the harmonisation of the tax systems across the island with the North adopting the tax rates and regulations of the Republic, which the researchers said would encourage more foreign direct investment in Northern Ireland.

The second assumption was that unification would reduce trade barriers and cut transport and currency transaction costs between the North, the Republic and other euro zone countries.

The model also presumed Northern Ireland would adopt the euro, a move which it said would in the short term boost economic output because of the strength of sterling.

Productivity
The fourth scenario predicted that unification would deliver productivity improvements – researchers pointed out that there is currently a sizeable productivity gap between the North and the Republic which they say is mainly to blame in the difference between the industrial structures of the two economies.

Finally, the model also looked at current fiscal transfers and noted that Northern Ireland’s current fiscal deficit – more than £9 billion – would have to be financed by the Republic.

However, it also notes that unification would create just one government structure and associated savings could in the long term be reinvested in the private economy or public projects.

According to Dr Hübner, the results show that the Northern Ireland economy would enjoy significant long-term improvements from unification.

“While these effects occur in a static global economic environment, under ideal political conditions, they underline the potential of political and economic unification when it is supported by smart economic policy.”

Thu, Nov 19, 2015, 01:00

The article and the study do precisely zero to challenge the my view that a united ireland is not currently viable

Fixed that for ye
Aye but seriously the article doesn't even try to argue that a united ireland is viable.

What the study "tries" to do is shed some light on the viability or otherwise of Irish unity, and it seems to be a resounding yes.

Resounding??

Talk me through the downsides that it examines? Anything is viable if you only look at the positives, assume they will all fall nicely into place and ignore any negatives, underperformances or even simple things like costs and practical realities by brushing them under the carpet with throw-away phrases like an assumption of "a static global economic environment, under ideal political conditions"

muppet

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 25089
    • View Profile
Re: A United Ireland. Opening up the discussion.
« Reply #188 on: November 24, 2015, 11:05:51 PM »

No, not like that at all actually.

Why is that? Are they not both smileys? Or is your comment: 'And you know what thought did...' not meant to be funny?

I know I heard it before, probably around 6th class.

 ;D It's a bit of a play on words but the bottom line is that they are used to convey a range of emotions.  You'll notice that, as I've already pointed out, the one I used is quite different to your 5 (on this page, of this thread).

You seem to use these quite regularly across most threads.  What's the cue for dropping one in?  Is it when you think you've landed a proverbial killer blow on one of your adversaries?  Or do you just think that what you're saying is just really funny and you'd like to tell everyone else to find it funny too?  It's just that I don't see too many others joining in on the laughter where your posts are concerned?  Maybe you could enlighten me?

Brilliant, you finally found Google.

And now we have a fact or two.

However, YOU used the word Smiley, as you can see below. You were correct, as smiley is also a perfectly acceptable word. The problem is I suspect you thought a smiley only referred to something with a smile. But at least this time you checked your facts and found that they were both smileys. Which of course didn't suit the hole you had just dug.

Hence your jump to the word 'emoticon'. But they are both also emoticons so that word changes nothing.

Quote
Or that putting a smiley face at the end of a sentence made it funny..

You see, they are both 'smiley' faces. And you finally figured that out.  ;D

A wonderful lesson.  Unfortunately, the predominant feature of the one I used was a wink (not a w**k, calm down, step away from the Kleenex), which makes it very different to the one you so regularly employ.  This being the obvious case, your wonderful lesson is rendered bullshit.  I'm sorry that you wasted your time, when realisation of this basic truth would have saved you the bother.

Now, back to those questions I was asking - how do the rest of us know when to add in one of these faces?  Being such a general authority on everything, I'm sure you'll be fit to give us a few answers...

Are you are seriously arguing that a wink smiley is acceptable after a smart comment, but a smiling smiley isn't?

The mind boggles. But then you don't know the difference between an opinion and a fact, so maybe the mind is very boggled.
MWWSI 2017

armaghniac

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12777
    • View Profile
Re: A United Ireland. Opening up the discussion.
« Reply #189 on: November 24, 2015, 11:19:37 PM »
What the study "tries" to do is shed some light on the viability or otherwise of Irish unity, and it seems to be a resounding yes.

Resounding??

Talk me through the downsides that it examines? Anything is viable if you only look at the positives, assume they will all fall nicely into place and ignore any negatives, underperformances or even simple things like costs and practical realities by brushing them under the carpet with throw-away phrases like an assumption of "a static global economic environment, under ideal political conditions"

It does not provide a resounding yes, and however much some of us would like it to there is no point in pretending that it does.

There is a good discussion on SluggerOToole about this.

This does not provide a resounding yes, but it starts to scope out the issues. It is incumbent on people who purport to be nationalists to move things so that the next report shows a smaller gap and so on. As long as SF see it as their business to crank up public expenditure in NI then there can never be a UI.
If at first you don't succeed, then goto Plan B

Franko

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2010
    • View Profile
Re: A United Ireland. Opening up the discussion.
« Reply #190 on: November 24, 2015, 11:19:52 PM »

No, not like that at all actually.

Why is that? Are they not both smileys? Or is your comment: 'And you know what thought did...' not meant to be funny?

I know I heard it before, probably around 6th class.

 ;D It's a bit of a play on words but the bottom line is that they are used to convey a range of emotions.  You'll notice that, as I've already pointed out, the one I used is quite different to your 5 (on this page, of this thread).

You seem to use these quite regularly across most threads.  What's the cue for dropping one in?  Is it when you think you've landed a proverbial killer blow on one of your adversaries?  Or do you just think that what you're saying is just really funny and you'd like to tell everyone else to find it funny too?  It's just that I don't see too many others joining in on the laughter where your posts are concerned?  Maybe you could enlighten me?

Brilliant, you finally found Google.

And now we have a fact or two.

However, YOU used the word Smiley, as you can see below. You were correct, as smiley is also a perfectly acceptable word. The problem is I suspect you thought a smiley only referred to something with a smile. But at least this time you checked your facts and found that they were both smileys. Which of course didn't suit the hole you had just dug.

Hence your jump to the word 'emoticon'. But they are both also emoticons so that word changes nothing.

Quote
Or that putting a smiley face at the end of a sentence made it funny..

You see, they are both 'smiley' faces. And you finally figured that out.  ;D

A wonderful lesson.  Unfortunately, the predominant feature of the one I used was a wink (not a w**k, calm down, step away from the Kleenex), which makes it very different to the one you so regularly employ.  This being the obvious case, your wonderful lesson is rendered bullshit.  I'm sorry that you wasted your time, when realisation of this basic truth would have saved you the bother.

Now, back to those questions I was asking - how do the rest of us know when to add in one of these faces?  Being such a general authority on everything, I'm sure you'll be fit to give us a few answers...

Are you are seriously arguing that a wink smiley is acceptable after a smart comment, but a smiling smiley isn't?

The mind boggles. But then you don't know the difference between an opinion and a fact, so maybe the mind is very boggled.

Ah right, it's after you make a comment that you feel is 'smart'.  Good stuff.

Are you seriously arguing that all those things at the top have the same connotations no matter which one you use?

Actually, you know what. Please don't bother answering that.  I genuinely can't be bothered any more.  You seem (as I've noticed myself and as other posters have both experienced and pointed out) to have an insatiable desire to get the last word and will plumb any depths of pedantry to achieve this.  I, on the other hand, have reached my limit and don't have the time or inclination to continue this shite any longer.  No doubt you'll have some pithy reply followed by one of these little faces to retort with but ya know what, I'm cool with that. If it makes you go to bed feeling better about yourself, knock yourself out.

muppet

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 25089
    • View Profile
Re: A United Ireland. Opening up the discussion.
« Reply #191 on: November 24, 2015, 11:30:50 PM »
Jesus you have some opinion of yourself.

YOU are the one who started the comments about the smiley faces. I have no problem with them, just with people who use them and hypocritically complain about others using them.

But then this little subtext captures everything about your arguments.

YOU can say what you want, use what every device you want, smileys, presentation of opinions as 'facts', but for the rest of us - normal rules must apply.

And the thing is, it is so easy to pull your position apart.

Because it is dogma. Some one else's 90 year old dogma at that. So you will get easily offended, and upset at smileys because you can't defend your position from more than a few probing points. And thus we end up running into a meaningless cut-de-sac. Because you need to get away from any scrutiny of your original position. It is the same with Fearon and a few others. So when you speak for others and my 'insatiable desire to get the last word', what you mean is my insatiable desire to expose the shallowness of the dogmatists and their quicksand positions.

The smileys show you up perfectly in this regard.  :D
« Last Edit: November 25, 2015, 12:05:33 AM by muppet »
MWWSI 2017

Rossfan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15199
  • Ballaghaderreen CO ROSCOMMON
    • View Profile
    • Roscommon County Board official website
Re: A United Ireland. Opening up the discussion.
« Reply #192 on: November 25, 2015, 12:04:14 AM »
Muppet, time you stopped answering th'eejit. Hopefully he'll go away then and let us adults have our discussion.
1 BIG CUP and 1 Cupeen so far....

laoislad

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10956
    • View Profile
Re: A United Ireland. Opening up the discussion.
« Reply #193 on: November 25, 2015, 10:12:14 AM »
Can the mods gat that Franko eejit off the scene till we have a serious adult discussion about the future please ??

I don't believe I'm stopping you discussing anything.  But yes, by all means, run and tell the teacher.
Just remember you won't get one after 3pm as they'll all be gone home.
Joe Mcdonagh Champions 2019

Applesisapples

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3809
    • View Profile
Re: A United Ireland. Opening up the discussion.
« Reply #194 on: November 25, 2015, 01:20:26 PM »
Aye but seriously the article doesn't even try to argue that a united ireland is viable.

But, as threads in here show, the present debate on the matter is incredibly fact free and immature and any attempt at organising the issues into some sort of rational form can only help.

It would particularly help if the biggest so called "nationalist" party in NI realised that they need to increase private economic activity and reduce public expenditure and waste if there is ever to be a UI. Ireland won't be united this year or next, building work is needed and this must be done.
Exactly!