Why join FF?

silverharp

Apologies for picking on FF but given that they have been in power for most of past 2 decades, why do people feel the need to get out there and go door to door asking people to vote for candidate X. I remember at the last election someone coming to my door asking me to vote FF and I basically said that I am very disappointed with how the country in run, he muttered something about the Celtic Tiger and he left it at that.

Now was he deluded that FF actually created or sustained the “Celtic Tiger” beyond what any other Party would have done in the round, or as probably a lot of people believe that the Celtic Tiger was a function of the fact that we speak English, we are in the EU, we had demographics on our side, there was a globalisation and credit expansion policy by US business and Gov., and a tax policy born out of the economic mismanagement of the 1980’s.

To my mind there is very little in this state that the gov could call best practice or you could show to impress a bunch of French German or Swedish officials

So either the FF gov is running the country according to plan, in which case they are doing a pi** poor job or they are incapable of controlling the various organs of state in which case they are a redundant party

So again I ask unless you’re a TD why be a member of FF? being cynical I would say maybe seeing it as an opportunity for some type of personal advancement, a deluded sense that you can make a difference, or just enjoy the crack of it all and would join another party if they were the main party or in the same way that people randomly follow particular English soccer clubs. I can understand why people join the smaller parties but otherwise I think there are better uses of ones time.
BTW, I can understand why people vote FF as they maybe generally happy with the status quo or see FF as the least worst alternative, I just don’t “get” people actively investing their time and energy in the organisation.

Dirk Gently

Yeah that always puzzled me too. Don't understand how young people canvass for them. I remember last time a young girl about my age (25) came posting FF leaflets through the letter box. I opened the door to her and she just said there’s an election on this week and maybe you might vote FF, handed me the one page leaflet and walked away. I was in shock and actually start laughing. No attempt made by her to convince me. The whole strange incident lasted about 5 seconds.

I often think that anyone active for FF at election time is either doing it because it’s a family tradition or because they want to advance themselves by associating with FF. What young person would actually look at them and say yes, this is a radical party who are going to make real changes, I'm going to support FF. I know I must be wrong but all I can think of is a family link. Can’t see FF attracting a new generation of young people who where not already linked to the party through family members. Even the blueshirts put up a better fight at the door and I don’t rate them much either.

I remember doing some campaigning for a local independent last time out and we were literally 15 minutes talking to every household while FF had 100's of houses done in 15 minutes. Although the independent got battered and FF managed to cling on to their seat so can't really slag them off that much. I am puzzled by FF canvassers and also by the people who vote for them because everyone tells you they want them out and then they get voted in anyway.

bk

clown bag wrote:

I am puzzled by FF canvassers and also by the people who vote for them because everyone tells you they want them out and then they get voted in anyway.

Because the economy is doing well, FF have done a good job in helping create it and maintain it and most people fear that a FG/Labour/Greens government would be unstable and mess up the economy.

The reality that most of the major issues that people have (economy, employment, wealth) are doing very well at the moment and most people would recognise that the the problems we do have (Infrastructure, A&E, etc.) are as a result of our economies growing pains and they are being tackled and fixed in time.

Personally I haven't seen any convincing reasons to vote for FG/Lab/Green. I think most people don't think that they would do any better then FF and could possibly do much worse.

You asked earlier why a young person would support FF when they don't have any radical policies. Maybe the reason is that most young people today are realists and don't want radical movements, instead they want to keep the economy nice and stable so that they can profit from it just like their elders.

Dirk Gently

only most people aren't profiting from the economy and are just about keeping up with their mortgage and stealth tax payments, are being forced to fork out on private health insurance because they no their ****ed if they rely on public health, face some of the dearest prices in Europe and don't get pay rises big enough to cope with the rising price of everything from maintenance companies to car expenses and childcare never mind rising house prices.

Yes they have more money than ever but their paying out more money than ever. I can see why builders, company bosses and landlords vote FF, but it’s the people who complain against them and still vote them in that gets me. I reckon FF get in more on the traditional older vote as younger people tend not to vote in the same large numbers. I have no stats on that but it is the only way I can rationalise it. The fact that the other big partys aren't really offering an alternative only helps FF too.

ISAW

silverharp wrote:

Apologies for picking on FF but given that they have been in power for most of past 2 decades, why do people feel the need to get out there and go door to door asking people to vote for candidate X. I remember at the last election someone coming to my door asking me to vote FF and I basically said that I am very disappointed with how the country in run, he muttered something about the Celtic Tiger and he left it at that.

Most canvassers in most parties are not professionally trained to do so. they usually travel in pairs and pick it up from others. If a question on a specialised subject is asked then they usually have someone who would know. Public representatives are always well informed and up to speed on all local issues and sometimes trained on national ones.
They are well meaning and dedicated people and like any other voluntary work I respect them all and dont expect them all to be experts.

The fact that someone might not know as much as you about something and the fact that that matters to you and the fact that you actually post here about it illustrates that you are an exception rather than the rule. Most people will comment on the main issues and say whether they will vote FG FF GP etc. They are not inclined to lie. About one in twenty is a professional complainer who will complain about any government. People do vote based on visability and canvassing. Yo8u8 may think you don't but you may also think you arte not affected by advertising.

Now was he deluded that FF actually created or sustained the “Celtic Tiger” beyond what any other Party would have done in the round,

Unprovable empty comment. The truth is that FF wwere mostly in power over the period. Any what if... argument is supossition.

or as probably a lot of people believe that the Celtic Tiger was a function of the fact that we speak English, we are in the EU, we had demographics on our side, there was a globalisation and credit expansion policy by US business and Gov., and a tax policy born out of the economic mismanagement of the 1980’s.

Economists agree to these conditions which are necessary but not sufficient. It requires conditions and political action. Getting US business here and lowering tax WAS a government strategy.

To my mind there is very little in this state that the gov could call best practice or you could show to impress a bunch of French German or Swedish officials

You are coupling "that which governs best governs least" - a US type economic thinking with the "soft law" and "best practice" model of the EUrocrats - Which is exactly what Ireland did!

So either the FF gov is running the country according to plan, in which case they are doing a pi** poor job or they are incapable of controlling the various organs of state in which case they are a redundant party

OR you propose a false analogy and while the State does not control everything it DOES relate to how we deal with Boston and Berlin and takes what it sees as the best from both systems.

So again I ask unless you’re a TD why be a member of FF?

How much voluntary work have you done for any organisations? Maybe you can answer that and we can go into it and we might discover what your attitude to social and community capital is?

being cynical I would say maybe seeing it as an opportunity for some type of personal advancement, a deluded sense that you can make a difference, or just enjoy the crack of it all and would join another party if they were the main party or in the same way that people randomly follow particular English soccer clubs.

I can see glaring problems with all these proposed reasons. No doubt some people think it is true but why dont you justify this opinion with evidence ?

I can understand why people join the smaller parties but otherwise I think there are better uses of ones time.

So why do they join smaller ones? and what is a "better" use?

BTW, I can understand why people vote FF as they maybe generally happy with the status quo or see FF as the least worst alternative, I just don’t “get” people actively investing their time and energy in the organisation.

I think your conservative vision of a state run by people who are remote uncaring and distant from the electorate is a very cold vision. i do not share it. I am not surprised you dont understand this with the social isolation you seem to think is the future. I really would like you to answer my questions about social capital. Maybe you will change your mind. If you really think people shouldnt bother I dont think you would have posted the original question.

Cork

clown bag wrote:

only most people aren't profiting from the economy.

RTE has a programme called "House Hunters in the Sun".

Have you even noticed the unumployment figures in France & Germany?

It is 20 years since "Self Aid" - where Irish companies had to pledge jobs to a teleton.

ISAW

clown bag wrote:

only most people aren't profiting from the economy and are just about keeping up with their mortgage and stealth tax payments, are being forced to fork out on private health insurance because they no their ****ed if they rely on public health, face some of the dearest prices in Europe and don't get pay rises big enough to cope with the rising price of everything from maintenance companies to car expenses and childcare never mind rising house prices.

I really cant agree with this. If you bought a house somewhere between 1985-90 you would have complained about it costing 30,000. You could sell it today for say 350,000. Then you would be doing okay on 15,000 a year (two years wages for the house). Now the house would be closer to ten years wages. Some people have done well off the celtic tiger. SAy they were 25 then they are 40-45 now. In twenty years they can retire. They have pensions but probably also have two SSIA coming in. They could retire at 60 still have a fat pension, still have fifteen years interest on their 40,000 SSIA and by that time sell the ghouse trade down be milionares and still have a house in Dublin. they would not have believed you if you told them that in 1985 when they were paying 15 per cent interest on mortgages.

People who are older do even better! It is really people in their twenties in 2000 who cant afford a house. Todays twenty somethings. Rising house prices are only making the thirty and fourty somethings richer and are not a burden on them.

Yes they have more money than ever but their paying out more money than ever. I can see why builders, company bosses and landlords vote FF, but it’s the people who complain against them and still vote them in that gets me. I reckon FF get in more on the traditional older vote as younger people tend not to vote in the same large numbers.

This is probably true. But i have not seen any evidence to convence me that people in the 18-30 age bracket vote less than about 35 per cent for FF.

I have no stats on that but it is the only way I can rationalise it. The fact that the other big partys aren't really offering an alternative only helps FF too.

I also agree with this. We have suffered from weak opposition. The main opposition parties are only beginning to get their act together and the fringe ones dont offer any real alternative with zany or uncosted policies.

Dirk Gently

ISAW wrote:

clown bag wrote:

only most people aren't profiting from the economy and are just about keeping up with their mortgage and stealth tax payments, are being forced to fork out on private health insurance because they no their ****ed if they rely on public health, face some of the dearest prices in Europe and don't get pay rises big enough to cope with the rising price of everything from maintenance companies to car expenses and childcare never mind rising house prices.

I really cant agree with this. If you bought a house somewhere between 1985-90 you would have complained about it costing 30,000. You could sell it today for say 350,000. Then you would be doing okay on 15,000 a year (two years wages for the house). Now the house would be closer to ten years wages. Some people have done well off the celtic tiger. SAy they were 25 then they are 40-45 now. In twenty years they can retire. They have pensions but probably also have two SSIA coming in. They could retire at 60 still have a fat pension, still have fifteen years interest on their 40,000 SSIA and by that time sell the ghouse trade down be milionares and still have a house in Dublin. they would not have believed you if you told them that in 1985 when they were paying 15 per cent interest on mortgages.

People who are older do even better! It is really people in their twenties in 2000 who cant afford a house. Todays twenty somethings. Rising house prices are only making the thirty and fourty somethings richer and are not a burden on them.


This is probably true. But i have not seen any evidence to convence me that people in the 18-30 age bracket vote less than about 35 per cent for FF.

I also agree with this. We have suffered from weak opposition. The main opposition parties are only beginning to get their act together and the fringe ones dont offer any real alternative with zany or uncosted policies.

Yeah fair enough, but none of that is any use to me at 25 with no realistic hope of keeping my head above water unless I get hooked up with some rich older lady willing to sort me out with some pocket money. (Any takers pm me )

There's a whole new generation of people who are working their arse off just to keep the repo man away, borrowing more and more to keep up with rising prices and stealth taxes. And its not reckless spending on their part, it’s down to the fact that you have to borrow, not to live beyond your means, but just to keep a roof over your head. I'm trying to self build at the moment, and I could afford the builders cost this year except for government tax on new homes, by the time I save enough to pay the services, esb and water charges the cost of building and the tax will have gone up again.

I'm constantly playing catch up but the price rises quicker than I can save it. Renting costs more than a mortgage these days but I can't qualify for a mortgage while at the same time there's no restriction on what the landlords can take off me. I'm prevented from installing solar electricity into the new house as the grants only allow for water heated solar and not electricity generating solar. Again no getting away from energy bills which will only rise in future from this supposedly enviro friendly government. FF and the PD’s attitude of leaving everything to the free market to decide is costing younger people like me and benefiting landlords, builders and people who already have multiple properties.

The Celtic tiger is all well and good for people who had assets and seen those assets increase over the past 10 years but has no benefit for me and other young people like me who are trying to start out but can't keep up with rising costs.

silverharp

ISAW wrote:

Unprovable empty comment. The truth is that FF wwere mostly in power over the period. Any what if... argument is supossition.
Economists agree to these conditions which are necessary but not sufficient. It requires conditions and political action. Getting US business here and lowering tax WAS a government strategy.

True, what if is a pointless exercise however it is logical to look at cause and effect. A psychologist would tell you that people often make the error of attributing success to their own actions and failure to outside events. A case in point, if you read Berties comments in 98/99 about the 9-10% growth, he would have said that this was largely due to his gov. policies, if you read his comments about why growth was flat in 01/02 he would have said it is due to global factors. This is a logical error.
That being said I would praise the IDA and FAS at the time for their contribution. The low tax policies of the 80/90’s are in my opinion the fall out from 20% unemployment in the 80% and the desperate need to get foreign capital into the country, any combination of the main parties would have followed this strategy

ISAW wrote:

You are coupling "that which governs best governs least" - a US type economic thinking with the "soft law" and "best practice" model of the EUrocrats - Which is exactly what Ireland did!
OR you propose a false analogy and while the State does not control everything it DOES relate to how we deal with Boston and Berlin and takes what it sees as the best from both systems.

My own view if that the gov. should tend to shy away from providing services but focus on good regulation and bashing heads together when there is market failure. An example is building standards, we have terrible building standards compared to countries like Denmark or Sweden, it’s not about under or over regulation but clever and innovative regulation. is this because FF is in the palm of the developers?



QUOTE=ISAW]


How much voluntary work have you done for any organisations? Maybe you can answer that and we can go into it and we might discover what your attitude to social and community capital is? . [/QUOTE]

I don’t know what this has to do with anything but I’ll bite.

My def of social capital starts at home. I moved from England back to Dublin to be close to my mother who is in her 70’s This increased her social capital even though I would have been financially better off in the UK. I keep my commuting down to 30min per day, this increases my family’s social capital. When my wife had our first child I encouraged her to take a year off work and since then she works part time from home, this increases my son’s social capital (as opposed to gov policy to frogmarch mothers back into the workforce after 3-6 months with little support). As a family we are a member of 2 musical societies, 2 sports clubs and one gov. supported NGO, our house is used as a venue by a local mother and toddlers group. So I can say that we have been able to build our social capital in spite of gov policy not because of it. BTW is it Robert Putman who has been advising the gov. that their policies are destroying social capital and is making my current lifestyle less of an option for young families today.





QUOTE=ISAW]
I think your conservative vision of a state run by people who are remote uncaring and distant from the electorate is a very cold vision. i do not share it. I am not surprised you dont understand this with the social isolation you seem to think is the future. I really would like you to answer my questions about social capital. Maybe you will change your mind. If you really think people shouldnt bother I dont think you would have posted the original question.[/QUOTE]

Believe me I feel deeply about “social capital” and I see the dash for growth as being a double edged sword, I’ve managed to build a good family structure in spite of gov policy as I said earlier, which is probably why I see the problems families have today more clearly. I see FF in particular as standing behind the developer lead housing (which is destroying social capital), confused spatial and decentralised strategies. I also believe that the gov is sleepwalking us into an energy crises and we should be following Sweden’s and Denmark’s energy policies. Because of this I frankly can’t see the point of getting involved with FF or FG for that matter

ISAW

clown bag wrote:

Yeah fair enough, but none of that is any use to me at 25 with no realistic hope of keeping my head above water ...
There's a whole new generation of people who are working their arse off just to keep the repo man away, borrowing more and more to keep up with rising prices and stealth taxes.

Slightly throw away comment. Why should people buy something they cant afford e.g. a BMW 4WD if there is a chance of it being repossessed? Why should anyone borrow more for something they cant afford? Why should they spend 200 a night in the pub and 500 on shopping at the weekend? These are not people who havwe no money. and many of the people without 50,000 income say into their household (indeed many with more income than that) have a free house from the State!

And its not reckless spending on their part, it’s down to the fact that you have to borrow, not to live beyond your means, but just to keep a roof over your head.

I don't understand this! If you continually borrow you ARE living above your means! Fi you continually borrow to pay rent/mortgage then your ARE living above your means and should be renting somewhere cheaper or sharing a house or gettign rent allowance or support or whatever.

I'm trying to self build at the moment, and I could afford the builders cost this year except for government tax on new homes, by the time I save enough to pay the services, esb and water charges the cost of building and the tax will have gone up again.

I was feeling sorry for you but you are doing better than others. My heart goes out to you nevertheless; all the hassle of building... etc. But you DO have property. You have the land which is half the battle and half the cost. You could also pay for the building and get it built and not get it connected to the water or ESB but have it wired and plumbed. What tax has "gone up" on housing in the last year? What do you expect to go up?

I'm constantly playing catch up but the price rises quicker than I can save it.

So why not pay for the service now? It is called a contract. Pay now and ask the guy to do the job in six months time. Make sure he wont go to the wall. Dont pay him the lot just a depoisit. Not like buying a house where a deposit means nothing. Invest a few grand in a solicitor and make sure he is contractually bound into building. Then he can pay for the rising costs if he breaches the contract.

Consider also the Polish/Russian Lithuanian etc. lads. they are lashing up houses on every corner around me. I have no doubt they would build a four bedroom detached for say 200,000. Look on the bright side. Given the influx of cheaper labour building (due to government policy) building is one of the things that has going DOWN in price

Mind you I git a quote of E750 for a tow bar and E300 for materials for a garden gate. Thank God I come from a family where my Da actually did things. I figure with labour costs I am heading for 1500 there. So I bought a bar and got it delivered for 140 and put up a gate myself for another 140. Most of the locals probably would have to get a "proper job" done by builders for fear of looking stupid . I still need to do a bit of finishing (like the floor I put down ) but the gate looks okay. I still cant fit the bar though I will work it out. Im the same on discussions. I would rather risk making a fool of myself than remain silent. I perfer to live speaking my mind than die fearing to speak.

Renting costs more than a mortgage these days but I can't qualify for a mortgage while at the same time there's no restriction on what the landlords can take off me.

Luckily supply is reducing rent but again... the hassle of looking around. Have you consider the "shared ownership scheme"

I'm prevented from installing solar electricity into the new house as the grants only allow for water heated solar and not electricity generating solar.

This is rediculous. Have you a reference to the regulations. You might have a case for challenging them ort changing them.

Again no getting away from energy bills which will only rise in future from this supposedly enviro friendly government. FF and the PD’s attitude of leaving everything to the free market to decide is costing younger people like me and benefiting landlords, builders and people who already have multiple properties.

What percent of your household budget is heating and energy? Have you done a yearly budget? I suggest you do all your income and outflows. You might find areas where you can get maore in or less out (e.g. tax relief on rent). In any case doing it will assist any mortgage assessor. They will look on you in a better light. You may also have the option to of shared ownership with a council. you then have the option to buy out. They will give you up to about 180,000 and you come up with the rest.
I assume you dont have a wife or kids, so social affordable or council housing is probably not on.

The Celtic tiger is all well and good for people who had assets and seen those assets increase over the past 10 years but has no benefit for me and other young people like me who are trying to start out but can't keep up with rising costs.

But you already HAVE assets! If you are building your own house then you already have the land - half the price of the house!

ISAW

silverharp wrote:

...
That being said I would praise the IDA and FAS at the time for their contribution.

they dont set policy they carry it out. the old IDA "get foreign jobs in at any cost" was a flawed policy (though low tax did move jobs) . the current strategy is for FDI to be underpinned with long lifetime and low possibility for transferability elsewhere. Knowledge intensive industry offers this.

The low tax policies of the 80/90’s are in my opinion the fall out from 20% unemployment in the 80% and the desperate need to get foreign capital into the country, any combination of the main parties would have followed this strategy

Really ? Alan Dukes followed the spending cuts which FF proposed. QAnd look wghat FG did to him. Cuts were favoured to increased taxation. the government mainly deal with the public service which is paid for in taxes. Slimming down public service allows for tax cuts.

My own view if that the gov. should tend to shy away from providing services but focus on good regulation and bashing heads together when there is market failure. An example is building standards, we have terrible building standards compared to countries like Denmark or Sweden, it’s not about under or over regulation but clever and innovative regulation. is this because FF is in the palm of the developers?

I think nmaybe because the construction sector does little or nothing to invest in R&D and innovation.

I don’t know what this has to do with anything but I’ll bite.

It has to do with communities being more than having "professionals" or being defined by money alone. The original question was about why young people would join FF. I ask you if you underrstand why people join the VdeP scouts REserve Defence Force or anything else they put more into than they get finantially out of.

My def of social capital starts at home.

I would call that caring for your family. I ask about the broader aspect of the community.

I moved from England back to Dublin to be close to my mother who is in her 70’s This increased her social capital even though I would have been financially better off in the UK.

This is a very admirable thing to do but it has little to do with social capital, Unless you bring your mother to Bridge, Country womens Association etc. where she interacts with the broader community.

I keep my commuting down to 30min per day, this increases my family’s social capital.

Not unless you use the time saved to bring your children to football or some other community interaction.

When my wife had our first child I encouraged her to take a year off work and since then she works part time from home, this increases my son’s social capital (as opposed to gov policy to frogmarch mothers back into the workforce after 3-6 months with little support).

Not unless the community benefits. You or your wife dont "gain". Social capital is about SOCIETY gaining. It is not about what you take but wht you contribute.

As a family we are a member of 2 musical societies, 2 sports clubs and one gov. supported NGO,

Do you participate in the activities of these? For example the pensioners group in the US went from a few hundred thousand to over 30 million members. They all pay subs and are one of the largest lobby groups on capital hill. But other than that one member might never meet another of share a common bond. How do you assist the musical society, sports clubs or NGO to contribute to society. Do you only pay subs and attend an AGM or do you do anything extra?

our house is used as a venue by a local mother and toddlers group.

Not THIS is social capital. REgular meetings? Do you ever interact with them? Do you feel you gain anything from it? Why did you allow the group to use the house?

So I can say that we have been able to build our social capital in spite of gov policy not because of it.

I dont believe in a nanny state. You could probably call me a "Libratarian" rather than "Authoritarian" . I dont think the State should regulate social interaction. I dont like beaurocratic nonsence which pays more attention to rules than the reason behind why they were made.

BTW is it Robert Putman who has been advising the gov. that their policies are destroying social capital and is making my current lifestyle less of an option for young families today.

No his "bowling alone" was read and admired by bertie. Have you read it? Maybe you might care to comment on it? Putman does not advise policy, though I think FF asked him to an Ard Fheis.

ISAW wrote:

I think your conservative vision of a state run by people who are remote uncaring and distant from the electorate is a very cold vision. i do not share it. I am not surprised you dont understand this with the social isolation you seem to think is the future. I really would like you to answer my questions about social capital. Maybe you will change your mind. If you really think people shouldnt bother I dont think you would have posted the original question.

Believe me I feel deeply about “social capital” and I see the dash for growth as being a double edged sword, I’ve managed to build a good family structure in spite of gov policy as I said earlier, which is probably why I see the problems families have today more clearly. I see FF in particular as standing behind the developer lead housing (which is destroying social capital), confused spatial and decentralised strategies. I also believe that the gov is sleepwalking us into an energy crises and we should be following Sweden’s and Denmark’s energy policies. Because of this I frankly can’t see the point of getting involved with FF or FG for that matter

I think you would be surprised. FF has traditionally supported the small builder and small farmer. It also has supported the family. The big business wing of FF is a more recent genesis. FG and the PDs would also have much more influence from this sector. Bertie didnt come from that wing. But it is still there. FF have probably become to top heavy. Assuming that FF leadership are not listening to their own members/ the people and suiting themselves and serving and elite. When and if the top cease listening to the grassroots two things can happen. either the top will change or the party will lose votes.
This would suggest that IF (a biug IF ) FF do not represent people that they will drop the PD's or have so few seats that they will not get into government. Mind you tghe PD are not all "big business". they are also heavily libratarian. Gandi for example was a left wing libratarian.

silverharp

silverharp wrote:

Apologies for picking on FF but given that they have been in power for most of past 2 decades, why do people feel the need to get out there and go door to door asking people to vote for candidate X.

Because I remember Norn Iron and the economy two decades ago...

Zombrex

Deleted User wrote:

Because I remember Norn Iron and the economy two decades ago...

What does Northern Ireland have to do with this?

Anyway, to answer the OP question, it is because FF have become (incorrectly) assocated with the economic survival of this country.

Basically we have embraced the capitalist ideals that money makes money, we love our money and we are terrified of the big bad socialists like Labour (and FG, apparently..socialists? wtf?) who want to run all foriegn investment out the door.

FF are seen as the only party who won't drive off all foreign investment with a big stick and hike taxes up to 60%

So it doesn't really matter if they are actually crap at running a country, at least we all have money. And if Labour got into power they would be just as crap at running a country but none of us would have any money, or jobs.

Of course its all nonsense, but then most people know jack sh*t about politics or economics, they just believe what they read in the tabloids.

George Bush has is threat of terrorism to keep him in power.

Bertie has the threat of the economy being ripped apart by socialists hippies.

And that is politics in the 21st Century. You don't have to actually be any good, you just have to put the fear of God in the population that the other guy will be even worse.

Fear, its a wonderful thing.

Dirk Gently

Isaw you’re completely missing the point. My point is a lot of people are not borrowing to live beyond their means. They are borrowing just to pay bills. When you say live beyond their means while technically true it implies they are wasteful with their money when the truth is that they simply need to borrow to pay childcare, maintenance companies, doctor/ hospital visits and so on. They borrow to survive. What’s the downgrade from survival?

I don’t own any property. The land you refer to is my parents corner garden; I can just about squeeze a house onto it. Service charges are pushing 20,000 on top of the cost of the build, I can't install solar generating electricity because there is no grant for it and it is too expensive to install in this country as nobody specializes in it and it is not mass produced here unlike on mainland Europe where there is plenty of choice. (A direct result of lack of investment in green energy by this government, where the ESB have a say in what energy technology is allowed to be developed so as not to create competition with them)
If I could afford to do this it would rule out any future energy bills thus making my repayments more affordable. I can heat the house from 150 a year with a wood pellet boiler so if I had real choices I could heat my house, water and supply energy from as little as 150 a year, but unfortunately I have no affordable choice except to pay ever increasing energy bills if I want to build.

At present I'm back at home with the parents living like a hermit, trying to save all I can and there is no sign of the house getting started. If I move out again I start paying rent again and don’t save anything. All I have is the drawings for the house which I done myself to save on architect fees, but I can't start it because I can get a mortgage to just about cover the builders cost but the additional service charges make it out of my reach.

The service charges go up every year as does the building cost. I was actually told this by my local FF councilor and he said it was a disgrace but there was nothing he could do about it as they also done away with first time buyers grants which might have offset the price a bit. If the government done away with the service charge ( your looking at 13,000 alone for use of the mains sewerage which only means running a drain less than 10 feet from the house to the mains, which the builder does anyway and costs the state nothing) I could afford to build.

You cannot get the house built with out paying the services, water and esb charges like you say because even if you don't use those services the house will not be certified without paying them and you will not get a mortgage with out paying them. You pay these fees before the first brick is laid. It is so frustrating to be so close to affording it but even with my parents garden it is just out of reach and next month it will be further out of reach and the month after that even further. Average price of build last year was 110 euro per sq foot, at present the average is 150 euro per sq foot. That’s the increase in costs in one year alone, unfortunately my wages don’t go up 50% each year to keep up with the rising price and I don’t get any magic bonuses to cover fantasy service charges either. I have currently stopped getting quotes from builders and have e-mailed my cad drawings to timber frame companies around Ireland in the hope they can build cheaper for me. Hopefully if they quote me at about 120 per sq foot I can then afford to get started and pay the government their fantasy service taxes.

And as you say that’s just me, who is lucky enough to have parents who happen to live on a corner house and are willing to sign the garden over to me. Plenty of people are a lot worse off than me.

bk

Wicknight wrote:

Anyway, to answer the OP question, it is because FF have become (incorrectly) assocated with the economic survival of this country.

The reality is that the vast improvement in the Irish economy is due to a number of factors and yes FF are responsible for some of them:

- Low Corporate Tax - Introduced by Charlie McCreevy FF
- Lower upper tax rate (48% to 42%) - Introduced by Charlie McCreevy FF
- Lowered CAT and CGT from 40% to 20% - Introduced by Charlie McCreevy FF
- Ending of Higher Education Tuition Fees - FG/Lab
- Ireland joins the EU (EEC) - FF and FG
- Joined the Euro - FF
- Irelands decision to allow in people from the new EU countries - FF

While I can certainly agree that the bases of Ireland's economic success is based on years of good decisions by various governments and parties. Most economists lay the incredible success of the last 10 years at the excellent taxation decisions of Charlie McCreevy and the drive of the current government to attract US direct foreign investment.

clown bag

clown bag wrote:

Plenty of people are a lot worse off than me.

Some are, but even more are driving arond in massive SUVs wondering whether they'll let 5 or 6 Polish guys move into their second house.

Zombrex

bk wrote:

Most economists lay the incredible success of the last 10 years at the excellent taxation decisions of Charlie McCreevy and the drive of the current government to attract US direct foreign investment.

Well a lot of that is highly debatable.

For example, it is often pointed out by a lot (don't know about "most") of ecomoists that the economy was already roaring long before McCreevey became Minister for Finance and really hacked away corporation tax, (or even before FF came back into power).

The term "Celtic Tiger" was first used in 1994. If you look at where the economy really picked up and who was in power, it was FG. BTW I'm not a FG supporter, I don't have any great interest in showing FG made the Celtic Tiger. The earlier governments of FF and Labour or the PDs proceeded this as well and could have had something to do with it certainly

But I'll leave the debate about the causes of the economic growth to others.

My point was that FF have certainly done a good job convincing the general population that they are not only responsible for the Celtic Tiger (debateable) but they have to remain in power for our economy to continue trucking on as it is. So we should put up with how badly the country is run because if we elect FG or Labour into power they will not be able to, or know how, to run the economy correctly

I don't see a whole lot of evidence for that position, but it works in this modern era of the "politics of fear"

bk

Wicknight wrote:

My point was that FF have certainly done a good job convincing the general population that they are not only responsible for the Celtic Tiger (debateable) but they have to remain in power for our economy to continue trucking on as it is. So we should put up with how badly the country is run because if we elect FG or Labour into power they will not be able to, or know how, to run the economy correctly

Personally I have no particular allegiance to any party, however I do want the economy to continue well. So I went and took a look at the policy manifesto of each of the opposition parties.

FG look like they would basically continue FF's policies and that is a good thing. I'd have no major problem with FG being in power.

Labour I'm highly dubious about, they have tried to make the right noises, but from watching them they seem to still hold a lot of their isolationist, protect the worker at all costs, high tax social policies, that I just don't think are compatible with the reality of the global economy today.

The Greens seem to be complete nut cases, their policies are only focused on the environment and seem to have little bearing on reality IMO.

I'd have no problem with FG being in government on their own or even with FF!! I'd be concerned about them being in government with Labour and Labour having too much influence.

I'm really concerned about a FG/Labour/Green rainbow government, I'd think it would be too unstable. You would have FG following FF policies, Labour pulling off towards more socialist and protectionist policies and god knows what the Greens would be doing.

So having said all that, from my view the best bet to keep the economy going well is to leave FF in there. Why take a chance with the alternative, FF haven't really done anything terrible and I can't see the alternative doing any better then them.

I've yet to see a convincing argument as to why FF should be removed from government?

Time Magazine

bk wrote:

I've yet to see a convincing argument as to why FF should be removed from government?

There are really quite a lot, but today I'll go with a nice one. Tell me what ye think .

If any of ye have read The Wisdom of Crowds (I love that book!) you'll probably accept the importance of diversity in decision making. Essentially, clashing and difference of opinions will almost always bear good fruit. Similarly, bringing in new ideas freshen things up. Simply because FG + Labour haven't been in government for ten years is almost reason enough to elect them - FF's ideas are tired.

But you probably have to read the book .

bk

Angry Banana wrote:

There are really quite a lot, but today I'll go with a nice one. Tell me what ye think .

If any of ye have read The Wisdom of Crowds (I love that book!) you'll probably accept the importance of diversity in decision making. Essentially, clashing and difference of opinions will almost always bear good fruit. Similarly, bringing in new ideas freshen things up. Simply because FG + Labour haven't been in government for ten years is almost reason enough to elect them - FF's ideas are tired.

That has to be the worst reason that I've ever heard. There is an old saying:
"if it ain't broken, then don't try to fix it".

What I want to hear is what FF/PD are doing wrong and what the opposition propose to do to fix it.

And I mean well thought and costed solutions, not PR noise about how their going to fix the health system over night using magic fairy dust.

Macy

bk wrote:

I've yet to see a convincing argument as to why FF should be removed from government?

The state of the health service?
The privatise everything to make it better line?
The massive increases in regressive indirect taxes to make up for the cuts in direct progressive taxes?
The failure to deal with their builder land holding friends in cities that caused the house price increases far beyond the means of normal working people?
The resultant effect of this that is 3 hour commutes, gridlock, towns 80-90miles out being commuter country?
Decentralisation and the massive waste of Public funds to buy rural votes?

Maybe the alternative will be better, maybe they'll be worse. One thing is certain they won't have such vast resources to deal with these issues, or no doubt the (by the time of the next election) 10 years to have done something meaningful about it.

Macy

I should add, I'm not convinced FF want to win the next election. Their policies are obviously about to lead to rampant inflation and economic downturn in the coming years, so I think it suits them to cause it, get dumped out of office and then blame the alternative for the fall out.

bk

Again, yes I'm aware of these problems, but firstly they aren't really that serious and secondly you haven't given us what the opposition plan on doing to fix these.

Macy wrote:

The state of the health service?

Much of the health system has vastly improved under FF. The problems of years long waiting lists from 5 years ago have been fixed and many areas of the health care system have drastically improved.

Yes there are major problems with A&E, primarily caused by past underspending and quickly growing population.

But what do the opposition parties plan on doing to fix it, that FF/PD's aren't already doing?

What is the formula of their magic pixie dust?

Macy wrote:

The privatise everything to make it better line?

FG have much the same policy as FF on this. Labour takes the opposite view. Personally I've seen places where privatisation does really well (e.g. RPA) and places where there have been problems (Eircom privatising the network, rather then splitting and keeping the network). But on the whole it really isn't a big deal.

Macy wrote:

The massive increases in regressive indirect taxes to make up for the cuts in direct progressive taxes?

Massive is a bit strong, but I do agree to a certain extent.

However FG policy is to cap direct taxation for the next 5 years, while reducing or eliminating indirect taxation.

That is nice, but if true, can I ask you how does FG plan on funding it's plan to build new public hospitals and public beds to fix the A&E problem?

Macy wrote:

The failure to deal with their builder land holding friends in cities that caused the house price increases far beyond the means of normal working people?

What are you talking about, stats clearly show that the number of homes per thousand people has increased significantly over the last 10 years and is quickly making it's way towards the EU average (should reach there at current rates in about 3 - 4 years).

Other stats show that the affordability of buying a home today is significantly cheaper then in the 80's and early 90's (due to very high interest rates back then).

The current high prices are due to demand outstripping supply, pure and simple. Prices will continue to rise until either supply outstrips demand or they are no longer affordable by "normal working people", they stop buying and the price goes down.

Anyway, what does FG/Lab propose to do to drop prices?

Macy wrote:

The resultant effect of this that is 3 hour commutes, gridlock, towns 80-90miles out being commuter country?

All the side effect's of a very strong, growing economy. The government has already announced the Transport 21 project and it should help fix a lot of these problems. It is recognised as the largest public transport project ever.

Interestingly neither FG or Labour have any objections to this project and claim they would continue it if in government and wouldn't change it in anyway that I can see.

So, again I ask what would FG/Lab do different to FF to fix this problem?

Macy wrote:

Decentralisation and the massive waste of Public funds to buy rural votes?

Fair point, I agree that a big scale decentralisation project is a waste of time and money.

But you have to remember that all these complaints are at the back drop of the Irish people being richer then they have ever been, in fact one of the richest nations in the world and in almost full employment.

I'm probably sounding like some sort of FF fanboy. I'm not, in fact I have very little political allegiance. I'm one of the thousands of Irish people who is undecided. But I'm really waiting for some one to tell me the reasons why I shouldn't continue with the devil I know, who has actually done very well for me.

Macy

Macy wrote:

Their policies are obviously about to lead to rampant inflation and economic downturn in the coming years

Obvious to who?

You better run out and tell those people who are paying hundreds millions for places like the Juries site in Ballsbridge that they got it all wrong and we're going to the wall...

Zombrex

Deleted User wrote:

Obvious to who?

You better run out and tell those people who are paying hundreds millions for places like the Juries site in Ballsbridge that they got it all wrong and we're going to the wall...

I doubt Sean Dunne, and his millions, would be that effected by the up coming ecomonic turn down.

It will be the average joes on the street who will feel it.

Macy

Deleted User wrote:

Obvious to who?

Obvious to me. Nominally my pay is up, take into account inflation, public service charges etc it's down.

It may not be obvious to the majority of the population, but it is simple economics that if wages aren't going up as quickly as inflation that they are falling in real terms. This is before the several percent that will be added to inflation by SSIA's maturing.

bk - look at the vast land tracks that could've been developed within the conurbation of Dublin that are zoned residential. No reason that there couldn't have been some windfall tax to encourage these to be developed rather than just accrue as an asset for Galway Tent Contributors. The amount of building in Mullingar, Port Arlington, Longford etc is symptomatic of the failure to have Dublin properly planned and developed. This has lead to the transport crisis, which a policy document was delivered 9 years into the present Governments tenure.

In the same time, they've blocked investment in Dublin Bus reducing options but for car use, in the hope of making the Dublin Bus Market look ripe for privatisation when Dublin Bus is one of the most efficient in Europe, particularly compared to the failed uk model that FF want to follow.

IronMan

You should join Fianna Fail, because your Daddy brain-washed you into it as a young fella. All you ever heard was about great Charlie was, and how Fitzgerald wore different coloured socks to work!! And never once did you question the fanboism, the tent in the Galway races, the rampant corruption, the blatent careerism, the lack of any idology apart from keeping the job, the back-scratching. And then you went to college, and you joined the youth wing. And their you got to meet more just like you. Others who never had an independent thought process when it came to politics. Those who can never question anything Fianna Fail have ever done. Those who seek to sometimes defend the indefensible.

ISAW

Macy wrote:

The state of the health service?

I think you may mean "accident and emergency". Do you?
I do not think the rest of the service is in a terrible stare but A&E is dreadful.

The privatise everything to make it better line?

this is more a PD policy than an FF policy. In either case it would come from a libratarian perspective and nor "right wing" as people tend to label it. One can be left wing and libratarian. Gandi for example. the point is about centralised and beaurocratic control.

The massive increases in regressive indirect taxes to make up for the cuts in direct progressive taxes?

Can you support this? Can you show what the State gains in indirect taxation on the income tax payer and how much they cut in income tax?

The failure to deal with their builder land holding friends in cities that caused the house price increases far beyond the means of normal working people?

Fair comment.
And FG Lab policy on this is?... Do they say they will cap land prices? prevent any profit on rezoned land? tax builders/developers more? Smash up land banks?
Indeed the local councild HAD land in the past but sold it to developers.

The resultant effect of this that is 3 hour commutes, gridlock, towns 80-90miles out being commuter country?

So you support high rise developments then? I thought FG Lab and GP opposed this in Dun Laoghaire didnt they? I mean most of the councils ar not now in FF control so how come all this local development and land usage isnt being changed by the non FF councils?

Decentralisation and the massive waste of Public funds to buy rural votes?

But the opposition agree that decentralisation is a good idea! It is the implementation of it to which they object.

Maybe the alternative will be better, maybe they'll be worse. One thing is certain they won't have such vast resources to deal with these issues, or no doubt the (by the time of the next election) 10 years to have done something meaningful about it.

Many of the "vast resources" have been dumped into a pension fund for civil and public servants. Is that a bad idea? "Maybe they will be better," is a very very weak arguement. Change just for the sake of change is pointless.

bk

Macy wrote:

bk - look at the vast land tracks that could've been developed within the conurbation of Dublin that are zoned residential. No reason that there couldn't have been some windfall tax to encourage these to be developed rather than just accrue as an asset for Galway Tent Contributors. The amount of building in Mullingar, Port Arlington, Longford etc is symptomatic of the failure to have Dublin properly planned and developed. This has lead to the transport crisis, which a policy document was delivered 9 years into the present Governments tenure.

What vast tracks of Land? I spent a few weekends looking at apartments all over Dublin last month, it seems to me that every little bit of available land has apartments being built on it, in fill is happening all over the city.

Absolutely thousands of apartments are being built down in the docklands, out in Ashtown and all along the Dart line. It seems to me that the issue with getting green field sites developed is ensuring public transport is available and services are available.

For instance the North Docklands are now being developed because:
A) The Luas is being extended down to the Point
Lots of buses are going to be rerouted down to there.
C) A tunnel is being built under the Liffey to bring sufficient sewage and clean water services to the currently under served North Docklands area.

The North Docklands area couldn't be developed without these.

Like wise Ashtown and other places along the DART are happening because of their proximity to public transport.

More homes were completed last year and in the first few months of this year then in any period in Irish history.

And again I ask what do the opposition plan to do to fix this?

I keep hearing problems, but I've yet to hear solutions.

ISAW

Macy wrote:

I should add, I'm not convinced FF want to win the next election. Their policies are obviously about to lead to rampant inflation and economic downturn in the coming years, so I think it suits them to cause it, get dumped out of office and then blame the alternative for the fall out.

Sweeping statement. what policies? Care to define "rampant" inflation and how it is being caused?
And FF are not in government on their own. it is possible FF PDs may run together and niot get a majority and say the PDs for example pick up five FF seats and two green seats. It could then happen that FG + Lab might end up in government with the PDs. Would this be acceptable to you? How about either Lab and FF or FG and FF?

ISAW

Macy wrote:

Obvious to me. Nominally my pay is up, take into account inflation, public service charges etc it's down.

It may not be obvious to the majority of the population, but it is simple economics that if wages aren't going up as quickly as inflation that they are falling in real terms. This is before the several percent that will be added to inflation by SSIA's maturing.

Based on this reasoning would you be prepared to accept a pay cut if inflation decreased?
And should you get paid more for doing the same job?

I think you will agree that inflation is caused my more money being available.

bk - look at the vast land tracks that could've been developed within the conurbation of Dublin that are zoned residential. No reason that there couldn't have been some windfall tax to encourage these to be developed rather than just accrue as an asset for Galway Tent Contributors.

It would by simple to legislate to prevent anyone gaining from the profits accruing due to the change in zoning. why dont FG or Lab have such a policy? Or in building 30 units to the acre? Why dont the city council (not a FF majority) Fingal etc. vote for that? The PDs had a plan to rezone the whole of the East docks region. thats an area as big as Dublin city centre. Why is that not supported by the FG Lab majority on the council?

...snip transport rant ...in the hope of making the Dublin Bus Market look ripe for privatisation when Dublin Bus is one of the most efficient in Europe, particularly compared to the failed uk model that FF want to follow.

The excuse was that Dublin Bus didnt ask for more busses. I agree that they run a good service and need more busses. I also think private operators could be allowed in.