Democracy my B0lllox!!!

tlev

worldrepublic wrote: »

There is a huge amount of poverty in europe. I think in most cases people are not simply living beyond their means, but are struggling to survive. This has really nothing to do with deregulation or the banking system itself. The system is dysfunctional, but this has made the people at the very top of society richer than ever. Trillions are being taken off workers and handed over to banks. By the way, banks are mostly privately owned, by enormously wealthy families and dynasties. I think that without some form of protest, by Ireland and other countries that might follow suit, there will actually be even more in the way of massive bailouts. Really, workers are being asked to do alot of handing over. Handing over money to banks, and handing over power via the Lisbon Treaty. Retaining power, not giving it away is the answer now, and it is the answer in the future. How much more do you want to give up?

No I disagree with you, people who are in poverty in Europe are generally from the Eastern bloc, part of the old soviet union, which collapsed because it itself was living beyond its means, producing worthless nothings and giving large amounts of state handouts. A lot of other people are in poverty because of ethnic and civil wars which have little to do with the banking sector. These are old hatreds dating back hundreds of years, (I know there is no war atm) but for instance the Slovaks hating the Hungarians for being part of the old Hungro-Austrain empire. The Catalans disliking the Spanish etc.

So Ireland retain power and then what? How will we be better off exactly? The current lot in government could have the power of Grayskull and they still would have trouble finding their own a*****. Also don't forget that money talks and bulls""" walks. We can be all powerful unto ourselves if no one is willing to give us money or invest in our economy.

And your talk of powerful families owning the banks etc. Well that is probably in part true but that too has been going on forever, there is always an elite few at the top pulling the strings, always has been and always will be, that won't change.

People after a while might indeed get so fed up that there will be some from of revolution from the opressed masses but these things are cyclical and it will all happen again.

I don't like the levels of incompetance either in the banking system but they are needed for a functioning economy and indeed society.

ei.sdraob

tlev wrote: »

which collapsed because it itself was living beyond its means, producing worthless nothings and giving large amounts of state handouts.

Sounds like a certain other country i cant put my finger on it :P

tlev

My parents grew up in communist Hungary and they told me a few stories of how things where. Sure everyone had a job and the only thing you had to be afraid of was the secret police taking you away at night never to be seen again but otherwise it was great until it lasted.
Basically it was all about figures, how much coal could a worker shovel, how many doorhandles could someone manufacture, it was pretty much useless as long as it bet the Americans.

free to prosper

Please, please , please - everybody should know by now that the govt "guarantees" are a PR con job with no substance.

Foreign Secretary David Miliband reiterated that "Every head of state agrees that these guarantees do not change the Treaty."


In a debate in the Lords at the end of June, Europe Minister Glenys Kinnock confirmed that Ireland will be voting on exactly the same text of the Lisbon Treaty a second time around. She said: "Those guarantees do not change the Lisbon treaty; the European Council conclusions are very clear on them. The Lisbon treaty, as debated and decided by our Parliament, will not be changed and, on the basis of these guarantees, Ireland will proceed to have a second referendum in October." She added: "Nothing in the treaty will change and nothing in the guarantees will change the treaty as your Lordships agreed it."

When asked about the legal status of the 'guarantees', she confirmed that they will not be legally-binding until they are written into the EU treaties as a protocol, which will happen after the Irish referendum. She said: "My Lords, what we have in the guarantees will become binding in international law when the guarantees are translated into a protocol at the time of the next accession, which presumably will be when Croatia or Iceland comes in. Before that protocol can be ratified by the UK, Parliament must pass a Bill. As I said, Parliament will rightly have the final say."

During questions at the House of Commons European Scrutiny Committee this morning, Foreign Secretary David Miliband reiterated that "Every head of state agrees that these guarantees do not change the Treaty."

However, he appeared to contradict the Europe Minister by stressing that "the guarantees are legally-binding in international law... It does not require ratification in order to have legal affect." This lead the Chairman of the Committee to ask, "If this is a legally-binding decision and doesn't need ratification, why does it need to be put in a protocol?" He asked, "Is it a stitch-up to get around Irish peoples' concerns? I can see why people would be suspicious."

ei.sdraob

free to prosper wrote: »

Please, please , please - everybody should know by now that the govt "guarantees" are a PR con job with no substance.

well in all honesty they were not needed in first place

since the "concerns" regarding: abortion, neutrality, corpo tax, etc

had nothing to do with Lisbon to begin with

Dinner

free to prosper wrote: »

Please, please , please - everybody should know by now that the govt "guarantees" are a PR con job with no substance.

Please, please, please - everybody should know by now that the govt guarantees address the concerns voiced by the public via numerous surveys after the first vote.

It is not, directly at least, the governments fault that people were worried about things that weren't in the treaty.

So when somebody comes up to the government and says I'm worried about abortion being introduced by Lisbon. What do you do? You reassure them that abortion cannot be introduced as a result of Lisbon through a number of legally binding protocols. Where's the outrage?

If the concerns of the public happened to be about issues actually in the treaty then the treaty might have to be changed but since they don't, it doesn't.

It is a very simple concept.

tlev

Sometimes I really wish that Ireland voted no was the laughing stock of Europe and then foreign investment would dry up just so I could say I told you so to the people who so desparetely want Ireland to stand on its own two feet!

Daftendirekt

free to prosper wrote: »

Please, please , please - everybody should know by now that the govt "guarantees" are a PR con job with no substance.

Please, please, please, educate yourself before making claims like this.

Stickied post on the guarantees wrote:

The Decision of the 27 EU Heads of States or Government agreed at the June European Council on Ireland’s legal guarantees will constitute an international agreement, which will take effect on the date of entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty. This will be legally binding under international law and will be registered with the United Nations.

If the Lisbon Treaty is approved by all EU Member States, including by Ireland in a further referendum and subsequently enters into force, the Decision will be annexed to the Treaties at the time of the conclusion of the next accession treaty for a new Member State. Protocols form an integral part of the Treaties to which they are annexed and have the same legal status as the Treaties themselves.

Scofflaw

free to prosper wrote: »

Please, please , please - everybody should know by now that the govt "guarantees" are a PR con job with no substance.

Actually, they're the response to a PR con-job by the No campaigns last time. They don't change the treaty because they're not intended to. They're guarantees of what's not in it - only if what the No campaigns said last time were actually true would there be a need to change the treaty to exclude those things. It isn't, so they don't.

Also, of course, they're not from our government, and they are legally binding. Before you go on to claim that the text isn't settled, or hasn't been published, I have to point out that the text is available in a sticky at the top of the forum.

regards,
Scofflaw

ei.sdraob

tlev wrote: »

Sometimes I really wish that Ireland voted no was the laughing stock of Europe and then foreign investment would dry up just so I could say I told you so to the people who so desparetely want Ireland to stand on its own two feet!

alot of the more vocal No supporters are from either far left or far right

trust me left to their own things would get nasty

this whole new world order conspiracy business is amusing considering that membership in the eu has been beneficial for us and everyone else involved

free to prosper

No supporters and No voters make up the majority of the population of Ireland.

Given the majority of professional (taxpayer funded) political classes of lying gits are on the Yes side.

Lisbon vote lines out as the people versus the politicians.

It is those who believe in national democracy against those who think we should be ruled by Brussels bureaucrats.

The Yes side has show their contempt for democracy by having a second run to get the only result they want.

It has lowered the view of the EU in the eyes of millions. Exposed the distaste at EU for democratic votes.

Ireland, Holland, France - the EU doesn't want to know what you think.

Dinner

free to prosper wrote: »

No supporters and No voters make up the majority of the population of Ireland.

Well thats a lie. Are you not aware of the turnout for the first Lisbon referendum or did you just say that knowing it was incorrect to make your point sound better than it actually is.

free to prosper wrote: »

Ireland, Holland, France - the EU doesn't want to know what you think.

Again, not true. After the votes in each country surveys were carried out to find out why the people voted the way they did. So again, you are either misinformed or lying.

Which is it?

ei.sdraob

free to prosper wrote: »

No supporters and No voters make up the majority of the population of Ireland.

do you have facts to backup your statements, your posts read like something straight from the Conspiracies forum, i don't even know where to begin you managed to concentrate so many lies with no references to backup your opinion in one post, and then try to pass it up as the opinion of the "majority" of the people of this country





since you are incapable it seems of providing facts to backup your statement, here are some figures for ya


only 53% of people who could vote bothered turning out for Lisbon I

and of those 53% voted NO

thats about a quarter of the voting population ...

free to prosper

Yes side are minority euro fanatic cranks - alot of tax funded politicos.

The majority of voters in Ireland voted No to Lisbon.

Their vote was ignored.

The peoples of France and Holland voted NO to the EU Constitution.

Their vote was ignored - totally.

The EU displays contempt for democratic votes. It's image has been sullied -

or it has been exposed at last.

Scofflaw

free to prosper wrote: »

Yes side are minority euro fanatic cranks - alot of tax funded politicos.

The majority of voters in Ireland voted No to Lisbon.

Their vote was ignored.

The peoples of France and Holland voted NO to the EU Constitution.

Their vote was ignored - totally.

The EU displays contempt for democratic votes. It's image has been sullied -

or it has been exposed at last.

If you're just going to keep repeating slogans and abuse rather than engaging with other posters, you'll be asked to leave.

moderately,
Scofflaw

Dinner

free to prosper wrote: »

The majority of voters in Ireland voted No to Lisbon.

Their vote was ignored.

Your still wrong. On both accounts.

Read the post above to work out why your comment on the majority of voters bit is wrong.

On your other bit of bull****; After the no vote, Lisbon was not ratified. The government made an attempt to satisfy the concerns of the no voters. And with these concerns satisfied, they are running the referendum again.

They were not ignored.

PopeBuckfastXVI

Wow that's a lot of falsehoods in one post, let's visit them one by one...

free to prosper wrote: »

Yes side are minority euro fanatic cranks - alot of tax funded politicos.

Well that's just a straight forward unsubstantiated ad hominem attack, and isn't worth responding to, I will tell you, as a courtesy, that you only serve to run down your own arguments when you engage in such bitter personal slurs.

free to prosper wrote: »

The majority of voters in Ireland voted No to Lisbon.

This is not true. The majority of the people who voted in the Lisbon referendum voted No to Lisbon. That does not equal the majority of 'voters in Ireland', which by the way is a further refinement of your original statement that 'No supporters and No voters make up the majority of the population of Ireland'.

That's called 'moving the goalposts' and is an essentially dishonest argumentative technique, which has no place in a constructive discussion.

free to prosper wrote: »

Their vote was ignored.

This is not true, the Lisbon treaty was not ratified.

Or are you claiming that the Lisbon treaty was ratified? If you cannot provide evidence that it was, I invite you to withdraw the claim, or at the very least to not repeat it again.

free to prosper wrote: »

The peoples of France and Holland voted NO to the EU Constitution.

Their vote was ignored - totally.

Again, this is not true, the EU Constitution was not implemented. Can you provide evidence that the EU Constitution has been implemented? If not I invite you to withdraw the claim, or, again at least not repeat it.

free to prosper wrote: »

The EU displays contempt for democratic votes. It's image has been sullied -


or it has been exposed at last.

The EU has neither the power, nor the right to ask us to vote again (if this is what you mean by displaying contempt), and indeed nor did it. It was the Irish government alone who scheduled a second vote.

Forwarding, or simply emptily echoing lies is not discussing or debating.

Boskowski

tlev wrote: »

...part of the old soviet union, which collapsed because it itself was living beyond its means, producing worthless nothings and giving large amounts of state handouts....

Sorry but I disagree. The eastern block failed in my opinion for two things.

a) the public service factor
Everyone (more or less) worked in the public sector. No incentive to bring forward private initiatives. Everybody was trying to screw the system as well as they possibly could - to get by. So how you're going to run an efficient state planned economy like this, I don't know and they obviously did not know either.

b) the west
We kept them in a constant competition, we provoked a massive arms race that sucked way too much out of their economy in order to succeed. I'm not defending the communist system as implemented by the former soviet block nations. But we also made dam sure there was no way they're going to make it work.

Boskowski

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

The EU has neither the power, nor the right to ask us to vote again (if this is what you mean by displaying contempt), and indeed nor did it. It was the Irish government alone who scheduled a second vote.

So tell me one thing then. Do you think that the Irish government asked us to vote again on their own account, because they kind of felt like it was good thing? Or would you say the Irish government was told to get their fkn act together and deliver the right vote rather sooner than later?

Dinner

realcam wrote: »

So tell me one thing then. Do you think that the Irish government asked us to vote again on their own account, because they kind of felt like it was good thing? Or would you say the Irish government was told to get their fkn act together and deliver the right vote rather sooner than later?

The First one. The Irish government were very involved in the negotiating of Lisbon in the first place. So they had a very strong interest in it being passed.

PopeBuckfastXVI

realcam wrote: »

So tell me one thing then. Do you think that the Irish government asked us to vote again on their own account, because they kind of felt like it was good thing?

Yes absolutely I do, I think that's exactly what they did, and not because they 'kind of felt like' it was a good thing, but because they wholeheartedly believe that Lisbon represents a good deal for Ireland, and the EU. They should do seeing as how they had a hand in negotiating it.

It's probably easier for me to believe that though, because I also think that Lisbon represents a good deal for Ireland, and the EU. If you don't think it's a good deal, you might fall into the trap of thinking that everyone believes the same as you, and must be under some form of coercion if they disagree with you. Trust me, this is not the case.

realcam wrote: »

Or would you say the Irish government was told to get their fkn act together and deliver the right vote rather sooner than later?

I would say not, mainly because I've never seen anything to make me think that, and, as per my first response, I don't believe the government needed to be told what to do, because they were in agreement with the other member states anyway (if that's who you think might have told them to 'get their fkn act together').

For what it's worth, I don't believe for a second that were the government in disagreement with the other member states they would be told to 'get their fkn act together', as I've never seen anything to make me believe that was a possibility.

Have you? And can you share it with everyone in the class?

Ciks

tlev wrote: »

Sometimes I really wish that Ireland voted no was the laughing stock of Europe and then foreign investment would dry up just so I could say I told you so to the people who so desparetely want Ireland to stand on its own two feet!

My parents work in the tourist industry and the day the 'No' came out for Lisbon all the tourists, some French, some Germans and some from another European country told them that the Irish were the 'heros of Europe' for voting no.

Scofflaw

Ciks wrote: »

My parents work in the tourist industry and the day the 'No' came out for Lisbon all the tourists, some French, some Germans and some from another European country told them that the Irish were the 'heros of Europe' for voting no.

Would it be unkind to wonder if that will translate into a huge increase in tourism? Everybody likes to see someone else poke the political classes in the eye - particularly when, as in our case, we successfully poked nearly every government in Europe in the eye. It would be nice to see some kind of more solid expression of support, but that certainly hasn't happened to date.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Ciks

You'd be surprised actually, things have really picked up. June was quiet, July was okay but August is going to be great for tourism. Keep the faith, we can rely on our sympathetic neighbours.

Interesting to refer to our voting no as 'poking nearly every government in Europe in the eye'. This idea of treating the leaders of europe like some sort of big bad wolf who must be appeased is very telling. I'd rather not indulge such megalomania though.

Scofflaw

Ciks wrote: »

You'd be surprised actually, things have really picked up. June was quiet, July was okay but August is going to be great for tourism. Keep the faith, we can rely on our sympathetic neighbours.

Interesting to refer to our voting no as 'poking nearly every government in Europe in the eye'. This idea of treating the leaders of europe like some sort of big bad wolf who must be appeased is very telling. I'd rather not indulge such megalomania though.

Then you should probably have a word with the makers of posters and cartoons:

http://img25.imageshack.us/img25/1831/antilisbon10335381.jpg

http://img17.imageshack.us/img17/2108/antilisbontwosm1139920.jpg

...and a good number of journalists.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Ciks

How sweet and almost as funny as the promises made to us.

FutureTaoiseach

Dinner, he said no side supporters and voters. Not merely voters.

Dinner

FutureTaoiseach wrote: »

Dinner, he said no side supporters and voters. Not merely voters.

So?

With a 53% turnout and 53% of those voters voting no there would need to be a lot of no supporters that didn't bother voting to approach either half of the whole population or half those eligible to vote. Either way it is a ridiculous statement.

Boskowski

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

Have you? And can you share it with everyone in the class?

Well, I can share what I believe while at the same time stating that I do not believe I'm the know-it-all and I'm open to corrections.

I believe that the way the EU manifests itself right now is that of a European superstate. I believe also that this superstate is deliberately not being implemented as a true democracy. And with true democracy I mean in the spirit of the great philosophers of the era of the french revolution defining a true state of the people (or at least a well meant attempt at it).
I believe that this European superstate is going to be geared towards the 'ruling classes' rather than the 'plebs' (forgive me some simplifications) and that the pleb's political influence and control will be greatly reduced. This is the impression I get from the Lisbon treaty and it's interpretations anyway. That is my issue with the Lisbon treaty. I don't care about this stupid abortion, neutrality, tax bullsh1t. Just as a background.

Ireland found itself now in the /sarcasm unfortunate sarcasm\ situation that a referendum was required, while in practically all the other member states the Lisbon treaty could be imposed - in the true spirit of what's to come - by the ruling classes upon the plebs. Even more unfortunate, this referendum went wrong, because our government - living up to it's abilities as demonstrated in practically all other areas - also messed this one up.

I'm not saying it's not in the interest of our own ruling classes/government to hammer this one home. They wanted it as much as the next lobby-infested, corporate controlled, self serving EU politician. But they messed up.

And now they've been told to get their fkn act (:D) together. Of course.

Now you know what you're dealing with, a hopeless cynic.

FutureTaoiseach

Dinner wrote: »

So?

With a 53% turnout and 53% of those voters voting no there would need to be a lot of no supporters that didn't bother voting to approach either half of the whole population or half those eligible to vote. Either way it is a ridiculous statement.

By that standard no EU Treaty would have been regarded as carrying the majority of public support.