Lisbon vote October 2nd - How do you intend to vote?

K-9

Look, this shower got their answer in the locals and EU Elections. FF and the Greens will hold out for as long as possible, because it is political suicide to go the polls, exactly for the reasons you outline.

They know going to the country now is stupid, politically.

P. Breathnach

r_obric wrote: »

my stance is simple, i want a change of government, and in the long run i dont see whats wrong with a more united europe, i have yet to hear a reason as to that being a bad thing

there are changes that need to be made that are not,
there are people that need to be held responsilbe that are not
there are hard decisions that need to be taken that are not
now is the time to get the finances, the politicians, the departments, the state and semi state organisations of this country right, but they are not trying to change the wastefull culture that exists within them

If i knew there was a general election coming then i would vote yes, because i would then have my say about this current gov, but this friday they are getting a no from me and it it goes against the opinions of people whom i respect and disrespect,

protest vote to get them out, simple as that for me

for me it cant really get any worse if the leave, but it can get a whole lot better when all the pals and cosy relationships are broken up

A no vote is unlikely to force an election here. Even the main opposition parties, if they didn't feel a need to posture to keep voters sweet, would probably tell you that an election in the short term would be a bad thing: some approximation to stability is necessary for a year or two. [And no, I am not a supporter of the present government.]

When we do get an election at some future date, the consequences of a no vote (if that were to happen) would be a problem for the incoming government, an extra problem on top of all our domestic ones. Do you really want to make things even harder for the next government?

8-10

r_obric wrote: »

my stance is simple, i want a change of government, and in the long run i dont see whats wrong with a more united europe, i have yet to hear a reason as to that being a bad thing

there are changes that need to be made that are not,
there are people that need to be held responsilbe that are not
there are hard decisions that need to be taken that are not
now is the time to get the finances, the politicians, the departments, the state and semi state organisations of this country right, but they are not trying to change the wastefull culture that exists within them

If i knew there was a general election coming then i would vote yes, because i would then have my say about this current gov, but this friday they are getting a no from me and it it goes against the opinions of people whom i respect and disrespect,

protest vote to get them out, simple as that for me

for me it cant really get any worse if the leave, but it can get a whole lot better when all the pals and cosy relationships are broken up

Whatever you think about that a No vote will not push a general election. I reckon in all honesty we'll have one in the first quarter of next year. Certainly very surprised if there's no general election in 2010, shocked in fact. That's when we go to the polls against/for government.

On Friday we're voting as European Citizens, take off the Irish party politics hat for a day, you'll look nicer without it.

Spook_ie

prinz wrote: »

http://www.fpri.org/ww/0405.200312.ganley.euconstitution.html

Read this and then rethink your objections to Lisbon.

I do my own reading and judgement making thanks very much

It shares most features of what the literature defines as a federation

a) The EU is a system of governance which has at least two orders of government, each existing under its own right and exercises direct influence on the people.

b) The European Treaties allocate jurisdiction and resources to these two main orders of government.

c) There are provisions for `shared government' in areas where the jurisdiction of the EU and the Member States overlap.

d) Community law enjoys supremacy over national law, it is the law of the land (Bundesrecht bricht Landesrecht).

e) European legislation is increasingly made by majority decision obliging individual Member States against their will.

f) At the same time, the composition and procedures of the European institutions are based not solely on principles of majoritarian representation, but guarantee the representation of `minority' views.

g) The European Court of Justice serves as an umpire to adjudicate conflicts between the European institutions and the Member States.

h) Finally, the EU has a directly elected parliament (since 1979).

The EU only lacks two significant features of a federation. First, the Member States remain the `masters' of the treaties, i.e., they have the exclusive power to amend or change the constitutive treaties of the EU. Second, the EU lacks a real `tax and spend' capacity, in other words, there is no fiscal federalism. Otherwise, however, the European Union today looks like a federal system

jeanmonnetprogram.org

free-man

8-10 wrote: »

Whatever you think about that a No vote will not push a general election. I reckon in all honesty we'll have one in the first quarter of next year. Certainly very surprised if there's no general election in 2010, shocked in fact. That's when we go to the polls against/for government.

On Friday we're voting as European Citizens, take off the Irish party politics hat for a day, you'll look nicer without it.

In my opinion it won't guarantee an election but it will add significant pressure to the government if Lisbon falls down again.

Add to this a tough budget and they'll (hopefully) be gone in the new year.

Anyone who says a Lisbon No will have no impact on the government standing down is misleading you in my view.

meglome

free-man wrote: »

Anyone who says a Lisbon No will have no impact on the government standing down is misleading you in my view.

What government standing? Other than some die-hard FF supporters everyone hates them. This is exactly the reason they won't go, why on god's green earth would you call an election that you'll get destroyed in. THAT WOULD BE MENTAL.

free-man

meglome wrote: »

What government standing? Other than some die-hard FF supporters everyone hates them. This is exactly the reason they won't go, why on god's green earth would you call an election that you'll get destroyed in. THAT WOULD BE MENTAL.

Are you saying that if Lisbon fails and a severe budget is introduced that there WONT be incredible pressure on the greens to pull out?

Heard it here first folks ...

meglome

free-man wrote: »

Are you saying that if Lisbon fails and a severe budget is introduced that there WONT be incredible pressure on the greens to pull out?

Heard it here first folks ...

But the Greens poll standings are shíte too. So they'll have to hold out as long as possible and find a way out that will save face. Since the Greens fully support the Lisbon treaty there's no way it'll be now or even soon.

free-man

meglome wrote: »

But the Greens poll standings are shíte too. So they'll have to hold out as long as possible and find a way out that will save face. Since the Greens fully support the Lisbon treaty there's no way it'll be now or even soon.

Yes the Greens support Lisbon and yes that is a reason a lot of the electorate will register a protest vote to try get them out..

Are you with me?

johnwillnot

Ireland now has 2.0% of the EU vote; The Lisbon Treaty will halve it to 0.9% as the new voting system is based on population. You can find a chart on the following page: http://en.euabc.com/.
This chart does not include Turkey, Montenegro, Albania, Croatia, Iceland and Macedonia. All these countries are planning on joining in the future. If new members join, I suspect our voting power will be reduced even further. The population of Turkey is over 74 million. Can anyone explain to me why this is good for Ireland? Does anyone remember when the Eurovision Song Contest changed it voting system? Irlande NIL POINTE!
Vote NO for a better deal for Ireland.

ei.sdraob

johnwillnot wrote: »

Ireland now has 2.0% of the EU vote; The Lisbon Treaty will halve it to 0.9% as the new voting system is based on population. You can find a chart on the following page: http://en.euabc.com/.
This chart does not include Turkey, Montenegro, Albania, Croatia, Iceland and Macedonia. All these countries are planning on joining in the future. If new members join, I suspect our voting power will be reduced even further. The population of Turkey is over 74 million. Can anyone explain to me why this is good for Ireland? Does anyone remember when the Eurovision Song Contest changed it voting system? Irlande NIL POINTE!
Vote NO for a better deal for Ireland.

:rolleyes:

Sam Vimes

Oh look a brand new poster linking to the UK Independence party's website that pretends to be neutral. I for one am shocked

MrMatisse

Subartu wrote: »

Brave Sons and Daughters of Beautiful Ireland!

Hundreds of millions are trustingly watching You from every corner of the Word and from the oppressed Europe.
We did not have any chance to vote against the Satanist Treaty at all. The tzionist dominated MPs voted for the lissabon treaty without asking the people.

In the name of Your ancestors and forefathers, we ask You to understand the
historical importance of the 2nd of October.

You have already gained the appreciation of all human beings at the first vote, when You stopped the coming darkness.

We are very proud of You!
God bless You all!

Subartu from the remained Hungary

:rolleyes:

Scofflaw

johnwillnot wrote: »

Ireland now has 2.0% of the EU vote; The Lisbon Treaty will halve it to 0.9% as the new voting system is based on population. You can find a chart on the following page: http://en.euabc.com/.
This chart does not include Turkey, Montenegro, Albania, Croatia, Iceland and Macedonia. All these countries are planning on joining in the future. If new members join, I suspect our voting power will be reduced even further. The population of Turkey is over 74 million. Can anyone explain to me why this is good for Ireland? Does anyone remember when the Eurovision Song Contest changed it voting system? Irlande NIL POINTE!
Vote NO for a better deal for Ireland.

Just a reminder - the new voting system in the Council is based on population and on a vote per member. The current one is based on population, a numerical vote, and a vote per member.

In the current system we have a voting weight of 0.8% (population), numerical vote 2.02% (7 out of 345), and 3.7% (membership). Average 2.17%

In the new system we'll have a voting weight of 0.8% (population) and 3.7% (membership). Average 2.25%

Personally, I'd call that a better deal for Ireland, but then I'm comparing like with like.

cordially,
Scofflaw

MrMatisse

Scofflaw wrote: »

Just a reminder - the new voting system in the Council is based on population and on a vote per member. The current one is based on population, a numerical vote, and a vote per member.

In the current system we have a voting weight of 0.8% (population), numerical vote 2.02% (7 out of 345), and 3.7% (membership). Average 2.17%

In the new system we'll have a voting weight of 0.8% (population) and 3.7% (membership). Average 2.25%

Personally, I'd call that a better deal for Ireland, but then I'm comparing like with like.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Yes, a soverign country having a 2% influence over decisions that affect them.

Wonderful.

prinz

Really-Stressed wrote: »

Yes, a soverign country having a 2% influence over decisions that affect them.

Wonderful.

I think you'll find on a population basis we're fairly well overrepresented as it is :rolleyes: What should we have 100% influence over what the rest of Europe does?

r_obric

8-10 wrote: »

Whatever you think about that a No vote will not push a general election. I reckon in all honesty we'll have one in the first quarter of next year. Certainly very surprised if there's no general election in 2010, shocked in fact. That's when we go to the polls against/for government.

On Friday we're voting as European Citizens, take off the Irish party politics hat for a day, you'll look nicer without it.

i dont see there being (m)any problems in europe that need to be addressed or changed urgently, i see problems in ireland that need to be addressed urgently, that are being put on the back burner, yet we are being made vote again on something that we have voted already on, I dont see any benefits to voting yes, and i dont see and negatives to voting No.

I do however see a positive to voting No (a kick in the hole for the gov) that outweights the negative of voting yes (having to do it a third time)

prinz

Spook_ie wrote: »

I do my own reading and judgement making thanks very much..

So you are prepared to ignore the fact the Ganley/Libertas want a federal Europe yet campaign against the Lisbon Treaty, which in your view is a step towards federalism?

As it is the German Constitutional Court have ruled against the federalism case, and they should know what a federal state is as they are the Constitutional Court in one.

K-9

Really-Stressed wrote: »

Yes, a soverign country having a 2% influence over decisions that affect them.

Wonderful.

So any examples of how it has gone against us in the past?

Stark

Or a reason why sticking with a lower voting weight is better than opting for a slightly higher one.

Kimono-Girl

I, my family and friends are voting no!

firstly you should remember FF are aware that as of the next election they are out of office and out of jobs, but there are a few nicely paid EU jobs waiting for them if the yes vote goes through....


secondly as many Europeans are aware we pay he highest dole/benefits with the easiest access to payments, this has caused a massive abuse of our system and billions paid out...add this to the fact the EU wants turkey to join and will be doing so under lisbon....there are 75 million citizens there majority of which are poor farmers who will be able to abuse Irish Benefits how will this effect our economy? nevermind the fact they will undercut the Irish workers!


for those who rant on about the EU giving us money to build roads/schools...etc
We did not GET the money we were LOANED the money, we are/will have to pay it all back at some stage or another...it suits the EU to have us BORROW money to pay out benefits to other EU citizens as it increases our debt and pays them interest....

also to those referring to the referendum commission i ask who is it behind it? if you trace it back it is the vote 'YES' camp who ARE lying on posters on the street.

lets us not forget the yes camp have resorted to popstars and sports stars to recruit yes votes, why are such publicity stunts needed if the text speaks for itself?

the EU is already bringing in Laws here we have no choice but to comply with, such as the new lightbulbs...what the EU forgot to mention is if one of these new bulbs breaks you have to evcuate the room for 10 minutes as the gas in them causes cancer...but then to the EU what does your health matter once you are saving the planet???

this is just one minior example....so i ask since small matters such as cancer causing agents being enforced on our homes was 'forgotton' to be mentioned by the EU what are they 'forgetting' to tell us about lisbon?

ScumLord

I really can't decide, I don't know which way to go. I voted yes the last time, my only reason for doing that was because I like Europe, I like the freedom, the currency and the good influence Europe is having on Ireland.

I don't want Europe to turn into some massive bureaucracy though, I'd like less top heavy government. I really don't know where Europe is going or if it needs to be going anywhere. At this stage I'm worried the MEPs are coming up with stuff to do just so they look busy and important. I think that's a real problem with government organisations. They'll never want to complete their job because then they'll be out of work.

I'd almost like to vote no just to see what they'll come up with next. They would have to go back to the drawing board and reconsider the little guys.


I'm on the fence leaning back to yes again. No real sound logical reason though I've just enjoyed travelling around Europe meeting other Europeans and want more of the same.

prinz

candlelover wrote: »

I, my family and friends are voting no!
what are they 'forgetting' to tell us about lisbon?

So much fail Not even going to bother replying that.

Sam Vimes

candlelover wrote: »

firstly you should remember FF are aware that as of the next election they are out of office and out of jobs,

that's hopefully true.

candlelover wrote: »

but there are a few nicely paid EU jobs waiting for them if the yes vote goes through....

Possibly true regardless of the vote

candlelover wrote: »

secondly as many Europeans are aware we pay he highest dole/benefits with the easiest access to payments, this has caused a massive abuse of our system and billions paid out...

Also that our government explicitly allowed them in which they didn't have to

candlelover wrote: »

add this to the fact the EU wants turkey to join and will be doing so under lisbon....

Not true

candlelover wrote: »

for those who rant on about the EU giving us money to build roads/schools...etc
We did not GET the money we were LOANED the money, we are/will have to pay it all back at some stage or another...it suits the EU to have us BORROW money to pay out benefits to other EU citizens as it increases our debt and pays them interest....

Some of the money was loans but not all of it. We've got about €41 billion effectively for free.

candlelover wrote: »

also to those referring to the referendum commission i ask who is it behind it? if you trace it back it is the vote 'YES' camp

Not true

candlelover wrote: »

who ARE lying on posters on the street.

Not true. It's a matter of opinion that 91% of economists, 90% of businesses, the majority of trade unions and these people agree with.

candlelover wrote: »

lets us not forget the yes camp have resorted to popstars and sports stars to recruit yes votes,

Unfortunately true

candlelover wrote: »

why are such publicity stunts needed if the text speaks for itself?

Because many people are idiots who are swayed by such things but not by boring facts

candlelover wrote: »

the EU is already bringing in Laws here we have no choice but to comply with,

Not true

candlelover wrote: »

such as the new lightbulbs

The Irish government actually brought that law in well ahead of the rest of the EU

candlelover wrote: »

...what the EU forgot to mention is if one of these new bulbs breaks you have to evcuate the room for 10 minutes as the gas in them causes cancer...

Source?

This suggests it's not true:
http://www.greenpeace.org.uk/blog/climate/green-light-bulbs-give-you-cancer-and-other-tall-stories-20080108

edit: and this:
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090529192925AAGhdzQ

and this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compact_fluorescent_lamp

It seems the claims are because of mercury which is also in thermometers

Stark

candlelover wrote: »

I, my family and friends are voting no!

firstly you should remember FF are aware that as of the next election they are out of office and out of jobs, but there are a few nicely paid EU jobs waiting for them if the yes vote goes through....

Have something to back this up with?

candlelover wrote: »

lets us not forget the yes camp have resorted to popstars and sports stars to recruit yes votes, why are such publicity stunts needed if the text speaks for itself?

Why does the No side have to resort to pictures of crying children and made-up issues if the text speaks for itself?

candlelover wrote: »

the EU is already bringing in Laws here we have no choice but to comply with, such as the new lightbulbs...what the EU forgot to mention is if one of these new bulbs breaks you have to evcuate the room for 10 minutes as the gas in them causes cancer...but then to the EU what does your health matter once you are saving the planet???

The Irish government had already planned to bring in the incandescent light bulb ban regardless. The "EU" doesn't make decisions, its member states do.

Have a source for "energy saving light bulbs cause cancer"? Which type of light bulb? Fluorescent? Halogen? LED? What's the cancer causing agent?

You also seem to overlook the myriads of carcinogens that the EU protects us from thanks to common standards on food safety, workplace materials and the like.

candlelover wrote: »

this is just one minior example....so i ask since small matters such as cancer causing agents being enforced on our homes was 'forgotton' to be mentioned by the EU what are they 'forgetting' to tell us about lisbon?

Nothing that you can't read in the treaty itself.

prinz

candlelover wrote: »

...what the EU forgot to mention is if one of these new bulbs breaks you have to evcuate the room for 10 minutes as the gas in them causes cancer...

Professor Virginia Murray, Consultant Medical Toxicologist, said: "Compact fluorescent lightbulbs contain a tiny amount of mercury - roughly enough to cover the tip of a ball point pen. A small proportion of this could be released into a room if the bulb is broken, but this does not pose a health risk to anyone immediately exposed....
There is no convincing evidence that mercury (or mercury compounds) can cause cancer in humans.

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/163886.php


But sure what would she know, she's probably a yes voter! :pac:

Stark

Sam Vimes wrote: »

It seems the claims are because of mercury which is also in thermometers

The EU forced thermometers on us.

moogester

These lightbulbs are anything but green. They're a danger for those who make them for starters.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article6211261.ece

And then there's the problems they cause if broken
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-506347/An-energy-saving-bulb-gone--evacuate-room-now.html

Disposal problems.....they need disposing of properly but i imagine most people will just chuck them in the bin causing untold damage. Example:

Think about this, how many of these bulbs have you got in your home? 6? 7? 10?

How many houses are on your road? 30? now how many roads are in your village/town/city? lets say 150.

Now that's about 31,500 Light bulbs for an average, size town. THATS allot of bulbs. how much mercury is that?

well 31,500 bulbs times 5 milligrams =157.5 g of Mercury...

now when all, these bulbs are thrown out, they are going straight to the dump.
and 157.5g of mercury being thrown out say every 5 years, is not so good.

when it rains, this is creating a mix of mercury and other crap, at your local dump. many times(especially where i am) this toxic mix, will run off into local rivers/estuaries/creeks/sea/fields/ even drains.

Which is A disaster for aquatic life. and will likely eventually find its way into your drinking water. and crops...

The above is just for starters.....i'm not even going into the health problems these bulbs cause to some people using them.

Follow the money......whose "bright" idea was this?

When i can no longer get incandescent bulbs i'm having LED ones.....no way i'm using those ones

marco_polo

moogester wrote: »

These lightbulbs are anything but green. They're a danger for those who make them for starters.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article6211261.ece

And then there's the problems they cause if broken
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-506347/An-energy-saving-bulb-gone--evacuate-room-now.html

Disposal problems.....they need disposing of properly but i imagine most people will just chuck them in the bin causing untold damage. Example:

Think about this, how many of these bulbs have you got in your home? 6? 7? 10?

How many houses are on your road? 30? now how many roads are in your village/town/city? lets say 150.

Now that's about 31,500 Light bulbs for an average, size town. THATS allot of bulbs. how much mercury is that?

well 31,500 bulbs times 5 milligrams =157.5 g of Mercury...

now when all, these bulbs are thrown out, they are going straight to the dump.
and 157.5g of mercury being thrown out say every 5 years, is not so good.

when it rains, this is creating a mix of mercury and other crap, at your local dump. many times(especially where i am) this toxic mix, will run off into local rivers/estuaries/creeks/sea/fields/ even drains.

Which is A disaster for aquatic life. and will likely eventually find its way into your drinking water. and crops...

The above is just for starters.....i'm not even going into the health problems these bulbs cause to some people using them.

Follow the money......whose "bright" idea was this?

When i can no longer get incandescent bulbs i'm having LED ones.....no way i'm using those ones

Just a thought, but perhaps people should consider not illegally disposing of these lightbulbs to domestic landfill then?


http://energystar.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/energystar.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=5411&p_created=1220627774

CFLs contain a very small amount of mercury sealed within the glass tubing - an average of 4 milligrams. Because of this, EPA recommends that consumers take advantage of available local recycling options for CFLs. But if the CFL is not recycled and it ends up in a landfill, EPA estimates that about 11% of the mercury in the CFL is released into air or water, assuming the light bulb is broken. This is because most mercury vapor inside fluorescent light bulbs becomes bound to the inside of the light bulb. Therefore, if all 290 million CFLs sold in 2007 were sent to a landfill (versus recycled, as a worst case) - they would add only 0.13 metric tons, or 0.1%, to U.S. mercury emissions caused by humans.

prinz

You cannot be serious :rolleyes: ffs. How many more are we going to have?