The best thread(s) I've ever read on the Lisbon Treaty(Warning: Very Long)

w00t

ei.sdraob wrote: »

<snip>


Lisbon Treaty wont save us, but rejecting Lisbon would make things worse economicaly, my own small company nearly went under few months ago due to chaos and lack of confidence in the international trade system

Refusing Lisbon would only create more uncertainty and in business uncertainty is very very bad <snip>

/

How will rejecting the Lisbon treaty make things worse and why are you equating your own company and chaos/international trade to the Lisbon question? Please explain in detail or retract those scaremongering remarks.

While you are at it....Please provide examples were our first rejection of the Lisbon treaty has had a proven negative result for our economy via the EU and our No vote.

Thank You.
w00t

ei.sdraob

w00t wrote: »

How will rejecting the Lisbon treaty make things worse and why are you equating your own company and chaos/international trade to the Lisbon question? Please explain in detail or retract those scaremongering remarks.

While you are at it....Please provide examples were our first rejection of the Lisbon treaty has had a proven negative result for our economy via the EU and our No vote.

Thank You.
w00t

scaremongering? perhaps you should read a history book or two

i already explained before about confidence and uncertainty being bad

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=61271648&postcount=327

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=61758720&postcount=181


first rejection didnt have much of an impact yet (it takes many years for investment projects to happen) and everyone knew there be a second referendum relatively shortly thereafter

but there wont be a third referendum, theres no will and no precedent, this is it


/

w00t

ei.sdraob wrote: »

scaremongering? perhaps you should read a history book or two

i already explained before about confidence and uncertainty being bad

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=61271648&postcount=327

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=61758720&postcount=181


first rejection didnt have much of an impact yet (it takes many years for investment projects to happen) and everyone knew there be a second referendum relatively shortly thereafter

but there wont be a third referendum, theres no will and no precedent, this is it


/

Confidence and uncertentiy being bad? Damn right they are.

Lisbon won't help our banking and housing crisis. Your examples have noting to do with the Lisbon treaty. Unless the Eu just write us a check for a few billion......

Also to ask you, did everyone know there would be a second vote? I was pretty well read up on the first one and I didn't see anything about it on the official sites. Quite to opposite actually.

ei.sdraob

w00t wrote: »

Unless the Eu just write us a check for a few billion......

guess whose been buying our worthless bonds?

and guess whose paying for NAMA?


theres a reason why 91% of independent Irish economists support Lisbon

are you an economist?


/

Jungle Bunny

ei.sdraob wrote: »

guess whose been buying our worthless bonds?

and guess whose paying for NAMA?


theres a reason why 91% of independent Irish economists support Lisbon

are you an economist?


/

What about the second vote question asked?

ei.sdraob

Jungle Bunny wrote: »

What about the second vote question asked?

? what are you trying to say? can you elaborate please

Jungle Bunny

ei.sdraob wrote: »

? what are you trying to say? can you elaborate please

w00t wrote: »

Also to ask you, did everyone know there would be a second vote? I was pretty well read up on the first one and I didn't see anything about it on the official sites. Quite to opposite actually.

One meant this.

ei.sdraob

Jungle Bunny wrote: »

One meant this.

did people know there be a second vote before first referendum? no

did we know there be a second vote once the people were surveyed and guarantees made? yes

BlitzKrieg

Also to ask you, did everyone know there would be a second vote? I was pretty well read up on the first one and I didn't see anything about it on the official sites. Quite to opposite actually.

I dont think anyone knew there would be a 2nd vote going into the first referendum or not, at least up until a week before hand.

The issue is a substantial (not all) number of voters had voted with issues that were not linked to Lisbon.

As I said not all, but more then enough to justify that if these issues were clarified the majority would be in favour of Lisbon.

Of course I mean issues like Abortion and taxation. These were issues that could be easily resolved with no issue from the treaty or other member states and they were giving the irish government an easy pass to justify a 2nd referendum.

There is nothing undemocratic about a 2nd referendum its just a matter of justifying that issues with the first one were resolved.

That is why so much effort is put into argueing that the gaurantees are worthless.

Scofflaw

w00t wrote: »

Confidence and uncertentiy being bad? Damn right they are.

Lisbon won't help our banking and housing crisis. Your examples have noting to do with the Lisbon treaty. Unless the Eu just write us a check for a few billion......

Credit will get you through times of no money without starving, or having to forgo other important things like a roof over your head. That you will eventually have to pay the money back doesn't make credit any less important (as anyone with a family is probably aware). The EU doesn't need to write us a cheque for a few billion, and shouldn't either, because we made this mess - but the fact that it is there to provide us with credit means that vital public services won't simply collapse for lack of funds, and that we don't have the bailiffs (IMF) in.

w00t wrote: »

Also to ask you, did everyone know there would be a second vote? I was pretty well read up on the first one and I didn't see anything about it on the official sites. Quite to opposite actually.

I don't think anyone who was around for Nice could possibly claim to be surprised. There were plenty of polls at the time asking when a second referendum would be held rather than whether - only the No campaigns and the government ever really pretended it wouldn't happen. The only doubt in the whole matter was whether the government felt they had the political capital and the courage to actually do it.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Hayzer89

ei.sdraob wrote: »

scaremongering? perhaps you should read a history book or two

i already explained before about confidence and uncertainty being bad

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=61271648&postcount=327

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=61758720&postcount=181


first rejection didnt have much of an impact yet (it takes many years for investment projects to happen) and everyone knew there be a second referendum relatively shortly thereafter

but there wont be a third referendum, theres no will and no precedent, this is it


/

Lol, that is the funniest response ever, YET! lol Ok, well if it is going to take ''years'' like you claim, then I'm far less likely to vote YES. And if it is going to take years, we'd be in a far better position, economically and financially to deal with it.

And why worry about things that probably won't even happen years down the line when there are FAR more serious and economically threathening matters to deal with before that?

Hayzer89

ei.sdraob wrote: »

scaremongering? perhaps you should read a history book or two

i already explained before about confidence and uncertainty being bad

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=61271648&postcount=327

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=61758720&postcount=181


first rejection didnt have much of an impact yet (it takes many years for investment projects to happen) and everyone knew there be a second referendum relatively shortly thereafter

but there wont be a third referendum, theres no will and no precedent, this is it


/

It's funny how you put that. Don't you find it outragous that the public have just accepted that the government is going to try and force us to vote YES, regardless of the result in the first referendum. They even go so far as to lie about not sending it back to the polls, when they and everybody else knows that that is going to happen.

It's a disgrace and an insult to me that they do that and get away with it, and you guys choose to vote for them, as you have been for the past few decades then the blame is entirely on yourselves for the hole we're in!

ei.sdraob

Hayzer89 wrote: »

Lol, that is the funniest response ever, YET! lol Ok, well if it is going to take ''years'' like you claim, then I'm far less likely to vote YES. And if it is going to take years, we'd be in a far better position, economically and financially to deal with it.

And why worry about things that probably won't even happen years down the line when there are FAR more serious and economically threathening matters to deal with before that?

why add oil to the fire now?

uncertainty is bad in business


/

Hayzer89

ei.sdraob wrote: »

guess whose been buying our worthless bonds?

and guess whose paying for NAMA?


theres a reason why 91% of independent Irish economists support Lisbon

are you an economist?


/

Yeah, FF f*ck us over and we have to pay for them f*cking everything up, but still, the retarded majority of us continue to vote them in. Why in the name of f*ck are you guys still voting FF or supporting anything they try and enforce? They are corrupt scum, who will o whatever they can for personal gains. Name a single FF taoiseach that has not been wrotten to the core. They are VERY few to choose from.

Hayzer89

ei.sdraob wrote: »

why add oil to the fire now?

uncertainty is bad in business


/

Well I am sorry to point this out to you, but business is all about uncertainties. If it was so predictable we'd know what is going to happen in the future, and to be frankly honest, we barely know what is going to happen a week in advantce with the way things are currently.

So get used to uncertainties, they are here and here to stay. And Lisbon will only open us up to all sorts of new uncertainties and to be frankly honest, we have enough uncertainties as it is!

ei.sdraob

Hayzer89 wrote: »

Well I am sorry to point this out to you, but business is all about uncertainties. If it was so predictable we'd know what is going to happen in the future, and to be frankly honest, we barely know what is going to happen a week in advantce with the way things are currently.

So get used to uncertainties, they are here and here to stay. And Lisbon will only open us up to all sorts of new uncertainties and to be frankly honest, we have enough uncertainties as it is!

Do you run a business? :rolleyes:


yes there are uncertainties and risk involved
but its all about conquering these and reducing risk
voting NO will only add more uncertainty and confusion
we dont need more of that!
theres a reason why all businesses in this country are for a YES vote


your opinion is at odds with what all business leaders and economists are telling us, ask yourself this "am i smarter than all of these people and do i have more of a insight into commerce than they do?"

if the answer is yes, then theres no point talking to you

if else the answer is no, then maybe you should stand back and listen for a minute


unless you are planing to work for Declan Ganley these are the companies that you are hoping to employ you in few years once you graduate



/

OldJay

Hayzer89 wrote: »

So get used to uncertainties, they are here and here to stay. And Lisbon will only open us up to all sorts of new uncertainties and to be frankly honest, we have enough uncertainties as it is!

Even with that simplistic (and quite frankly, incorrect) assumption, it is about market confidence and clout within that market.
Not "uncertainties".

KetchupKid

ei.sdraob wrote: »

Do you run a business? :rolleyes:
your opinion is at odds with what all business leaders and economists are telling us, ask yourself this "am i smarter than all of these people and do i have more of a insight into commerce than they do?"
/

OK, so if you aren't a genius, then you should vote Yes for Lisbon, because all of the supposed "smart" people told us to vote yes.

Lockstep

Just came across this now.

Basically, I was in the same boat as Rb. Voted no, but now support a yes outcome. I was in a fair few threads backing the no side in Lisbon I.

I honestly would not have come across such a decision without visiting boards.ie and seeing all the refutations of the No side and explanations put forward.

Frankly, the Boards.ie EU section should be made required reading for those who say they don't understand the treaty.

Thanks to everyone on this forum for your help; ye all know who ye are.

w00t

kickoutthejams wrote: »

Just came across this now.

Basically, I was in the same boat as Rb. Voted no, but now support a yes outcome. I was in a fair few threads backing the no side in Lisbon I.

I honestly would not have come across such a decision without visiting boards.ie and seeing all the refutations of the No side and explanations put forward.

Frankly, the Boards.ie EU section should be made required reading for those who say they don't understand the treaty.

Thanks to everyone on this forum for your help; ye all know who ye are.

Quitter. :pac:

FunnyStuff

nice post, very revealing

papachango

I disagree with the OP. Im my experience on boards.ie open discussion about Lisbon and the people pushing it are only entertained whern there is a yes bias.
In my personal experience with Scofflaw, I have found his responses worrying. When I posted some factual information about the current EU Commission Vice president Jacques Barrot being a convicted criminal, he accused me of throwing FUD(Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt) around.
There was indeed an underlying air of menace in my view. I was merely raising my concern about the intention and impartiality of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) with regard to Lisbon and our infamous 'guarantees' considering this criminal Barrot is also our current EU Justice Commisioner, not a junior role I think you'd agree.
Jacques Barrot IS a criminal, He IS the current vice President of the EU Commission, he IS the current EU Justice Commissioner. He IS pushing for a yes vote. HE is a crook. These ARE facts. So you didn't read about them in these facts in the Indo or hear about them on RTE? No surprise there then. But these facts ARE relevant when you make up your mind on who you want to put your trust in!
Scofflaw is neither a crook nor a criminal but does not apply the 'Mod'eration required in a Moderator 'in my experience'.
I'm sure he's a nice bloke or indeed a nice girl, but certain facts upset him or her greatly, and as such affect the direction of threads on boards.ie
Unfortunately this is MY experience.