FF overall majority: its time to get out of this country

ainemolloy1

Please see my post on the other thread 'What Does Bertie Have To Do To Lose Popularity??' for a bit more detail.

There are hundreds of thousands of people quitely living in poverty in Ireland.
My mother went to the dentist last month (with a desperate toothache) and was charged over 1000 euros (she is a pensioner) for 2 hours work. She questioned this beforehand and he practically laughed at her, as if she was from another planet. Mary Harney shrugs her shoulders and tells people like my Mother who worked very hard all their lives to shop around.

Pat Kenny had an article on his show the other week where he described a new block of apartments in New Ross. One of the people who bought one of these swish new apartments said that if you flushed the toilet, and ran downstairs and outside quickly you could see whatever you flushed popping out of a drainpipe straight into the river.

If people have problems in their life that the state is responsibile for, like health,housing,commuting,education etc etc, why do they continue to vote the party that has failed in their responsability back into office. People may say it is because of the positive gains in the economy, but those educated in these matters will tell you FF just rode the crest of a wave.
I don't understand this country. People seem to only see as far as the end of their own road.

Villain

The Muppet wrote:

There is no way Fianna Fail will do business with Sinn Fein. Bertie has been courting the greens of late but I wouldn't rule out a Labour FF coalition either.

Bertie will go in with anyone to make sure he is in Government, however I do believe the Greens could use SF as an excuse to join FF although I think it may hurt them in the longrun.

jacool

Re the Economy and a potential downturn, John Waters made the point that the Irish people would prefer to vote back in Fianna Fail and then blame them for the downturn rather than vote in the Fine Gael/Labour coalition and blame themselves !
I think that, in the end, we are a country of “Me Feiners” and if we think that the present incumbents are going to keep the gravy train going then we will row in with them.

Dr Strange

shoegirl wrote:

Germany circa 1933.
Could the last person to leave please turn off the lights.

Now, now...that doesn't compare well. At least we (Germany) had an excellent health system and anti-social behaviour and criminals were dealt with once and for all in 1933.

Best,
P.

MrSquishSquash

brim4brim wrote:

Yeah it has nothing to do with Bertie calling the election on a Thurs, preventing many people from voting (especially students) so the only people turning out in numbers are the people who have got rich from the "celtic tiger" or property bubble if you will who are happy to have Bertie licking developers holes.

Fianna Fail would of lost as much of the vote as Fine Gael or anyone else from the students not being able to travel. I know plenty of students, those who cared enough, voted! Those who didn't give a crap, still don't.

I don't care for Fianna Fail & i didn't vote for them but it is democratic and your clutching at straws if the aboves your thinking. Enda Kenny wouldn't be as strong a leader as Bertie by a mile (lack of any real experience in comparison) & Labour's (albeit i supported them) "Time for a change" campaign was pathetically weak.

The opposition tried to get in on FF's failures instead of their strengths, but it ain't over so just wait and see before you blame "The Bertie Conspiracy" for the election failure!

TCollins

I really , really wanted to vote for an alternative to FF/PD but the opposition just werent doing it for me. I think they lost the plot totally in the last few weeks and i'm sorry but i just couldnt do it.
Sadly i had to go for the lesser of 2 evils.

I think a lot of people decided to get rid of the PDs too, but not necessarilyrid of FF.

what_car

Smarmore wrote:

Oh right Ted!!
He's been more successfull in sorting out the problems in the North than Morgan. He's well educated, has a law degree!! I think you'll find he has all the credentials necessary. What are Morgans credentials? He's a former gun-runner, same as Ferris.

degree in talking ****e if u ask me..
and the FF credentials speak for themselves, waste, corruption, etc.

you are so funny....

:eek:

Akrasia

Giblet wrote:

Hundreds of Thousands? Now come on!

According to Combat Poverty, there are 7% of the Irish population in consistent poverty. Out of around 4 million, that's 280,000 people. There are 18% at risk of poverty.

Boston

jacool wrote:

Re the Economy and a potential downturn, John Waters made the point that the Irish people would prefer to vote back in Fianna Fail and then blame them for the downturn rather than vote in the Fine Gael/Labour coalition and blame themselves !
I think that, in the end, we are a country of “Me Feiners” and if we think that the present incumbents are going to keep the gravy train going then we will row in with them.

So your problem is that people vote for the party that they see as being the best for themselves as apposed to another party. People should vote in your best interest rather then their own? Are you that deluded. I'm starting to see why the FF's results are such a surprise.

Boston

Akrasia wrote:

According to Combat Poverty, there are 7% of the Irish population in consistent poverty. Out of around 4 million, that's 280,000 people. There are 18% at risk of poverty.

Relative poverty, relative!

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

ainemolloy1

Akrasia wrote:

According to Combat Poverty, there are 7% of the Irish population in consistent poverty. Out of around 4 million, that's 280,000 people. There are 18% at risk of poverty.

Indeed and it amazes me that it is ignored.

I know a nice lady who lives on Eglington Road in D4 who informed me last year that there is no poverty in Ireland anymore . I tried to reason with her but she was convinced that everybody she knows has done really well. Hmm ...what could I say.

ainemolloy1

Relative poverty is still poverty. There are breakfast schemes in junior schools in disadvantaged areas to ensure that kids who do not get properly fed at home at least have a decent breakfast. Under the last government funding for this was cut. Can a FF voter please explain this to me

ainemolloy1

daveirl wrote:

This post has been deleted.

If I click my ankles three times, will I go up in a puff of smoke only to arrive in your fantasy land?

TCollins

ainemolloy1 wrote:

Relative poverty is still poverty. There are breakfast schemes in junior schools in disadvantaged areas to ensure that kids who do not get properly fed at home at least have a decent breakfast. Under the last government funding for this was cut. Can a FF voter please explain this to me

My wife actually volunteers in the breakfast club in the local school (my old school). Most of these children are from poor families and also abusive families.
Junkie parents or parents that just dont care. Its extremely sad to see as some of these choldren are the children of people i grew up with.

In all honesty the better this country does overall the more we can do for these children, but you can do your bit by donations and volunteering your time to help out. not only in breakfast clubs, but there are all sorts of other schemes where we can make a difference by helping out and not just complaining that nothing i being done by government, whoever they may be.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Akrasia

Boston wrote:

Relative poverty, relative!

Consistent poverty measures people with an income of less than 60% of the median income who are also deprived of goods or services deemed essential for a decent standard of living.
If you tick two or more of these boxes then you are considered deprived.
Considering that the 'celtic tiger' is claimed to have 'lifted all boats', why are there 280,000 people who can't even afford the most basic essentials like food and clothing?
(and this is even before things like medical expenses are taken into consideration)

If you can not afford :

1. Two pairs of strong shoes

2. A warm waterproof overcoat

3. Buy new not second-hand clothes

4. Eat meals with meat, chicken, fish (or vegetarian equivalent) every second day

5. Have a roast joint or its equivalent once a week

6. Had to go without heating during the last year through lack of money

7. Keep the home adequately warm

8. Buy presents for family or friends at least once a year

9. Replace any worn out furniture

10. Have family or friends for a drink or meal once a month

11. Have a morning, afternoon or evening out in the last fortnight, for entertainment

ainemolloy1

TCollins wrote:

In all honesty the better this country does overall the more we can do for these children, ... we can make a difference by helping out and not just complaining that nothing i being done by government, whoever they may be.

I understand what you mean and the capitalist argument is always that the bigger the economic pie, the bigger everybodys slice. But I'm studying Economics at the moment and I don't believe it to be true, maybe to a small extent but the distribution is never fair.

The problem I have is that I see these schemes being cut by FF/PD and they cost a pittance, and I see the tax breaks / freebies going to those who need them least.

Time Magazine

daveirl wrote:

This post has been deleted.

Not the thread, nor the forum, nor the day for it, but anyway: if it's absolute wealth that should measure poverty it is absolutely useless as a psychological proxy. Inflation-adjusted American GDP per capita has multiplied tenfold since c. 1880, but they're certainly nowhere near ten times as happy. If you look at psychological tests (this isn't my area of expertise but it came up in an economic exam last year), people are actually less happy than they were a few decades ago. Also very uncertain, whereas GDP is on the up.

What's absolutely certain is, and found time after time, is that people who feel less rich than average (as opposed to relative to JP McManus) feel "impoverished" and it can be used a decent psychological proxy. It's income inequality that is linked to "socioeconomic-based" crime, not absolute wealth.

And there is quite a bit of relative poverty in Ireland.

Boston

Akrasia wrote:

Consistent poverty measures people with an income of less than 60% of the median income who are also deprived of goods or services deemed essential for a decent standard of living.
If you tick two or more of these boxes then you are considered deprived.
Considering that the 'celtic tiger' is claimed to have 'lifted all boats', why are there 280,000 people who can't even afford the most basic essentials like food and clothing?
(and this is even before things like medical expenses are taken into consideration)

So yea relative poverty then.

daveirl Theres alot of old people and very young people that would fall into the group.

ainemolloy1

daveirl wrote:

This post has been deleted.

I really don't know what to say, I can see it from maybe your perspective,
as I know a lot of well to do people beacuse I'm in TCD and in their daily lives they don't encounter poverty. People naturally try to hide it best they can. Nobody will actually tell you they are living with no hope in consistent poverty.But if you go round my way in Bray there is an area of really quite bad poverty. I know this as I have friends who live there and I know how they live. No jobs (except for construction),due to the loss of lots of factories over the last few years, little hope.

If you drive about 3 mins away, there lives a developer who is probably close to a billionaire by now, who made most of his money in the last 10 years.(I know his son)

I find this unacceptableand a little disguisting, and I blame the FF/PD government

TCollins

Ibid wrote:

What's absolutely certain is, and found time after time, is that people who feel less rich than average (as opposed to relative to JP McManus) feel "impoverished" and it can be used a decent psychological proxy.

Like those of us who consider that we are poor because we cant afford a mortgage on a 3 bed house on a single wage

What? ... Go for a 2 bed ? no way, i WANT a 3 bed and the government have to provide the means for this for me. - Just kidding, but this is how a lot of my mates feel. They all want the brand new 3 bed, fully furnished etc.

TCollins

ainemolloy1 wrote:

I really don't know what to say, I can see it from maybe your perspective,
as I know a lot of well to do people beacuse I'm in TCD and in their daily lives they don't encounter poverty. People naturally try to hide it best they can. Nobody will actually tell you they are living with no hope in consistent poverty.But if you go round my way in Bray there is an area of really quite bad poverty. I know this as I have friends who live there and I know how they live. No jobs (except for construction),due to the loss of lots of factories over the last few years, little hope.

If you drive about 3 mins away, there lives a developer who is probably close to a billionaire by now, who made most of his money in the last 10 years.(I know his son)

I find this unacceptableand a little disguisting, and I blame the FF/PD government

What would you suggest being done about this though - by whichever political party happens to be in power?

ainemolloy1

TCollins wrote:

Like those of us who consider that we are poor because we cant afford a mortgage on a 3 bed house on a single wage

What? ... Go for a 2 bed ? no way, i WANT a 3 bed and the government have to provide the means for this for me. - Just kidding, but this is how a lot of my mates feel. They all want the brand new 3 bed, fully furnished etc.

Sorry folks but there is a lot of people talking a lot of rubbish on this thread, this has nothing to do with poverty , relative poverty or the stuff someone else wrote about pyschological poverty. nor does it have to do with students who have to live on baked beans for 4 years of their life.

Not enough food = poverty
No heating = poverty
No hope = poverty

It has to do with being consistently driven into the ground by your circumstances. And I'm positive there are many 10's or even 100 thousand people living this way, and they are being left to rot by the political classes.

TCollins

ainemolloy1 wrote:

Sorry folks but there is a lot of people talking a lot of rubbish on this thread, this has nothing to do with poverty , relative poverty or the stuff someone else wrote about pyschological poverty. nor does it have to do with students who have to live on baked beans for 4 years of their life.

Not enough food = poverty
No heating = poverty
No hope = poverty

It has to do with being consistently driven into the ground by your circumstances. And I'm positive there are many 10's or even 100 thousand people living this way, and they are being left to rot by the political classes.

Again, what will you do about this poverty. I think i know the area you are talking about. Indeed it is poverty stricken, but only relatively you and i. Not relative to a third world country though. Why not go down there and give €500 or so to a family you believe to be in need, if you really want to do something about it. You know what i did with the 1 % tax reduction i got. I bought goats for a family in Africa through bothar. I could have given money to a family in Ireland but i believe people in Africa need it more.
My point is this - You can make a difference yourself. Dont go blaming the government for everyones woes. Of course the govt can help, but you can help individuals more. So do it, it will make you feel good and you ownt have to wait for the govt to make your difference.

Lennoxschips

daveirl wrote:

This post has been deleted.

65% would be considered shamefully low in many European countries.

magpie

If you can not afford :

1. Two pairs of strong shoes

2. A warm waterproof overcoat

3. Buy new not second-hand clothes

4. Eat meals with meat, chicken, fish (or vegetarian equivalent) every second day

5. Have a roast joint or its equivalent once a week

6. Had to go without heating during the last year through lack of money

7. Keep the home adequately warm

8. Buy presents for family or friends at least once a year

9. Replace any worn out furniture

10. Have family or friends for a drink or meal once a month

11. Have a morning, afternoon or evening out in the last fortnight, for entertainment

Is this being able to afford the above before or after paying for Sky HD, cigarettes, cans of lager, going to the pub/bookies/chip shop and having 3/4 holidays in Lanzarotte every year.

Replace any worn out furniture - WTF are they getting this one from?

They should add in

12. Have to pay more than 50% of your gross income in a mortgage you are committed to pay for another 35 years with increasing interest rates (as opposed to being housed for free at the taxpayers' expense)

13. Have to pay for childcare (as opposed to letting your children roam around outside for 16 hours a day)

14. Not receiving any state benefits

nesf

Lennoxschips wrote:

65% would be considered shamefully low in many European countries.

We've had a good turnout by our standards, that's the only measure that matters.

ainemolloy1

TCollins wrote:

What would you suggest being done about this though - by whichever political party happens to be in power?

That's a big question and as I'm not yet an economist I can't give a qualified answer. The normal reply that people have is that it's the only system we have and we can't do anything about it. It's either capitalism or socialism. I see this as nonsense, all we need is a better type of capitalism.

As a capitalist myself, I am certainly in favour of tax incentives and that the system should reward those that succeed. However (property) based tax breaks have been extended way beyond their shelf life in this country for many years and have been of benefit generally to those who do not need it in any way, and the trickle down effect has been slight.

We need to quickly move our attention to other industries, developing R & D in universities, and investing very very heavily in science education at all levels, and establishing widespread incentives for people to progress to 4th level education. For god sake we still have no adequate broadband, this kind of infrastructure is as basic as having a phone by international standards. If there are no exports, there is no income, property development is only passing money from Peter to Paul. The money moves in ever decreasing circles and eventually runs out. Instead of there being no tax on the horse industry,or on holiday homes why not give substantial tax breaks for indigeneous start ups, or even no tax for a number of years. I don't think people realize (or remember come to think of it) how bad things can become.

Let's say if we look ahead 10 years and the political priorities domestically have been the same as the last 10 years. The major issues will be energy/waste and the dominance of China / India (the city of Bangalore knocks out 100k computer graduates a year) as economic powers.

After 10 years of FF/PD government does anybody really think they will be able to deal with these monolithic issues coming down the line? I'm not saying that FG would be any better, but as I said before they at least touched on these issues during their campaign.

dh2007

but the turnout would've been much better if the election was on the weekend. It was a tactical decision to have the election yesterday. Students are still doing exams. Younger people are less likely to vote FF.