B Ahern interview - Banks, blame and the Pres Election

Wolfe Tone

It would be funny if Bertie became president just to see the reaction here.

Wolfe Tone

hallelujajordan wrote: »

I'm confused . . Bertie is now responsible for pushing through divorce legislation even though we voted for such change in a constitutional referendum ? ? ?

I suggest you look into how a constitutional referendum comes about.

Liam Byrne

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

It would be funny if Bertie became president just to see the reaction here.

I think we could still access boards.ie from abroad.

hallelujajordan

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

I suggest you look into how a constitutional referendum comes about.

Thanks, I know how it comes about. I just think it is rich for a poster to criticize the movement on a piece of legislation on which we got the opportunity to vote in a referendum.

Had Ahern used his Dail majority to move divorce legislation, the point would be valid; the fact that we as a country had to support this change renders it entirely invalid.

Wolfe Tone

hallelujajordan wrote: »

Thanks, I know how it comes about. I just think it is rich for a poster to criticize the movement on a piece of legislation on which we got the opportunity to vote in a referendum.

Had Ahern used his Dail majority to move divorce legislation, the point would be valid; the fact that we as a country had to support this change renders it entirely invalid.

If they had have rejected the bill in the Dail there would have been no referendum.

hallelujajordan

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

If they had have rejected the bill in the Dail there would have been no referendum.

Mussolini, I don't need a lesson in the legislative process. . My point is the fact that the motion was supported by a majority of voters and therefore passed in a referendum shows that the movement to call the referendum was in the national interest, and not a self motivated move by Ahern as posted earlier.

gbee

hallelujajordan wrote: »

and not a self motivated move by Ahern as posted earlier.

Not quite what I said. I said I know a lot of people voted for the Divorce referendum out of sympathy for Bertie's situation, and those same people were personally disappointed that bertie's was not the first to get out of his marital troubles.

I did not see the need to make long post out of what's been very public knowledge for a long time and the sympathies that Bertie played to.

And how may referenda did we have on the subject?

Wolfe Tone

hallelujajordan wrote: »

Mussolini, I don't need a lesson in the legislative process. . My point is the fact that the motion was supported by a majority of voters and therefore passed in a referendum shows that the movement to call the referendum was in the national interest, and not a self motivated move by Ahern as posted earlier.

You said:

Had Ahern used his Dail majority to move divorce legislation

hallelujajordan

gbee wrote: »

Not quite what I said. I said I know a lot of people voted for the Divorce referendum out of sympathy for Bertie's situation, and those same people were personally disappointed that bertie's was not the first to get out of his marital troubles.

I did not see the need to make long post out of what's been very public knowledge for a long time and the sympathies that Bertie played to.

And how may referenda did we have on the subject?

You accused Bertie Ahern of 'meddling in our moral life' because he moved a divorce referendum that was subsequently supported by a majority of voters. .

Can we not even take responsibility for that which the majority of us vote for in a referendum now ?

Also, I am pretty certain that Ahern was consistent in saying that he would not seek to divorce his wife.

gbee

hallelujajordan wrote: »

Also, I am pretty certain that Ahern was consistent in saying that he would not seek to divorce his wife.

He's too clever to have ever said that, but believe me, I know several who thought it would be so and voted to get the poor man out of his troubled marriage, and that's from people who were not vigorously in favour but loved Bertie and felt sorry for him.

I can support you by agreeing 100% in the last line of your response.

Strata

hallelujajordan wrote: »

You know how I define 'taking responsibility'. I've explained this before. It's about putting in place the necessary economic policies to correct the current economic situation. Yes, it involves transferring large swathes of debt from dying banks to the taxpayer and I don't like that any more than you, but I personally do not believe there is a real and credible alternative.

And your analogy is crazy. Are you suggesting that FF voters or members pay a higher rate of tax to account for their 'blame'? What about FG supporters who took out 100% mortgages that they can't now pay? Shall we create a blame index where everyone is rated and pays tax according to their behaviours ?

Your 'blame game' is fascinating but it achieves nothing !

I'm really intrigued by your notion that the "blame game" will achieve nothing.

I totally disagree. People have to be held accountable for this mess. Individuals. People who didn't do the job that they were employed/elected to do. Why they didn't do there job is not really relevant (incompetence, laziness etc). If I, or anyone else in the real world doesn't do their job they're fired - and rightly so surely? I definitely would not be given a golden handshake and a pension for my troubles!

I genuinely cannot understand the mentality of some people who think making people accountable* for this mess is not necessary.

* Accountable, in my opinion, does not mean sent off into the sunset with a €1m golden handshake. Not looking at any former financial regulator in particular!

hallelujajordan

Strata wrote: »

I'm really intrigued by your notion that the "blame game" will achieve nothing.

I totally disagree. People have to be held accountable for this mess. Individuals. People who didn't do the job that they were employed/elected to do. Why they didn't do there job is not really relevant (incompetence, laziness etc). If I, or anyone else in the real world doesn't do their job they're fired - and rightly so surely? I definitely would not be given a golden handshake and a pension for my troubles!

I genuinely cannot understand the mentality of some people who think making people accountable* for this mess is not necessary.

* Accountable, in my opinion, does not mean sent off into the sunset with a €1m golden handshake. Not looking at any former financial regulator in particular!

Understood, and actually I agree with you . . . Accountability on behalf of the professionals who should have done a better job and didn't is indeed necessary, up to and including criminal prosecution if we can determine that laws were broken.

That's not the same as doling out blame to Joe or Jennifer Bloggs because they voted a particular way or because they overspent on a house that they couldnt afford . . and its certainly not the same as trying to structure the tax take so that Joe and Jennifer suffer more than Liam Byrne or anyone else because the blame index considers them more culpable. . .

NewHillel

gbee wrote: »

They think we can't see their IP addresses!!!!

That, my friend, cuts two ways!

NewHillel

hallelujajordan wrote: »

I blame Fianna Fail for the mistakes they made

I blame Fianna Fail for the mistakes they made

Are we clear now ?

Good. I take it that you accept then that the blame for our current mess goes to Fianna Fáil. Phew, I'm glad we got that sorted! (Wipes perspiration from brow/)

NewHillel

gambiaman wrote: »

It certainly seems the bigger the monster fck-up the further the distance the perpetrator puts between him/her and it.

That's what all the research seems to indicate.

gambiaman wrote: »

I find it horribly fascinating that this particular speciman can't keep his sleeveen trap shut and head down considering what he has done to a whole nation - but then I think he knows in this Banana Republic, he and his ilk are virtually untouchable within the current setup.

I don't think that that's it at all. I think that he has convinced himself that none of this mess was his fault.

paddyland

I genuinely, firmly believe that the present grotesque situation this country finds itself in is the ultimate result of decades of how this state was set up and run, by all parties, but a hundred times primarily by the FF party, from Dev's day.

Talk to old timers about the '40s and '50s, and the petty little corruptions that went on, job cronyism, lucrative contracts, political favouritism, blatant theft and fraud in every single state organisation, cover ups, abuse of everything in a quiet and unspoken way.

The fact that it was generally kept at a level 'under the radar,' and that FF had a strong grip on this country and it's people, through political chicanery, meant that it carried on for decades, the dirty little way Irish people went about their daily business.

It became so ingrained, that a new generation of FFers began to think they were invincible, and when sheer greed took over, and they didn't know when or how to stop, that the cup spilleth over, and the whole thing blew up in their face.

For that reason, I think it is not simply enough to have a token investigation into a small number of present day culprits, to blame a small number of politicians or bankers. No, a real indepth investigation into how all of this came about would be a mammoth task, and would involve trawling the entire history of politics in this country, and primarily the Fianna Fáil party, since they were in power far longer than anyone else, and allowed a system develop that suited their own purposes in a very unhealthy and ultimately destructive manner.

The whole rise of Fianna Fáil, their 'raison d'etre,' their agendas, their dirty little deals, and their prime shakers and movers, needs to be turned inside out and exposed. If it could only be opened up, it would stink to high heaven. The question is, have Fianna Fáil still such a hold on this country that such an investigation can never happen?

NewHillel

gbee wrote: »

And he meddled in our moral life too. We all know too well how Bertie used his estranged marriage to push through divorce legislation, I know a lot of people expected Bertie to be FIRST in the queue when Divorce Came in, but no .... the snivilling little cow......

On the contrary, he lessened the states meddling in our moral life. One of the things I give him credit for.

gbee wrote: »

.... the snivilling little cow......

Who??? Bertie?? (ROFL)

Liam Byrne

hallelujajordan wrote: »

That's not the same as doling out blame to Joe or Jennifer Bloggs because they voted a particular way or because they overspent on a house that they couldnt afford . . and its certainly not the same as trying to structure the tax take so that Joe and Jennifer suffer more than Liam Byrne or anyone else because the blame index considers them more culpable. . .

Hold on a second there now, before you start implying that my views are completely off the wall!

I'm all for aiming blame where it lies, and for letting natural justice prevail. It's FF that have chosen to screw that natural accountability.

If Joe & Jennifer lived within their means, they (should) have no worries.

If Joe & Jennifer got greedy and borrowed too much, they have to take responsibility for that, and so will "suffer the consequences" of their choices without impacting on others

The problem is that the EXACT SAME JUSTICE should apply it if were Joe & Jennifer Developers Ltd or Joe & Jennifer Bank Ltd.

So the only reason that I want FF voters taxed more is because FF have ensured that I am taxed more to bail out the corrupt Anglo.

It CERTAINLY isn't my choice to approach things this way (as I said, I wouldn't ask anyone to foot someone else's bill), but if FF are forcing people to foot the bill then their supporters - the ones who put them in a position to wreck the natural karma and consequences - should be the ones to do so.

Ideally (and my preference) would be that the only impact of the crash would be everyone paying / meeting instalments of the loans that THEY CHOSE to take out, and not footing the bills for anyone else.

But if FF and their supporters want Anglo bailed out and NAMA set up, then they can foot the bill themselves.

gandalf

While there were an awful lot of people who did stretch themselves beyond their means there were an awful lot of us who were living within our means as well. I have a modest mortgage in comparison was in reasonably secure employment up until the last couple of years. However based on the bad decisions of our Government including in recent times the crazy bank guarantee scheme me and probably my infant son (if my wife and I decide to stay in Ireland) will be paying for years to come.

I'm responsible for my decisions and actions and I will pay my mortgage and other debts back as every good citizen should do. I expect those who made bad decisions. who failed in their jobs to take responsibility for their actions and if they were incompetent or worse I expect them to be punished or face legal action. I certainly do not expect them to be allowed go into retirement with a pension fund that most of us will only get if we win the lottery.

NewHillel

gandalf wrote: »

While there were an awful lot of people who did stretch themselves beyond their means there were an awful lot of us who were living within our means as well. I have a modest mortgage in comparison was in reasonably secure employment up until the last couple of years. However based on the bad decisions of our Government including in recent times the crazy bank guarantee scheme me and probably my infant son (if my wife and I decide to stay in Ireland) will be paying for years to come.

I'm responsible for my decisions and actions and I will pay my mortgage and other debts back as every good citizen should do. I expect those who made bad decisions. who failed in their jobs to take responsibility for their actions and if they were incompetent or worse I expect them to be punished or face legal action. I certainly do not expect them to be allowed go into retirement with a pension fund that most of us will only get if we win the lottery.

I agree with your position. However, there is no appetite in political circles for accountancy amongst politicians and civil servants. I really don't know how this can be addressed. I would like to think that a non-FF Government will take a strong line, but, I have my doubts.

hallelujajordan

NewHillel wrote: »

Good. I take it that you accept then that the blame for our current mess goes to Fianna Fáil. Phew, I'm glad we got that sorted! (Wipes perspiration from brow/)

No, I don't accept that. . . I accept that Fianna Fail played a major role in creating the environment to allow an unsustainable economic bubble. .

I don't believe in blame but if you want to talk about collective responsibility, I think everyone who supported the high spend / low tax economic policies of the 90's (which includes a lot more than FF supporters) have some responsibility. I think the developers, the property investors, the 100% mortgage holders . . . the people who lived way beyond their means on the never-never, all have some some responsibility. . . I don't know how to put all of these people in a box or why you would even want to and that is why I use the term collective responsibility.

hallelujajordan

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Hold on a second there now, before you start implying that my views are completely off the wall!

I'm all for aiming blame where it lies, and for letting natural justice prevail. It's FF that have chosen to screw that natural accountability.

If Joe & Jennifer lived within their means, they (should) have no worries.

If Joe & Jennifer got greedy and borrowed too much, they have to take responsibility for that, and so will "suffer the consequences" of their choices without impacting on others

The problem is that the EXACT SAME JUSTICE should apply it if were Joe & Jennifer Developers Ltd or Joe & Jennifer Bank Ltd.

So the only reason that I want FF voters taxed more is because FF have ensured that I am taxed more to bail out the corrupt Anglo.

It CERTAINLY isn't my choice to approach things this way (as I said, I wouldn't ask anyone to foot someone else's bill), but if FF are forcing people to foot the bill then their supporters - the ones who put them in a position to wreck the natural karma and consequences - should be the ones to do so.

Ideally (and my preference) would be that the only impact of the crash would be everyone paying / meeting instalments of the loans that THEY CHOSE to take out, and not footing the bills for anyone else.

Your views are off the wall (in this case at least). . what you are suggesting is that a governing party should be held personally responsible (I'm OK with that ) but also personally financially culpable (seriously ?? ) for the results of their economic decisions.

We should all have to pay our own debts, I'm absolutely fine with that but national debt needs to be paid by us all. . . If the view of the government is that institutional debt needs to be converted into national debt in order for our economy to continue to function then, while I might not like it, I understand why I have to live with it . .

Liam Byrne wrote:

But if FF and their supporters want Anglo bailed out and NAMA set up, then they can foot the bill themselves.

So, if NAMA turns a profit (unlikely I accept, but possible nonetheless) will you be equally happy for those profits to be distributed amongst the Fianna Fail membership ?

Shea O'Meara

to simplify...

I'm driving a car. I'm driving fast, the passengers are in the most part okay with this. However, I've only one hand lightly on the wheel, they don't know that. I see a 'bridge out' sign up ahead. Only some of the passengers see the sign and voice concern. I plough on as I figure, it'll be all okay, Dukes of Hazzard style. We crash, I believe we were all at fault even the lad in the boot who had no idea and never asked to be in the car in the first place.

To me, that's Bertie. If you never voted for him, lived within your means...it's your fault. If you spent stupidly but only did so because the government said the boom would get boomier, it's your fault...If you thought FFail would in the least have the decency to put their hands up and say, 'We were in charge we screwed up', now you're being foolish.

I would like some credit for my role in creating the intial economic growth, because I seem to be taking the rap for the crash and burn.

Liam Byrne

hallelujajordan wrote: »

We should all have to pay our own debts, I'm absolutely fine with that but national debt needs to be paid by us all. . . If the view of the government is that institutional debt needs to be converted into national debt in order for our economy to continue to function then, while I might not like it, I understand why I have to live with it . .

That last bit is my objection. I have no problem being held responsible for NATIONAL DEBT, but I draw the line at paying the debts of irresponsible gamblers, and Fianna Fáil have absolutely no authority to make a decision to take on institutional debt and cause it to become national debt.

hallelujajordan wrote: »

So, if NAMA turns a profit (unlikely I accept, but possible nonetheless) will you be equally happy for those profits to be distributed amongst the Fianna Fail membership ?

If you can factor in interest paid on the loan that we've been forced to give NAMA, and some compensation for the hardship caused by same, then yes - Fianna Fáil membership can share whatever is left over.

Sir Oxman

Liam Byrne wrote: »

That last bit is my objection. I have no problem being held responsible for NATIONAL DEBT, but I draw the line at paying the debts of irresponsible gamblers, and Fianna Fáil have absolutely no authority to make a decision to take on institutional debt and cause it to become national debt.



If you can factor in interest paid on the loan that we've been forced to give NAMA, and some compensation for the hardship caused by same, then yes - Fianna Fáil membership can share whatever is left over.

They have no moral authority whatsoever to have made the decisions they have.
None. Whatsoever.

NewHillel

hallelujajordan wrote: »

I accept that Fianna Fail played a major role in creating the environment to allow an unsustainable economic bubble. .

Better than nothing, I suppose.

(Oh Lord, May the remaining scales fall quickly from his eyes. halleluja! May he come to recognise the culpability of FF and wash away his allegiance in the river jordan. halleluja! May he come to recognise in Enda a true and inspiring leader. halleluja. Ok. Okay, I'm not sure even St. Paul had that much of a conversion.)

hallelujajordan

Shea O'Meara wrote: »

to simplify...

I'm driving a car. I'm driving fast, the passengers are in the most part okay with this. However, I've only one hand lightly on the wheel, they don't know that. I see a 'bridge out' sign up ahead. Only some of the passengers see the sign and voice concern. I plough on as I figure, it'll be all okay, Dukes of Hazzard style. We crash, I believe we were all at fault even the lad in the boot who had no idea and never asked to be in the car in the first place.

To me, that's Bertie. If you never voted for him, lived within your means...it's your fault. If you spent stupidly but only did so because the government said the boom would get boomier, it's your fault...If you thought FFail would in the least have the decency to put their hands up and say, 'We were in charge we screwed up', now you're being foolish.

If you extend your analogy correctly you would point out that Bertie stopped the car twice en route to the bridge, got everyone out, had a vote to see if the majority wanted him to keep driving or to hand over the keys to his mate Enda. . .

Liam Byrne wrote: »

That last bit is my objection. I have no problem being held responsible for NATIONAL DEBT, but I draw the line at paying the debts of irresponsible gamblers, and Fianna Fáil have absolutely no authority to make a decision to take on institutional debt and cause it to become national debt.

Authority to legislate is provided for in a general election. You may not like what the government do, but you have no right to question their authority to do it.

Shea O'Meara

hallelujajordan wrote: »

If you extend your analogy correctly you would point out that Bertie stopped the car twice en route to the bridge, got everyone out, had a vote to see if the majority wanted him to keep driving or to hand over the keys to his mate Enda. . .

Fair point, but if people are being fed the line that everything is great and will continue to be so.....

hallelujajordan wrote: »

Authority to legislate is provided for in a general election. You may not like what the government do, but you have no right to question their authority to do it.

You do. It's democracy. That's why in more normal states governments fall or politicians with less of a brass neck resign.

Liam Byrne

hallelujajordan wrote: »

If you extend your analogy correctly you would point out that Bertie stopped the car twice en route to the bridge, got everyone out, had a vote to see if the majority wanted him to keep driving or to hand over the keys to his mate Enda. . .

.....while lying about the fact that the bridge was out and reassuring all of the passengers that he knew the road.....despite passing 24 signposts and road workers waving madly for his attention.

hallelujajordan wrote: »

Authority to legislate is provided for in a general election. You may not like what the government do, but you have no right to question their authority to do it.

Treason negates such authority.

By the way, it's gas that you phrase it as "questioning their authority"; that is precisely how democracy works.

If FF decided in the morning to legislate for, say, bulldozing all houses and forcing everyone to move to Donegal so as to pay off the debt by selling the country to America, would you "question their authority" ?

If so, why not "question their authority" on NAMA & Anglo ?

hallelujajordan

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Treason negates such authority.

By the way, it's gas that you phrase it as "questioning their authority"; that is precisely how democracy works.

If FF decided in the morning to legislate for, say, bulldozing all houses and forcing everyone to move to Donegal so as to pay off the debt by selling the country to America, would you "question their authority" ?

If so, why not "question their authority" on NAMA & Anglo ?

In Irish law treason is defined as follows "Article 39 of the Constitution of Ireland (adopted in 1937) states that "treason shall consist only in levying war against the State, or assisting any State or person or in citing or conspiring with any person to levy war against the State, or at tempting by force of arms or other violent means to overthrow the organs of government established by the Constitution, or taking part or being concerned in or in citing or conspiring with any person to make or to take part or be concerned in any such attempt."

It's a stupid word to throw around in this context.