how will the lisbon ACTUALLY create jobs?

LauraLoo

After viewing both sides of the story, I'm more swaying to the yes side but what annoys me is the two main selling points on posters that are statements i have yet to see explained:

1.Lisbon creates jobs
2.Ireland needs Europe

What i hear when i read the 2nd point is:

If we dont vote yes, Europe will kick us out

If the first point is true, i am hoping someone can explain exactly how Lisbon is actually going to create jobs?

I feel annoyed at my perception of the "fear" tactic that "we need Europe" and am hoping that someone can explain it. I feel threatened by the statement and it actually pushes me away from voting yes.

Rb

If those statements push you away from voting Yes, what do the statements of fear mongering psychopaths such as Coir do for you?

WeeBushy

LauraLoo wrote: »

After viewing both sides of the story, I'm more swaying to the yes side but what annoys me is the two main selling points on posters that are statements i have yet to see explained:

1.Lisbon creates jobs
2.Ireland needs Europe

What i hear when i read the 2nd point is:

If we dont vote yes, Europe will kick us out

If the first point is true, i am hoping someone can explain exactly how Lisbon is actually going to create jobs?

I feel annoyed at my perception of the "fear" tactic that "we need Europe" and am hoping that someone can explain it. I feel threatened by the statement and it actually pushes me away from voting yes.

1. Lisbon doesn't have a clause stating that X amount of of jobs will be created if it is passed. But in terms of business, especially with countries like the US, confidence is extremely important. If we vote NO then investing countries could lose confidence in our ability to be part of a thriving EU, conversely a Yes vote can help improve confidence. If confidence in Ireland is high from outside investment then more jobs may be created through that investment. So while it is not technically part of the Lisbon treaty itself it is a side-effect of our vote.

2. Simply, Ireland does need Europe. We wouldn't be anywhere near the nation we are today without the help of the EU. Unfortunately I cannot tell you why you take it as meaning "If we don't vote yes, Europe will kick us out" as that is not/cannot/will not be the case. It will make things a lot more difficult to proceed but we wont be kicked out.

EDIT: After reading Marco_polo's post I should have made that clear as well; I'm not a big fan of the posters either, everybody should be sticking to the facts of the treaty instead of posters with opinions/possibilities. However those posters are no where near as bad as the No posters.

marco_polo

Not a big fan of those posters myself, however..

Many independent economists are of the opinion that it will hurt our economy if we vote no. It is not a 100% provable fact either way, but to call it an out and out lie is disingenuious and the balance of probability is firmly in favour of the Yes camp on this issue.

http://www.thepost.ie/newsfeatures/how-independent-economists-view-lisbon-vote-44300.html

I have not heard one single Yes campaigner suggesting that Ireland will get kicked out of the EU, except for elements of the No campaign saying that they have. All I have heard suggested is that Ireland will lose influence and goodwill of our fellow member states.

Hydrosylator

I'm with you on those posters. The groups in question are, in my own opinion, alluding to things they'd never get away with saying, and playing to people's fears.

Fear is an emotion which is being abused in this referendum more than the last one, because it's much stronger now. People have less money to live on, or no job, or no customers, and are ****-scared.

This is being taken advantage of by FF, FG and Cóir, using statements without actual arguments. I'm not surprised at Cóir, but I am surprised at the other two as I've never seen them do anything like this before.

I don't know how it will affect jobs, good or bad. I think it will ease the process of the re-location of industry, which could tip the balance for foreign manafacturers here who already feel our wages are too high. But what companies can do and what they will do aren't always the same. Maybe the IDA can figure out how to keep them here.

As for "Ireland Needs Europe", I agree that the statement is irrelevant to Lisbon.

Scofflaw

Hydrosylator wrote: »

I'm with you on those posters. The groups in question are, in my own opinion, alluding to things they'd never get away with saying, and playing to people's fears.

Fear is an emotion which is being abused in this referendum more than the last one, because it's much stronger now. People have less money to live on, or no job, or no customers, and are ****-scared.

This is being taken advantage of by FF, FG and Cóir, using statements without actual arguments. I'm not surprised at Cóir, but I am surprised at the other two as I've never seen them do anything like this before.

Has there never been a poster that said "Vote Fianna Fáil - for the good of the economy", or (in so many words) "Fianna Fáil - the safe pair of hands"? Portraying your side as 'good for the economy' and the other side as 'bad for the economy' is pretty much a staple of political campaigns. Most campaigns boil down to a simple slogan: [ISSUE VOTERS CARE ABOUT] - [BETTER US THAN THEM].

Hydrosylator wrote: »

I don't know how it will affect jobs, good or bad. I think it will ease the process of the re-location of industry, which could tip the balance for foreign manafacturers here who already feel our wages are too high. But what companies can do and what they will do aren't always the same. Maybe the IDA can figure out how to keep them here.

As for "Ireland Needs Europe", I agree that the statement is irrelevant to Lisbon.

That I don't agree with, because there's more to Ireland's relationship with Europe than the binary "in/out". We can be in Europe and have a bad working relationship with Europe - indeed, we could be out of Europe and have a good working relationship with Europe. We do need Europe, and we need it in the sense of needing a good working relationship with it - a No vote will not deliver that, even though it doesn't involve us having to hand in our membership card.

And that, in turn, is why it's "Yes for Jobs" - by itself another vacuous slogan, simplistic and overdone (it's a slogan!), but it reflects the genuine belief of the main political partners and most of civil society that of the two possible options at the vote, No will lead to a worse environment for jobs than a Yes. That doesn't mean a No vote will result in immediate mass unemployment, and it doesn't mean a Yes will result is a sudden return to full employment - it means that a Yes will create a better environment for job creation than a No vote. The factors that lead to that are complex, but would include (in my view) political paralysis and stagnation at the EU level, a damaged working relationship with the other member states, a probable swing away from solving problems in common and towards individual national action (which is worse for us, because we have a tiny national market and rely on exports), damaged international confidence in where Ireland is going with respect to the EU, a loss of international confidence in the EU itself, and so on.


cordially,
Scofflaw

jank

To the OP it wont, anything else is just lies.

nullzero

Hydrosylator wrote: »

I'm with you on those posters. The groups in question are, in my own opinion, alluding to things they'd never get away with saying, and playing to people's fears.

Fear is an emotion which is being abused in this referendum more than the last one, because it's much stronger now. People have less money to live on, or no job, or no customers, and are ****-scared.

This is being taken advantage of by FF, FG and Cóir, using statements without actual arguments. I'm not surprised at Cóir, but I am surprised at the other two as I've never seen them do anything like this before.

I don't know how it will affect jobs, good or bad. I think it will ease the process of the re-location of industry, which could tip the balance for foreign manafacturers here who already feel our wages are too high. But what companies can do and what they will do aren't always the same. Maybe the IDA can figure out how to keep them here.

As for "Ireland Needs Europe", I agree that the statement is irrelevant to Lisbon.

In the Nice 2 referendum FF et al brandished posters warning of how we would go to the wall economically if we voted No a second time. Nothing in the tactics being used by the "establishment" in regard to Lisbon 2 is without precident. FF know better than anyone that fear is usually the main driving force in Irish politics. Look at the last General Election, FF had many voters convinced that despite their inability to take a period of unprecidented economic prosperity and use that as a platform to create a reasonably stable economic model for our country, not to mention their complete distain for building any sort of infrastructure beyond the bare minimum, that not returning them to power would result in complete economic ruin for the country. Even in 2007 the warning signs were there that things would be hard in ireland, the massive international collapse has put us in an even worse position, but we still returned the pantomime villains back into power because of the fear mongering they knew was such a powerful weapon.

As for voting Yes creating jobs, well thats based on the assumption that Ireland can be of use to foriegn investors. Nice brought a number of cheaper labour markets on stream in the EU which can now boast EU membership alongside cheap wages.
Relying on direct foriegn investment in the future may prove to be an exercise in futility. If in the next few years after Lisbon is ratified the EU decides to bring Irelands corporate tax level up to the same level of other competing countries for the sake of fair competition, we may seem like a bit of a chocolate frying pan to any foriegn companies who may have considered us as an option.

The EEC was the best thing that ever happened to our economy, we had always been a poor nation previous to our EEC membership, but it doesn't follow that because in worked once, in a time when we were ultra competitive when compared to relativly well developed economies, that it will be our economic saviour once again.
The EU isn't going to inform us after ratification of Lisbon that "by the way, you now have massive oil reserves and huge gold mines".
We probably will never again have anything like the economic prosperity we have squandered over the past decade and while the EU has been great for us in the past, there is only so much the EU can do to help us in a time when we really need to be pulling ourselves up by our own boot straps.

I think what I have mentioned above more or less puts paid to the idea that a Yes vote will create jobs.
Lisbon was never about that, it's more focused on the development of the EU as a body and how it will function in the future.
I persoanlly take issue with the increased centralisation of power proposed by the Lisbon treaty and the increased autocracy being offered to EU beureaucrats.
I just can't see how the EU can be heading a direction which is in the best interest of the democratic process in the light of the Lisbon treaty.
I'm not anti EU, I just don't like where it is headed via Lisbon.
There is always another way and that surely is the crux of the democratic system, not being bullyed into agreeing with what the establishment wants.
Barrosso was quick to criticize Coir last week for making spurious claims about wages and labelled them liars. While I have to intention of defending Coir, Barosso continued to state that a No vote could have "implications" for Ireland in the EU in the future, something which is not true, at least according to how the EU functions currently.Barrosso never took the time to correct the lies being pushed by the Yes side, surprise surprise.

Lisbon 2 has been a by the numbers Irish political farce from start and I'm sure will be to the finish. Scare the people sufficiently to get what you want. Regardless of the outcome of the referendum, I think it's high time we took a good long look at ourselves and how we are motivated politically.

Scofflaw

nullzero wrote: »

Barrosso was quick to criticize Coir last week for making spurious claims about wages and labelled them liars. While I have to intention of defending Coir, Barosso continued to state that a No vote could have "implications" for Ireland in the EU in the future, something which is not true, at least according to how the EU functions currently.Barrosso never took the time to correct the lies being pushed by the Yes side, surprise surprise.

It's impossible for a vote either way to have no implications for Ireland - if that was the case why bother with a vote, when we could more cheaply toss a coin?

Nor is the debate about being thrown out of the EU - the debate is about a good working relationship with the EU or not.

nullzero wrote: »

Lisbon 2 has been a by the numbers Irish political farce from start and I'm sure will be to the finish. Scare the people sufficiently to get what you want. Regardless of the outcome of the referendum, I think it's high time we took a good long look at ourselves and how we are motivated politically.

That's very true. I'm a very big fan of direct democracy, but if anything could put me off it, this would.

cordially,
Scofflaw

nullzero

I was taking issue with the manner in which Barrosso made his comment.
It's obvious there will be consequences either way but he sounded more like a blunt instrument sent to collect on a mafia debt than a well meaning politician when he made that remark.

Scofflaw

nullzero wrote: »

I was taking issue with the manner in which Barrosso made his comment.
It's obvious there will be consequences either way but he sounded more like a blunt instrument sent to collect on a mafia debt than a well meaning politician when he made that remark.

I'm sure he sounded like that to every No voter, but if one is set on doing something, people warning you there will be consequences are usually unwelcome, and frequently sound either hysterical or threatening. That's the subjective part - the important question is, are they right?

As a Yes voter, I have to make my way through the various contributions of the No side, from COIR's easily dismissable claims through the warnings of a 'race to the bottom' to some German Professor's claim that the Charter of Fundamental Rights is a covert plot to reintroduce the death penalty through footnotes. I'd be interested to try and work out why it is that I don't feel like I'm being threatened, but that my intelligence is being insulted, while No voters apparently find things their side of the fence a lot more scary. What's the psychology behind that, would you say?

cordially,
Scofflaw