Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Bertie Ahern-good taoiseach?
Options
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
trapsagenius wrote: »Something i've noticed since Bertie Ahern has resigned as Taoiseach is that he is blamed in many quarters for 'wasting' the boom years. So my question here is how many people out there still believe he WAS a good Taoiseach.Personally, i still think he was a good taoiseach.He presided over the biggest economic boom in Irish history and it's only since he left that the Irish economy has gone down the tubes. (I mean,he won 3 elections in a row and was the 2nd longest serving Taoiseach since the foundation of the state so he must have been doing something right).But what does everyone else think-good Taoiseach or not??All comments appreciated.
I had my doubts this was a pi** take.
But your later posts shows you might actually believe this sh**e.
Perhaps you have a ff view history where all their glorious leaders led the country to prosperity and happiness :rolleyes: Of course you do cast aspertions about haughey bu then you slip in IFSC and how he saved the country.
hello soldier of dysentery :rolleyes:
Has it ever crossed your little ff mind that maybe the reason for the bust was the boom in the first place ?
Not all booms, as you affectionately label a construction BUBBLE, are good in the long term or even the short term for those happen not to be in the bubble industries.trapsagenius wrote: »What does that have to do with him being
Taoiseach?
I think this referred to bertie sleeveen having no tax clearance cert and no bank accounts ?
The above has nothing at all to do with being taoiseach, if you believe in the ff philosophy where you only do wrong if you are caught and the acts can't be dismissed.
You know the attitute where crimes are things carried out by the unconnected and non party faithful.trapsagenius wrote: »He lead a government that reduced the amount of money raised in all taxes spent on servicing the national debt from 20% in 1997 to 4.3% in 2007.During the same period average incomes rose by an average of 131%.In 2004 the Irish economy was still growing at 3 times the average eurozone rate.And the initial boom years were from 1997-2000. I don't think too many of you were complaining then.
Oh we have found a few figures on the party website have we :rolleyes:
The initial boom years, as you label them, were built on real jobs in real industries being funded by export earning products.
The foundations for this boom were actaully laid by former taoisaigh and ministers of finance.
Oh and some of them were FG and labour as well as ff.
Maybe some of us were complaining seen as he had created a myriad of quangoes, (jobs for his friends), had done nothign with the health service, had wasted money, had affectively laid the plans for the housing bubble.
Also a biggy was fact he had a former minister for giving away our natural resources and radio licenses, who happened to be a corrupt lying theiving scumbag, supposedly investigated up every tree in North County Dublin, as one of the top three ministers in his cabinet.
But of course you would rather gloss over that :rolleyes:trapsagenius wrote: »He won THREE elections in a row.Even if in 1997 people didn't know what to expect, in 2002 and 2007, a majority of voting adults approved of Fianna Fails policies.In fact in 2002 Fianna Fail increased their number of seats by 4.
As other poster pointed out quantity doesn't equate to quality.
Also goes to show how deluded a lot of people were and I would say a lot of it was down to the old adage "I am doin alright jack so screw the rest of ye".
I would guess not many people who had seen the HSE in action up close and personal were big voters for bertie.
But I again the only thing that matters to ff is winnign the election.
Doesn't matter how much it costs or what are the long term affects on the country, right ?trapsagenius wrote: »Are you referring to John Bruton, who wasn't even elected?Or Albert reynolds who was in power for 2 and a half years?Or Haughey who was corrupt(although the IFSC was a great initiative)?One more-it couldn't have been Garret Fitzgerald who did his level best to cripple the country with taxes and almost brought the country to its knees before Mcsharry(and Haughey, actually) saved our hides?
Actually haughey eventually did something when the IMF were at the door and he may not have suceeded without the backing of FG under Alan Dukes (Tallaght Strategy), who sacrificed his own career for the country.
BTW that is word a few ffers should learn, sacrifice. :mad:
Actually Garrett Fitzgerald didn't cripple the country, that honour belongs to yet another ffer jack lynch whose 1977 election manifesto helped sink the country.
As someone stated earlier it is beyond comprehension how some people can still peddle utter sh**e that bertie built this magnificent economy that disappeared overnight once he left power. :rolleyes:
Ah but shure it was all the fault of those peasky Americans and their subprime thingy magigs :rolleyes:
I used to campaign for national broadband but now I seriously think it is wasted on some
I am not allowed discuss …
0 -
That quote suggests you know little or nothing about politics. Bertie's departure did coincide with the collapse, but the collapse was in place, and all that was need was the catyalist i.e. the banking collapse.
-Bertie artificially increased wages through the social partnership sham
-Bertie refused to take on the Unions
-Bertie's premiership was predicated on the property boom once he moved Harney, McCreevy and Brennan from the economic and infrastructural portfolios.
-Bertie allowed this boom to be primed by ignoring sham banking practices, and light touch regulation. It wasnt in his interest to do otherwise
Bertie crippled a fine export driven, productive economy in the name of short term populism. He equally had the gall to tell us that the "boom would get boomier".
A shambles of a leader, who masked this by crippling the country financially.
What imeant was i'd have more confidence in Bertie being able to drag us out of this mess than Cowen.I had my doubts this was a pi** take.
But your later posts shows you might actually believe this sh**e.
Perhaps you have a ff view history where all their glorious leaders led the country to prosperity and happiness :rolleyes: Of course you do cast aspertions about haughey bu then you slip in IFSC and how he saved the country.
hello soldier of dysentery :rolleyes:
Has it ever crossed your little ff mind that maybe the reason for the bust was the boom in the first place ?
Not all booms, as you affectionately label a construction BUBBLE, are good in the long term or even the short term for those happen not to be in the bubble industries.
I think this referred to bertie sleeveen having no tax clearance cert and no bank accounts ?
The above has nothing at all to do with being taoiseach, if you believe in the ff philosophy where you only do wrong if you are caught and the acts can't be dismissed.
You know the attitute where crimes are things carried out by the unconnected and non party faithful.
Oh we have found a few figures on the party website have we :rolleyes:
The initial boom years, as you label them, were built on real jobs in real industries being funded by export earning products.
The foundations for this boom were actaully laid by former taoisaigh and ministers of finance.
Oh and some of them were FG and labour as well as ff.
Maybe some of us were complaining seen as he had created a myriad of quangoes, (jobs for his friends), had done nothign with the health service, had wasted money, had affectively laid the plans for the housing bubble.
Also a biggy was fact he had a former minister for giving away our natural resources and radio licenses, who happened to be a corrupt lying theiving scumbag, supposedly investigated up every tree in North County Dublin, as one of the top three ministers in his cabinet.
But of course you would rather gloss over that :rolleyes:
As other poster pointed out quantity doesn't equate to quality.
Also goes to show how deluded a lot of people were and I would say a lot of it was down to the old adage "I am doin alright jack so screw the rest of ye".
I would guess not many people who had seen the HSE in action up close and personal were big voters for bertie.
But I again the only thing that matters to ff is winnign the election.
Doesn't matter how much it costs or what are the long term affects on the country, right ?
Actually haughey eventually did something when the IMF were at the door and he may not have suceeded without the backing of FG under Alan Dukes (Tallaght Strategy), who sacrificed his own career for the country.
BTW that is word a few ffers should learn, sacrifice. :mad:
Actually Garrett Fitzgerald didn't cripple the country, that honour belongs to yet another ffer jack lynch whose 1977 election manifesto helped sink the country.
As someone stated earlier it is beyond comprehension how some people can still peddle utter sh**e that bertie built this magnificent economy that disappeared overnight once he left power. :rolleyes:
Ah but shure it was all the fault of those peasky Americans and their subprime thingy magigs :rolleyes:
I used to campaign for national broadband but now I seriously think it is wasted on some
Had a nice little rant have we?.I was listening until you said that Garret Fitzgerald didn't cripple the country.After that i lost interest.In future, to calm down, take a deep breath and count to 10.There's a good lad.I put part of that quote in bold to point that it's a bit ironic that JMAYO doesn't want national broadband.0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
trapsagenius wrote: »Have a look at this link.http://www.rte.ie/news/2008/0409/fiannafail.html
I especially like the 6th line where it says he was "elected unopposed".
Yea, the technical phrasing and accuracy of reporters is legendary.
They should have stated he was nominated to the position unopposed - but hey, yet again another website that dumbs down info for the masses (whom they think, we can't handle such more accurate detail) and loses its actual accuracy - then sadly others pick it up as supposed 100% true fact...
I wish folk would look at the fine details and not just post the quick fire generalisations - which surprise - turn out to be wrong in a lot of cases.0 -
Yea, the technical phrasing and accuracy of reporters is legendary.
They should have stated the was nominated to the position unopposed - but hey, yet again another website that dumbs down info for the masses 9whom they think, we can't handle such more accurate detail) and loses its actual accuracy - then sadly others pick it up as supposed 100% true fact...
Just admit you were wrong and stop embarassing yourself.0 -
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement