Unions call to not pay mortgages

Is mise le key

OMD wrote: »

That is just daft.

DAFT.IE???:D

littlemac1980

Is mise le key wrote: »

Now you see this is where we come to discuss how we structure society, i bbeleive in property prices being fixed depending on their size/location & not open to fluctuation & speculation, the prices they rose to were not their true value & therefore the laons should be lowered.

Then once we have established a fair price & there is no negaitive equity issues prices are fixed.

Cool, a government that decides where I live, and how much my property is worth. I can't wait. Where do I collect my Soma?

Cookie_Monster

Is mise le key wrote: »

How is it punishment? You are being asked to contribute more to society because you earn more.

excessively more though and you are entitled to much less in terms of support from the state also (no cheap housing, medical card etc)

The current system rewards failure and punishes success, as does socialism.

OMD

littlemac1980 wrote: »

Cool, a government that decides where I live, and how much my property is worth. I can't wait. Where do I collect my Soma?

Not only decides how much it is worth but sets the price if you want to sell. So if you want to move, someone has to pay the set price or else you cannot sell and therefore cannot move.

Godge

Is mise le key wrote: »

Now you see this is where we come to discuss how we structure society, i bbeleive in property prices being fixed depending on their size/location & not open to fluctuation & speculation, the prices they rose to were not their true value & therefore the laons should be lowered.

Then once we have established a fair price & there is no negaitive equity issues prices are fixed.

And if seven people want to buy the same house, how do we decide who should get it if the price is fixed? The naivety of your post is hard to believe.

Cookie_Monster

Godge wrote: »

And if seven people want to buy the same house, how do we decide who should get it if the price is fixed? The naivety of your post is hard to believe.

whoever knows the local TD best of course

Frank Black

Godge wrote: »

And if seven people want to buy the same house, how do we decide who should get it if the price is fixed?

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say - whoever earns the least?

littlemac1980

You think you are a Socialist Is Mise, but you're actually a Feudalist.

Is mise le key

So i take you guys are all completley happy with market capitalism, yes?

littlemac1980

Is mise le key wrote: »

So i take you guys are all completley happy with market capitalism, yes?

Beats Feudalism and Totalitarianism any day of the week.

Godge

Is mise le key wrote: »

So i take you guys are all completley happy with market capitalism, yes?

Market capitalism with appropriate Government intervention in cases of market failure, with appropriate Government regulation of the market and with appropriate provision of universal services such as social welfare, education and health. The balance of each to be decided in a democratic process by the will of the people.

The system works in most of Europe. Unfortunately, we haven't got it quite right in Ireland yet.

Loony Left ideas? No thanks, best left to the North Koreans.

Frank Black

Is mise le key wrote: »

So i take you guys are all completley happy with market capitalism, yes?

Given the choice between it and the alternatives you've proposed, I'll stick with the capitalism, thanks.

djpbarry

baaaa wrote: »

Some people say it is the banks fault- for flooding the market with cheap,lax credit thus inflating prices temporarily and ultimately crashing it long -term.

Everyone else says those who took out mortgages they couldn’t afford are responsible for their own actions.

d'Oracle wrote: »

Whats more these are nurses. Now, I understand nurses plight. They work a tough, tough job.

And they are well-compensated for it – nurses in Ireland are among the best-paid in the world.

d'Oracle wrote: »

Many of them are in debt (mortgage) and go to work in increasingly poor conditions due to resource depletion in the appallingly run health services.

The Irish health service is not appallingly run – it’s a pretty good health service. Certainly there are some issues that need to be addressed, such as long waiting times, but patient outcomes and satisfaction levels are very high. This is supported by the OECD’s annual health indicators publications.

denlaw wrote: »

people dont give a ****e about that anymore .

I think you’ll find that financial institutions will when you go looking for credit from them.

Is mise le key

littlemac1980 wrote: »

You think you are a Socialist Is Mise, but you're actually a Feudalist.

Ha ha, now this is where you really do have a skewed perception of reality, we are discussing the mortgage issues that are with us at present & you think that by the state providing all housing & controlling the price so it is not open to capitalist markets that make me a feudalist!!!!

You are truly misguided in your interpretations.

Dyr

djpbarry wrote: »

times, but patient outcomes and satisfaction levels are very high. This is supported by the OECD’s annual health indicators publications.
I think you’ll find that financial institutions will when you go looking for credit from them.

Do they ask dead people how satisfied they are with the health service?

sarumite

Is mise le key wrote: »

How is it punishment? You are being asked to contribute more to society because you earn more.

It doesn't differentiate to why I earn more though. If I earn more because I worker harder/have more responsibility, then taxing me to pay for the person who doesn't work as hard etc doesn't reward me for that extra effort. Though now we are getting into a discussion about socialism, probably better for another thread dedicated to it.

littlemac1980

Is mise le key wrote: »

Ha ha, now this is where you really do have a skewed perception of reality, we are discussing the mortgage issues that are with us at present & you think that by the state providing all housing & controlling the price so it is not open to capitalist markets that make me a feudalist!!!!

You are truly misguided in your interpretations.

You need to learn how to develop the concepts you propose so that they arrive at their natural conclusion, as they would operate in the real world, as opposed to where you would hope they would to lead.

Then you will begin to understand how to interpret the dangers inherent in the allegedly 'socialist' policies you propose, and where the imperfections of men would ultimately lead society on the back of those ill-conceived policies.

ei.sdraob

Is mise le key wrote: »

"To each according to his need, from each according to his ability"

Who gets to decide on the "needs" ? you ?

does everyone need a 4 bed celtic tiger home oO

Icepick

Is mise le key wrote: »

Ha ha, now this is where you really do have a skewed perception of reality, we are discussing the mortgage issues that are with us at present & you think that by the state providing all housing & controlling the price so it is not open to capitalist markets that make me a feudalist!!!!

You are truly misguided in your interpretations.

Interesting how the only communists are either people ruling communist states or bored rich kids in the west.

Is mise le key

littlemac1980 wrote: »

You need to learn how to develop the concepts you propose so that they arrive at their natural conclusion, as they would operate in the real world, as opposed to where you would hope they would to lead.

Then you will begin to understand how to interpret the dangers inherent in the allegedly 'socialist' policies you propose, and where the imperfections of men would ultimately lead society on the back of those ill-conceived policies.

Contained within you post is the very contradiction that answers your question for me, it is the imperfections of men that lead society to bad places, not Socialist policies.

Add to this that it is the men of capitalism that have brought us to where we are now, now dont just look around your room at your big TV & flash car in the garden, look around the globe & acknowledge how inequitable the world is.

Finally on this, the other factor affecting where any Socialist state leads society is the enemies of Socialism working hard to ensure its demise, this is not conspiracy, the operations of the CIA are more than documented & exposed on this for decades.

You posed that i should 'learn how to develop the concepts i propose', i really think you should educate yourself as to the workings of Socialism unhindered by capitalists working to make it fail & choose which is the right side for humanity.

What is more important to look after, Money? or People?

Icepick wrote: »

Interesting how the only communists are either people ruling communist states or bored rich kids in the west.

And which one of those do i fall into?

You do know also that offering communism up here as the political persuasion is off the mark, i have already said the system i am in favor of is Democratic Socialism,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_socialism

Gilda Fortune

I have a mortgage and its mine and as such I will pay it back. i do not want any handouts. Thankfully I didnt saddle myself with a huge mortgage.
I would urge people in bad debt to stop paying the ridiculous credit cards and loans back. Let them go to creditors and the interest will be frozen. then arrange a sensible pay back scheme with the creditor. A friend of mine had a 5,000 mbma credit card. she stopped paying it, ignore calls and letters. eventually the debt was sold to a bad credit company. They rang and she was able to pay back 50 euro a month. eventaully she got the debt down to 3,000. she rang them up and they accepted 2,100 as full payment. so she saved 900 euro. sure her credit rating is crap but she already owns her own house. and in a country were hundreds of thousands of people have bad credit rating who cares.
But keep paying ur mortgage.

sarumite

Is mise le key wrote: »

Contained within you post is the very contradiction that answers your question for me, it is the imperfections of men that lead society to bad places, not Socialist policies.

I think the point here is that socialism does not take into acount these imperfections. Its works at a theoretical level, however it ignores too many variables to be viable on a practical level.

Add to this that it is the men of capitalism that have brought us to where we are now, now dont just look around your room at your big TV & flash car in the garden, look around the globe & acknowledge how inequitable the world is.

Are you trying to suggest that socialism would solve an inequitable world? Is it equitable to reward the hard working the same as the lazy?

Finally on this, the other factor affecting where any Socialist state leads society is the enemies of Socialism working hard to ensure its demise, this is not conspiracy, the operations of the CIA are more than documented & exposed on this for decades.

Unfortuantely while there is a correlation with CIA activity the causation was not solely socialism but also totalitarianism.

What is more important to look after, Money? or People?



And which one of those do i fall into?

As my mother would say "Health is wealth and wealth is health".

Is mise le key

sarumite wrote: »

As my mother would say "Health is wealth and wealth is health".

So you finally agree, peoples well being is more important than capital.

southsiderosie

sarumite wrote: »

Unfortuantely while there is a correlation with CIA activity the causation was not solely socialism but also totalitarianism.

What?

Totalitarianism was not the issue in Iran, Guatemala, El Salvador, Nicaragua or Chile (just to name a few). Commodities interests and ideological opposition to socialist policies were, and neither of those justified US/CIA interference into the domestic affairs of these countries, particularly the small, poor countries of Central America.

Sorry to veer OT, but that is just a ridiculous statement, and is too often trotted out to justify US atrocities abroad.

sarumite

southsiderosie wrote: »

What?

Totalitarianism was not the issue in Iran, Guatemala, El Salvador, Nicaragua or Chile (just to name a few). Commodities interests and ideological opposition to socialist policies were, and neither of those justified US/CIA interference into the domestic affairs of these countries, particularly the small, poor countries of Central America.

Sorry to veer OT, but that is just a ridiculous statement, and is too often trotted out to justify US atrocities abroad.

I actually I do agree. I am tired and didn't have my coffee when I made that simplistic argument. I didn't agree with the argument about the "enemies of socialism", however that doesn't really excuse my lazy retort. I retract the statement.

sarumite

Is mise le key wrote: »

So you finally agree, peoples well being is more important than capital.

No. I believe capital creation is important to sustain peoples well being.

Is mise le key

sarumite wrote: »

People well being rely's on capital.

To elaborate more on this,

Peoples well being relys on capital, and how that is distributed & prioritised in society for the betterment of all of the people.

sarumite

Is mise le key wrote: »

To elaborate more on this,

Peoples well being relys on capital, and how that is distributed & prioritised in society for the betterment of all of the people.

I apologise I changed my statement, though that was in an effort to clarify ut.

I don't agree witht he betterment of all the people. If you don't make an effort, I don't believe my producitivity should be used to subsidize your livelyhood to the detrement of mine.

Is mise le key

sarumite wrote: »

I apologise I changed my statement, though that was in an effort to clarify ut.

I don't agree witht he betterment of all the people. If you don't make an effort, I don't believe my producitivity should be used to subsidize your livelyhood to the detrement of mine.

Well i have to say at least your view is crystal clear even if i think it is wrong.

Unless you feel that we have an obligation to assisst those less fortunate than us, or that have less ability than us then you are what epitomises capitalism. That is not a crticism of you, meerly a recognition that you are what i am fighting against.

I will leave you with this thought, if you were ever to fall on hard times, i would still advocate that you be assissted by those of us in better positions to help you even if you were still of the same mind set.

You see Socialism represents an evolution in the thinking of man away from the primal instinct of accumulating as much as you can personally, we strive to share out what we all have collectivley so no one should have a less than par quality of life.

sarumite

Is mise le key wrote: »

Well i have to say at least your view is crystal clear even if i think it is wrong.

Unless you feel that we have an obligation to assisst those less fortunate than us, or that have less ability than us then you are what epitomises capitalism. That is not a crticism of you, meerly a recognition that you are what i am fighting against.

I will leave you with this thought, if you were ever to fall on hard times, i would still advocate that you be assissted by those of us in better positions to help you even if you were still of the same mind set.

I think you are misrepresenting my views. I believe wholeheartedly in a 'hand up', just not always in a 'hand out'. I am not a fundamental capitalist. From an Irish prespective I am probably more fiscally conservative than most of my peers.Personally I currently have fallen on hard times as I am not eligable to recieve state benefits and I do not have an income. I am lucky that my partner has a stable job. I am currently living off my savings. I am not in favour of cutting all JSA or stopping all social housing .As such I share your final thoughts myself. However if you were to fall on hard times and never make an effort to get back on your feet, then continuing to provide you assistance is a detriment to the both of us.