A Tea Party movement for Ireland?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

monosharp

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I see a lot of people working their lives away with little to show for it.

They have extremely generous "entitlements" by international standards, and yet they pay next to no income taxes.

Did I say international standards were good ? I consider the whole international system to be the problem.

In other words, we allow "common people" to take, and take, and take—but try scrapping a single euro of their "entitlements," or try making them pay a single euro towards their "entitlements," and wait for them to congregate on Kildare Street howling that they are being "attacked."

Are you talking about those on the dole ? Because I agree with you. Social welcome should be a right for those who really deserve it. People who abuse the system should be severely punished.

And how do you propose to accomplish that? What kind of "new system" do you propose?

I have no idea. Capitalism doesn't work, Communism doesn't work. Socialism perhaps.

SeanW

Whoa whoa, this is one of the worst posts I've read in a while.

Pride Fighter wrote: »

In America they are protesting over health reform which will actually help the poorer sections of society.

By some accounts, the poor had relatively good healthcare in the days before governmnet programs. Even in the poorest places, it seems, the poor could get some medical care as charity cases.

the tea party movement is baffling.

The tea party movement, from what I understand, is something of a broad church. There are some libertarians in there, but also some racists, some Christian nutters etc. Doesn't mean they all fit that, or indeed any one description.

The tea party movement has sent death threats and assaulted members of both republican and democrat legislators at state and national level. They are basically a right wing SWP. Can I ask how are those actions libertarian?

They are not. See the point above.

Many in this movement are opposed to abortion. Something every libertarian would be in favour of.

Wrong again, many libertarians oppose abortion. It all comes down to an individuals primal view of when life begins and this isn't easy to pigeonhole, though religion tends to uniformly define an "early" view.

They are also in favour of making the US a theocratic christian state, something that would conflict with libertarians too.

Yes, totally. But again, see my second point. Not everyone in the tea parties are singing from the same proverbial hymn sheet.

randomchild

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Its just an example of the tea parties' apparent priorities and methods. No interest in civil discourse, only petty slandering and violence, like school yard bullies. While I would welcome a stronger voice for fiscal conservatism in Ireland (although, tbh I think the government has already preempted this with its recent budgets, at least on an emergency level), if it had anything at all to do with the party in America, I would oppose them purely on this ground.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Lockstep

SeanW wrote: »

Whoa whoa, this is one of the worst posts I've read in a while.
By some accounts, the poor had relatively good healthcare in the days before governmnet programs. Even in the poorest places, it seems, the poor could get some medical care as charity cases.

One, anecdotal piece of evidence?
C'mon man, if you want to prove that healthcare will be available to the poor in the abscence of a subsidised system then you'll need to do a lot better than that.

I don't think anyone disputes that there will be good doctors who will provide pro-bono care in the abscence of any government intervention. The question arises as to whether there will be enough who will cater for those who need it.

Personally, I'd hate to need urgent medical care and have to drag myself to every medic I can think of and beg for help, only hoping that they have the time and inclination to help me.

imported_guy

the real question isnt the viability of a libertarian movement but rather

can the irish people live without the dole?

LOL

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

danman

@Donegalfella,
as a fellow Donegal man, I feel I have the right to make this comment...

Is there not a Tay Party every year, over in Kincasslagh?

Sorry, I couldn't help myself.


My feelings on this is that it could never come about.
I know that in the States, it started as a group of libertarians from both political parties. But it has been hijacked in the past 3 years by the GOP and Fox News in particular.

Their propoganda doesn't tie in exactly with the original aims of the Tea Party movement.

for that reason, the very name, "Tea Party", has a negitive image on this side of the pond.

Any Libertarian party would have to distance themselves as far as possible from the Tea Party movement.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

ei.sdraob

danman wrote: »

Any Libertarian party would have to distance themselves as far as possible from the Tea Party movement.

yep

last thing we need is to be lumped together with all sorts of crazies (as has been attempted in this thread)

monosharp

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I agree.

So workers wind up paying interest on their debt instead of accumulating interest on their savings.

I agree, its idiotic.

You can't just unilaterally condemn "the whole international system." Living standards in Ireland are far above those in Ethiopia, for instance.

And I condemn them both.

I'm talking about those on the dole and the bottom 50 percent of earners, who demand public services but who are not willing to pay income tax to fund those services.

What kind of public services would that be ? The dreadfully inept public education (not including 3rd level) ? Or the laughable pathetic excuse for a health service ?

Ah, I see.

Now don't be like that, I didn't say yes socialism, I said I didn't know.

But as far as I can logically make out the best system must lie somewhere close to socialism. Capitalism and Communism as economic systems do not work. Democracy (and its present day cousins) is incredibly good at electing by way of stupidity of the masses. Look at the current eejits we have in suits, not just in government but sitting opposite them. Socrates' was partially right about democracy, and that was over 2 millennium ago

So what I know is the current systems are rubbish. What I don't know is a better alternative. Do you have one ?

danman

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

the original movement has been completly taken over by the loonies, as far as I can see.
That may be just my own perception.

I don't keep up with their policies/agenas though.

SeanW

kickoutthejams wrote: »

One, anecdotal piece of evidence?
C'mon man, if you want to prove that healthcare will be available to the poor in the abscence of a subsidised system then you'll need to do a lot better than that.

No, I'm not suggesting that this is a particularly desireable thing to do, but the poster I responded to suggested that all the Obama health "reform" was going to "help the poor."

I suspect that the main beneficiaries are going to be the HMO lobbies will cream the profits from the individual mandate and the 16,000 new IRS agents that will be needed to administer the already Byzantine IRS tax code. Hey, when the tax code is already something like 1,000,000 pages long, whats another few thousands between friends?

We've seen something like this here: one of the most bloated ares of the public service is the administration/managerial levels of the HSE.

I suggest that something like a Medical Savings Account, for everyone, which could be topped up by gov't for the poor, might be more efficient than government bureacracies, individual mandates, etc.

RonMexico

I can appreciate what you are suggesting donegalfella but I think you picked the worst possible example in the Tea Party movement. I'd have zero respect for them for two reasons - the first bring the lunatic element that have become their most vocal representatives and secondly the fact that the so called sensible elements have allowed this to happen and have done little to dissassociate themselves from that crowd whilst also giving a podium for Sarah Palin to spew her brand of inciteful fear mongering bile.

However, that said, we DO need a movement for sensible fiscal responsibility in this country, one that will not entertain any right or left wing fringe nutjobs.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

danbohan

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Such "debates" are tantamount to fiddling while Rome burns. They show just how utterly out of touch the people and the politicians are with the catastrophic reality of our public finances, and how oblivious they are to the very real dangers of a complete economic collapse.

thats it in a nutshell , complete and utter denial in this country from top to bottom apart from a few economists and others ,wonder where it will all lead to .

scr123

FG are the natural home of Tea Party movement type of people. Could FG not be persuaded to come out on the streets to counter the protests by the extreme left ?

RonMexico

I agree with you donegalfella, I just think that even mentioning the Tea Party Movement immediately undermines or rather detracts from the legitimate concerns that they supposedly originally held (which has become lost amidst all the hysterical nonsense associated with them now - they are tainted goods)

In saying that I would love to see a new political party or group who actually push for what you outlined. I look at the current government and opposition and truly find myself utterly, utterly, disheartened regarding the future of this country.

There isn't an ounce of sensibility out there in terms of political thought. Social welfare and the public service have become so completely bloated that they no longer have any connection to the reality of our current predicament.

Unfortunately anyone who suggests bringing either in line is immediately shouted down by those milking the system for every cent they can get.

The problem doesn't end there however. There are so many areas of Irish life that need radical reform that it is sometimes hard not to just shrug your shoulders and say - "**** it all.":mad:

I'd love to be able to do something about it.

EDIT: NONE of the political parties are going to do what is necessary. They haven't the balls and are crippled by politically correct do-gooder muppets.

Lockstep

SeanW wrote: »

No, I'm not suggesting that this is a particularly desireable thing to do, but the poster I responded to suggested that all the Obama health "reform" was going to "help the poor."

I suspect that the main beneficiaries are going to be the HMO lobbies will cream the profits from the individual mandate and the 16,000 new IRS agents that will be needed to administer the already Byzantine IRS tax code. Hey, when the tax code is already something like 1,000,000 pages long, whats another few thousands between friends?

We've seen something like this here: one of the most bloated ares of the public service is the administration/managerial levels of the HSE.

I suggest that something like a Medical Savings Account, for everyone, which could be topped up by gov't for the poor, might be more efficient than government bureacracies, individual mandates, etc.

Fair enough man, I can acknowledge the viewpoint that the government should run things like school vouchers and otherwise play a role in helping out the worst off via the private sector. I disagree with it but can see the merits.

I thought you were using it as an example of how the government can completely get out of medical care, which is something I am utterly opposed to.
Apologies for misreading your post.

fontanalis

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Where were they during Bushes terms, and that tool Graham also? Give me a break, the are republicans that are pissed off the person they voted for lost.

randomchild

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I am merely pointing out why I would resist introducing a tea party in Ireland, as Micheal Graham is proposing: "grab these Government oafs by the scruff of the neck and shake them until their eyes rattle -- you can take back your country" is no different to Palin's call to "reload". Calling people "spoiled, violent Euroweenie thugs" is thematically the same as much of the TP's extreme rethoric.

You asked in your opening post "Would you support such a movement, and if so, why? Or would you turn your back on it, and if so, why?" I repeat my position: I would would always welcome the introduction of such a movement, or any reasonable voice in a debate on our Government's policies, provided it does not bring with it the calls to forcefully "take back your country" or labeling others as "Euroweenie thugs".

While you might think that our government has "preempted" a movement for fiscal conservatism with its recent budgets, the moves they have taken so far have been largely cosmetic. Two years and three budgets into the recession, it is still the fact that:

Public Sector Wages + Social Welfare Payments > Total Tax Revenue

No government looking at that equation can call itself fiscally responsible.

I dare you to tell people who work in the public service that these budgets have been cosmetic. We have had a Government who has massively oversplurged on spending and government infrastructure, but when the Economist and Newsweek are praising Lenihan for the steps he has taken in this regard and other countries are looking to Ireland as a model to base there cutbacks on, I would say that they must be doing something right. I feel I should point out that i have faint knowledge of economics so I dont really think I am qualified to really debate this beyond a superficial level/ throwing periodical quotes at you :pac:.

RonMexico

The thing about the public service that irritates me is that your average Joe Soap Garda for example starts off on pretty poor wages (considering the **** they deal with+hands tied+brutal hours - a whole other thread in itself) and the same can be said for other public service workers, but it is those at the top who need to be focused on in terms of cuts FIRST. The wages of those at the upper levels across the board are obscene.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

MysticalRain

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I don't doubt there are some people in the tea party movement that believe in genuine freedom and fiscal restraint. Just the same way there are some in the BNP who are not necessarily racist. Or some people in Sinn Fein who don't actually hate every single Protestant on this island. The problem is those people in the tea party movement are drowned out by the crazy birthers, racists, bigots, and people who are advocating armed insurrection against a democratically elected government. Their so-called "economic" arguments amount to little more than incoherent rage against anything that remotely perceive as socialist. When people point out these very real problems with the tea party movement, your response is to bury your head in the sand and claim that the critics just "don't get it". If you tried to run a political group on similar lines over here, it would be quickly overrun by anti-immigrant nationalist types, right-wing Catholic groups, and crazy libertarian nerds who have no place to go now that the PD's are dead.

I think you could borrow a few organizational tactics from the tea party movement to use over here, but that's where the useful comparison ends. The tea party movement is more a textbook example of what not to do. What I would like to see happen in this country is perhaps all the nations shopkeepers and small businessmen getting organized and protesting outside the Dail, along with as many other sane middle-class people as you could find. It might be similar to the traditional pro-business FG constituency.

irishh_bob

fontanalis wrote: »

Where were they during Bushes terms, and that tool Graham also? Give me a break, the are republicans that are pissed off the person they voted for lost.

+1 , ive no problem with people opposing a goverment run healthcare system or any other goverment run system for that matter , but its a tad hypocritical when thier wasnt a peep out of the same people when the same amount and more was spent on a war of choice during the bush presidency , face it , TEA party members only get thier knickers in a twist when its democrats who are spending tax dollars

DublinWriter

Valmont wrote: »

Yet every day we are told that the recession was caused by the unregulated free market

Yes it was.

Irony of ironies it was the Rainbow Coalition of 1994 that jacked up stamp duty in a bid to curtail speculative property dealing.

After the collapse of the Rainbows, FF were once again in office with an incumbent Charlie McCreevy stating "when I have it I'll spend it, when I don't, I won't".

And spend he did.

The good work of the IDA in engaging global corporations to come invest in Ireland was p*ssed up against a wall as FF more out of ignorance than design pursued a policy of laissez faire economics, which in turn drove up general operating costs and made us far less competitive as a prospect than the accession EU states.

Now add the unholy combination of low ECB rates, light-touch financial regulation, public-sector benchmarking and the opportunity for blatant profiteering that the introduction of the Euro facilitated and basically we're tipping Christmas trees and petrol onto the bonfire.

Maybe it all goes to show that managing financial success is a lot more difficult than managing financial hardship.

MysticalRain

irishh_bob wrote: »

+1 , ive no problem with people opposing a goverment run healthcare system or any other goverment run system for that matter , but its a tad hypocritical when thier wasnt a peep out of the same people when the same amount and more was spent on a war of choice during the bush presidency , face it , TEA party members only get thier knickers in a twist when its democrats who are spending tax dollars

That reminds be of a conversation I had online with a fairly militant American "fiscal conservative" the other day. Myself and a couple of other people asked him what he would cut off the federal budget to reduce the deficit.He rattled off his favorite hit list of various "socialist" programs - healthcare, cap and trade, the stimulus plan etc. When we asked him if he would cut even one tiny amount off America's astronomical defense budget, all we got was a Captain America speech about how the US had to be the strongest and most powerful nation on the planet regardless of the fiscal cost.

Annasopra

Ok

so someone (not me under any circumstances) has started a facebook page "Lets start a Tea Party movement in Ireland!"

The bizarre thing is though they have linked to photos of The Right to Work Campaign and People Before Profit

danman

I went on that page, and pointed out the difference in political ideologies, the comment seems to be deleted. I couldn't see it when I went back on later.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

fontanalis

MysticalRain wrote: »

That reminds be of a conversation I had online with a fairly militant American "fiscal conservative" the other day. Myself and a couple of other people asked him what he would cut off the federal budget to reduce the deficit.He rattled off his favorite hit list of various "socialist" programs - healthcare, cap and trade, the stimulus plan etc. When we asked him if he would cut even one tiny amount off America's astronomical defense budget, all we got was a Captain America speech about how the US had to be the strongest and most powerful nation on the planet regardless of the fiscal cost.

Another thing that I don't get especially with the healthcare debate is that Europe (sometimes I wonder if some of them realise that it's a continent not a country) is referred to as some evil secular place with socialised medicine but yet many on the right claim to be great christians, yet reject the helping the sick bit.

I still can't get over the presenter of The Hack report with Hack Hackerson lecturing others on fiscal responsibility.

Lockstep

fontanalis wrote: »

Another thing that I don't get especially with the healthcare debate is that Europe (sometimes I wonder if some of them realise that it's a continent not a country) is referred to as some evil secular place with socialised medicine but yet many on the right claim to be great christians, yet reject the helping the sick bit.

I still can't get over the presenter of The Hack report with Hack Hackerson lecturing others on fiscal responsibility.

Yeah, I've noticed this myself.
I'm pro-life myself but I'm pretty horrified by the idea that the right to life only applies until the fetus comes out of the vagina.

That said, I would draw a distinction in the Religious Right. A close friend of mine is a Catholic seminarian from Wisconsin. He's in favour of minimal government and abhors a lot of the Religious Right. He's pro-minimal government as he thinks that the private sector and charity groups can do things a lot better than the government can. However, he has absolutely no time for those who are merely anti-government as they want to keep their money to themselves; he thinks there's a strong moral duty on each person to help and provide for the poor. He can't stand Ayn Rand for example.

HavingCrack

As far as I can make out the Tea Party is esentially a watered down version of the Libertarian Movement (If I'm wrong please correct me ). So they stand for no holes barred unregulated free market capitalism. The one argument I can use to debunk this is ireland's property boom-look at the stae of the country now after years of unregulated property development. We have massive unemployment, thousands of unoccupied homes, emigration etc-most of which can be directly traced back to property developers, planners, private citizens etc etc etc doing whatever they want (libertarian model).

So no-a Tea Party Movement is the last thing Ireland needs-coudl you imagine the field day the usual crew would have....

fontanalis

HavingCrack wrote: »

As far as I can make out the Tea Party is esentially a watered down version of the Libertarian Movement (If I'm wrong please correct me ). So they stand for no holes barred unregulated free market capitalism. The one argument I can use to debunk this is ireland's property boom-look at the stae of the country now after years of unregulated property development. We have massive unemployment, thousands of unoccupied homes, emigration etc-most of which can be directly traced back to property developers, planners, private citizens etc etc etc doing whatever they want (libertarian model).

So no-a Tea Party Movement is the last thing Ireland needs-coudl you imagine the field day the usual crew would have....

It's unfair to link genuine Libertarians in with the freakshow of mutant Glen Beck fans.

digme

we need more parties.

SeanW

HavingCrack wrote: »

The one argument I can use to debunk this is ireland's property boom-look at the stae of the country now after years of unregulated property development.

All aggravated by targetted tax breaks and artificially low interest rates.

We have massive unemployment, thousands of unoccupied homes, emigration

All of which are the predictable results of malinvestment.

(libertarian model).

With libertarianism, lending would have been hard-capped by a gold-standard currency. As people began to borrow and spend more, and save less, interest rates would have risen, mercilessly and unstoppably until the trend had been reversed.

Furthermore a simpler and less political tax system would have avoided giving developers (friends of the government) massive tax breaks to build monster housing estates in the middle of nowhere.
Yet once again we hear "There was too much freedom" "Not enough government" when the truth is we had plenty of government and that's how we got into this mess.

And this issue affects me because my county has been to some degree "Ground Zero" for this rash of overdevelopment.

ei.sdraob

monosharp wrote: »

I've lived all over the world and I think I've gained a considerable insight into politics around the globe and theres one common factor. The common people are slaves to the system, its just a matter of degree.

so did I

except i dont propose and want more of a "system" but less

Finnbar01

kickoutthejams wrote: »

Meh, I have to agree with Dlofnep here.

At the end of the day, I disagree with libertarianism from it's fundamentals. As such, I cannot support a Tea Party style movement.

The best way I can describe is to quote Robert Locke

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

ANarcho-Munk

Apologies if this has already been posted, but you can listen to Michael D. higgins wipe the floor with michael Graham (Tea Party movement) live on enwtalk here: http://www.newstalk.ie/programmes/all/therighthook/the-two-michaels/

Lockstep

Finnbar01 wrote: »

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

A wonderfully open-ended quote which can be used to justify pretty much anything; who defines "essential liberty"?
I'd say your idea of "essential liberty" is fundamentally different from mine.

Denerick

Finnbar01 wrote: »

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

This is the least understood catchphrase of history. And it completely overlooks the phrase 'Essential liberty'. The American Founding Fathers, that slave owning Libertarian Jefferson among them, knew fine well that no free people can live in a society without some degree of personal safety. Without personal safety there is no personal liberty. Where Liberals, Libertarians and conservatives disagree on is the appropriate balance between personal safety and personal liberty. Its hardly a new phenonomon. In Britain, this has been a debate that polarised the Whigs and Tories since the 18th century. Its basic social contract. I advise you to abandon well worn catchphrases and talk about concepts, not slogans.

fontanalis

kickoutthejams wrote: »

A wonderfully open-ended quote which can be used to justify pretty much anything; who defines "essential liberty"?
I'd say your idea of "essential liberty" is fundamentally different from mine.

Not as good as
The tree of liberty must be watered with the blood of tyrants (people I didn't vote for) and patriots (other people, beacuse I won't do it).

Laminations

Finnbar01 wrote: »

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

I think you'll find it's worse to give up essential safety for a little more liberty as you'll quickly find yourself dead. Catchphrases from history don't make you correct otherwise I'd win outright with 'it's better to be safe than sorry' said by somebody sometime

Valmont

ANarcho-Munk wrote: »

Apologies if this has already been posted, but you can listen to Michael D. higgins wipe the floor with michael Graham (Tea Party movement) live on enwtalk here: http://www.newstalk.ie/programmes/all/therighthook/the-two-michaels/

Political leanings aside, Higgins simply shouts Graham down and insults him for twenty minutes straight. He is just trying to get the crowd to cheer for him. A terrible debate on all accounts.

toiletduck

It was reported in the Galway Sentinel that such a meeting (they called it "anti-establishment") was held in Galway last week with about 50 in attendance, anyone know anything about it?

JustinDee

post links instead of copying and pasting everything please. Took an age to scroll through that regurgitation on my phone.

earlytom

Good idea, if I ever wax loquacious again I will do that.

It has occurred to me that I am wasting my time anyways. Perhaps all that is left is for the wheels to spin off, and for the EU and US to crash, dragging the whole world into darkness.

Perhaps then liberty and fiscal sanity can rise like a phoenix from the ashes.

Naw, I doubt it.

Talk to you all later, I have to catch this horse up and ride back to middle earth to warn the other hobbits and give the bad news. All is lost, Mordor has won and it's soul sucking creeping darkness now comes unchecked over the land.

Jelle1880

Wasn't the American economy the first one to take the brunt of the recession, causing other countries to go down the drain too ?

You'd almost be tempted to say that they are part of the problem.

RichieC

No thankyou. they are vacuous morons.