‘OCCUPY Wall Street’ protestors on Dame Street

Lockstep

I can dig politicians and highly paid civil servants could do with a paycut but I don't get this assumption that if we do this, our economy will fix itself. What they earn is a drop in the public finances ocean. At best it's setting an example but it doesn't fix the glaring problems we face.

It worries me when I agree with Permabear :pac:

hatrickpatrick

It's not just about fixing the economy, no one expects a quick fix. It's about moral conscience. The bankers and politicians don't deserve to have their wages payed by the taxpayer after they screwed up so much. It feels like we're rewarding incompetence and corruption. They deserve to experience the sh*t they've forced on the rest of us.

Don't you agree that the people who caused this crap should be punished for it? We can't do it within the legal system apparently, why don't we do it by stopping the outrageous amount of money they still get, which their own incompetence and corruption has deprived everyone else of?
We OWN Anglo, We pretty much OWN the Irish banking system We should INSIST that anyone whose corruption had a hand in creating this mess simply be FIRED, without any kind of golden handshake.

Sounds harsh? It is. But so is the reality facing hundreds of thousands of unemployed, debt ridden Irish people because of the unbelievable criminality these assholes have so far gotten away with scot free.

Ireland: Where you can utterly screw the entire system up and get rewarded for it. The reward comes out of the pockets of Irish taxpayers.

Bannasidhe

Lads. We all decide for ourselves if we want to participate or not. At least we have a choice when in comes to the protest. None of our recent governments have ever given us a choice - from referenda on Treaties to Bank Bail-Outs.

So

We stop being so fecking spineless and can speak up

or

We can kvetch about how useless it is, how the 'demands' are wrong, how cutting politicians salaries won't help pay the bond holders, how lets play private sector vs public sector is a far more important issue .... ever heard of divide and rule?

I'll be at Occupy Cork.

Jippohead

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

It's not just about fixing the economy, no one expects a quick fix. It's about moral conscience. The bankers and politicians don't deserve to have their wages payed by the taxpayer after they screwed up so much. It feels like we're rewarding incompetence and corruption. They deserve to experience the sh*t they've forced on the rest of us.

Don't you agree that the people who caused this crap should be punished for it? We can't do it within the legal system apparently, why don't we do it by stopping the outrageous amount of money they still get, which their own incompetence and corruption has deprived everyone else of?
We OWN Anglo, We pretty much OWN the Irish banking system We should INSIST that anyone whose corruption had a hand in creating this mess simply be FIRED, without any kind of golden handshake.

Sounds harsh? It is. But so is the reality facing hundreds of thousands of unemployed, debt ridden Irish people because of the unbelievable criminality these assholes have so far gotten away with scot free.

Ireland: Where you can utterly screw the entire system up and get rewarded for it. The reward comes out of the pockets of Irish taxpayers.

While I see the points that both sides are making, the above post is exactly how I feel. Why are so called experts and professionals not held accountable for being extremely incompetent at best, or downright dishonest and criminal at worst? (what I believe).

Yes, people who took out massive loans were idiotic and made mistakes, but is the entire population expected to be financial experts? Is it fair that people who perpetrated fraud are allowed to lounge about as millionaires?

Why are people so eager to hammer on old-age pensioners and students, like they're the cause of the meltdown exclusively?

If people saw a little accountability in Ireland, they might not feel sick to their stomachs when taking pay cuts etc etc.

Bannasidhe

Jippohead wrote: »

If people saw a little accountability in Ireland, they might not feel sick to their stomachs when taking pay cuts

ABSO****INGLUTELY!!!

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

ballyharpat

In theory, this 'occupation' sounds great, in reality, there are more dole scroungers and SW recipients up there looking out for themselves, saying 'no, don't cut my dole, I don't want to have to get a job, if I did I wouldn;t be able to hang out here and do sweet FA all day every day.'
Get off your arse and get a job. Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country.

I would love to be up there to protest the cronyism, the high wages paid to Quangos, etc. But I would also like to be up there protesting the high rate of SW and Rent Allowance. I would be up there saying stop any sort of a bailout for people that lived beyond their means. Those that couldn't see past the end of their nose as they took out 200k mortgages on 30k salaries.

After watching Frontline last night, I am sick of watching these people. One couple was only paying $632 month of a mortgage, they had it reduced to 210 a month and now they are worrying about how they'll pay when it goes back to the original sum. If they have both been out of work for 2+ years, how do they expect to own a house????
The other couple bought an apartment, then decided to have a kid, now they are unhappy that they live in an apartment......
Then the poor single lady that bought a e1,000,000 house and now can't make the payments.....ya think???? wow,

I'm no genius, but stupidity knows no boundaries...

I do not want anything to do with these people and their sense of entitlement and lack of self responsibility, yet they want the government to take responsibility!!!


Grow up, stop being so naive, working to try and have a better life for myself, I vote for who I think will do the best job, but unfortunately, politicians, the world over, always have been, and are, crooked.

Excuse me while I throw up......

Bannasidhe

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Nobody has hammered the handful of bankers and TDs - full stop.

I have no problem with cuts being made. I have no problem with inefficiencies in the PS sector being halted, or redundancies made. I have no problem with SW cuts being made. In fact - I was a front-line PS worker. My contract was cut. At the age of 46 I had to claim SW for the first time in my life. I got my first PAYE job when I was 15. 31 years of PRSI payments and I was made to feel like a begger. Yet, Ahern can have his exorbitant phone bill paid!

I do have a problem with No equivalent measures being taken against the 1 % - the bankers, the top civil servants, the TDs, the quango directors, the developers.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Manach

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

The jobless.
Apart from that, I'd agree with you on the emotive language issue.

Bannasidhe

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I think I was not the first to use the term hammered, I was echoing your use of it in relation to cuts to pensions

THE Department of Finance is investigating the payment of a secret €500,000 bonus to a senior figure in Bank of Ireland.

The Irish Independent has learned the payment was made to the executive in Bank of Ireland Asset Management (BIAM) in recent days -- without the knowledge of Finance Minister Brian Lenihan.

Dec 2010 http://www.independent.ie/national-news/probe-into-euro500000-secret-bank-bonus-2465716.html

An investigation by the Department of Finance into bonuses paid to executives at Bank of Ireland has found that the bank misled the State and the taxpayer.

It has emerged Bank of Ireland paid €4.3m in bonuses to staff since the introduction of the bank guarantee in 2008.

Another €600,000 will be paid in bonuses this year; another €200,000 in 2012.

The bank also said that €11m may have to be paid to 250 workers this year under certain bonus categories.

March 2010 Read more: http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/investigation-exposes-bank-of-ireland-bonus-payments-495877.html#ixzz1aWE79pSm

It hasn't been a great couple of years for corporate bankers in Ireland, what with redundancies, pay cuts and the whole finger-pointed-for-the-country's-economic-meltdown thing. But their situation is starting to look up.

Salaries for commercial and corporate bankers have actually increased over the course of 2010, on the back of greater demand for their services.

The rise is most pronounced at the senior end; relationship managers with over five years' experience can now expect €85-100k (up from €69-85k last year), according to the 2011 Robert Walters Salary Survey. But, as the table below shows, pay has increased across the board, from junior credit analysts to senior assistant relationship managers.

Feb 2011 http://news.efinancialcareers.ie/NEWS_ITEM/newsItemId-31040

TWO senior executives at Irish Life & Permanent enjoyed earnings above the €500,000 banking pay cap last year, as car allowances and other perks bulked up their salaries.

The €538,000 package of IL&P boss Kevin Murphy is revealed in the bancassurer's 2010 annual report, which also shows that finance chief David McCarthy enjoyed total remuneration of €514,000.

Both men's salaries were in line with the pay cap on state-supported banks, with Mr Murphy's on the button at €500,000 and Mr McCarthy following closely behind with €497,000.

Mr Murphy's salary was supplemented with a €34,000 benefit in kind -- believed to relate to a company car and health premiums -- plus €4,000 in "other" benefits, linked to permanent health insurance.

Mr McCarthy's benefit in kind came in at €31,000, while he also booked €4,000 in "other" remuneration.

Mar 2011 http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/perks-take-ilp-bankers-over-the-euro500000-pay-cap-2573571.html

BANK OF Ireland chief executive Richie Boucher received a top-up to his pension of €1.49 million last year. This was part of a total remuneration package worth €1.99 million for the bank boss.

Apr 2010. http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2010/0417/1224268543242.html

No bonuses and salary cuts across the banking sector you say?

Jippohead

Bannasidhe wrote: »

I think I was not the first to use the term hammered, I was echoing your use of it in relation to cuts to pensions

Jeez folks, it was just a word. I apologise and will tame my emotive language in future discussion.

Jippohead

Ok, I agree that cuts will have to be made and that social welfare, salaries and pensions are now way out of kilter with our current revenue streams.

However, where did the revenue come from for the rises between 2002 and 2007? I'm going to guess it was from the credit/property bubble inflated by a small number of people (developers, bankers, politicians). Is that fair or not? or did that all money come from our coffers when we were a country that actually produced things of value?

If it is a fair (simplistic) assessment, whats happened those responsible? A pay-cut of 33% on a €500,000 salary and leave it at that? A large golden handshake? A very generous pension (in the case of several politicians)?

The thing that really bothers me, is that considering all the variables that have gone into this mess, has the burden of "our" collective mistakes (and I didn't touch property and don't live in Ireland anymore) been spread proportionally? and has there been any accountability for those that helped mess things up? (and I don't necessarily mean FF getting booted out of government, although that is an example).

hatrickpatrick

The point I'm trying to make with regard to banks is that it's not just about directly fixing the economy.

It's also about justice.

It's about the moral abhorrence of you and me, the people who have suffered because of this, paying the wages of the people who caused it. Do you not see the bitter irony?

They should be left to rot, just like they left us to rot. Equality. All human beings deserve equal treatment. No bailout for one sector without a bailout for others. Why do we bail out gambling idiots while not bailing out people in negative equity?

I AGREE that you could make the argument that those people were also irresponsible and incompetent. But if incompetence is rewarded in the banking sector, it should also be rewarded everywhere else.

Otherwise the message you're sending is "people who manage banks are more important than others and deserve to be protected and treated better than others."

And I simply don't accept that this holds true for ANY part of society. Either we're all in this together or we're not. I don't accept that one class of people matters more than others. Why should a gambling banker have his money repaid by the taxpayer but not a gambling homeowner who took out an unwise mortgage?

Same mistake, different place. Why are we paying for one but not the other? Why is it ok to let that homeowner rot but not the bank manager?

Bannasidhe

It is reported that nine Ministers are paying their special advisers more than the money-saving pay cap announced by Government.

The normal pay scale is €80,000 to €92,000, but nine Departments have secured exemptions.

Sinn Féin said it was ironic that advisers to Joan Burton's department of Social Protection were on higher rates "while the department is doggedly pursuing fraud".

The Taoiseach's two advisers earn €168,000 each while the Tánaiste's advisors earn €168,000 and €155,000. They are not subject to the pay ceilings.

Oct 12 2011 http://www.examiner.ie/breakingnews/ireland/nine-ministers-exceed-pay-cap-for-advisors-524023.html#ixzz1aYarMWoP

:mad:

meglome

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Oct 12 2011 http://www.examiner.ie/breakingnews/ireland/nine-ministers-exceed-pay-cap-for-advisors-524023.html#ixzz1aYarMWoP

:mad:

There you go yet another thing that the protest should be about but isn't. Along with cutting Social Welfare payments, excessively high public salaries etc.

Though if these advisors are actually doing a good job it might be money well spent.

hatrickpatrick

meglome wrote: »

There you go yet another thing that the protest should be about but isn't. Along with cutting Social Welfare payments, excessively high public salaries etc.

Though if these advisors are actually doing a good job it might be money well spent.

1: social welfare recipients and average public servants didn't cause the mess through corruption. For me, this is about punishing those who actively encouraged corruption. IE, handing over €65bn to Anglo because the people in charge of it are personal friends, etc.

If a company in the public sector had been bailed out and had had a direct part in causing the mess, I would absolutely object to my money paying its wages. The reason that isn't a priority for my complaints (and I'm not saying it isn't for others) is because I'm primarily concerned with the blatant injustice of me paying the wages of the people who have ruined my prospects of living comfortably myself.

That might be overly dramatic but I don't understand the apathy here. Why should you pay for Drumm, FitzPatrick etc? We now own Anglo. It's OUR money paying for these assholes' pensions. It's THEIR mistakes which will damage OUR lives.

The injustice simply makes me absolutely sick. They should be penalized, not rewarded.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Drumm#The_.22Golden_Circle.22

David Drumm: €3m pension on resigning under scandal. €3m being paid for by you and me. €3m which could easily fund hospitals, schools, roadworks, things which benefit Ireland as a whole.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seán_FitzPatrick#Career

Read this one yourself. It makes me rage too hard. €4m is the figure here.

Again, that's going to be paid by you and me. We own that bank, even though we never asked to own it. The guy and his cronies should be being savaged by the criminal assets bureau, not being bailed out by the taxpayer. They played a huge role in causing the general misery in this country.

An I honestly the only one who abhors this situation? Do you want me to name anymore names of people who are being funded by the taxpayer after they screwed up of their own free will and lost the ability to fund themselves?

Sure, social welfare and PS pay are too high. But there's a difference between that, and actively paying for people who are criminals and who caused unbelievable amounts of sh!t for the rest of us. They should be in prison.

meglome

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

1: social welfare recipients and average public servants didn't cause the mess through corruption. For me, this is about punishing those who actively encouraged corruption. IE, handing over €65bn to Anglo because the people in charge of it are personal friends, etc.

I don't think you'd find many people who wouldn't want those directly responsible for what happened to be punished for it. How harshly would depend on what they did. However it won't do a damn thing to stop what's happening right now. This is in the past and we need to look to the future.

I personally had some tough times in 2008/09 financially and was living on next to nothing. Yet I'd still gladly take more pain if it helped us get out of this mess. How many on Dame street would cheer on their welfare being cut by a third? Which is what needs to happen.

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

If a company in the public sector had been bailed out and had had a direct part in causing the mess, I would absolutely object to my money paying its wages. The reason that isn't a priority for my complaints (and I'm not saying it isn't for others) is because I'm primarily concerned with the blatant injustice of me paying the wages of the people who have ruined my prospects of living comfortably myself.

Fine but what will that do to fix anything now? (And don't get me wrong I'd love if the likes of Sean Fitz were sitting in a gaol cell).

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

That might be overly dramatic but I don't understand the apathy here. Why should you pay for Drumm, FitzPatrick etc? We now own Anglo. It's OUR money paying for these assholes' pensions. It's THEIR mistakes which will damage OUR lives.

I don't see apathy. I see people seeing this protest for what it is. There is a mass of things wrong and they go after bull**** and/or imaginary things. To be honest it's a ****ing joke.

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

The injustice simply makes me absolutely sick. They should be penalized, not rewarded.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Drumm#The_.22Golden_Circle.22

David Drumm: €3m pension on resigning under scandal. €3m being paid for by you and me. €3m which could easily fund hospitals, schools, roadworks, things which benefit Ireland as a whole.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seán_FitzPatrick#Career

Read this one yourself. It makes me rage too hard. €4m is the figure here.

Again, that's going to be paid by you and me. We own that bank, even though we never asked to own it. The guy and his cronies should be being savaged by the criminal assets bureau, not being bailed out by the taxpayer. They played a huge role in causing the general misery in this country..

I agree entirely, so why hasn't the protest made a point of this? If they did they would get far more people to join in. Right now I see a lot of people down there who want all our problems to magically disappear of be someone else's problem. I cannot... will not... agree with that.

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

An I honestly the only one who abhors this situation? Do you want me to name anymore names of people who are being funded by the taxpayer after they screwed up of their own free will and lost the ability to fund themselves?

Again agreed it's terrible... pity the protests didn't mention this.

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Sure, social welfare and PS pay are too high. But there's a difference between that, and actively paying for people who are criminals and who caused unbelievable amounts of sh!t for the rest of us. They should be in prison.

The biggest problem we've got isn't getting revenge, it's fixing the mess. No matter who we put in prison what's done will still be done. Our overspending is the greatest threat to this state, it actually worries me a lot. Quite honestly it pisses me off that all these protesters could do was shout about getting 'the man' or making it someone else's problem. What a complete waste. If I spent more than half an hour down there I'd be in a fistfight with someone. What's so difficult to get, piling crap on top of a mess isn't helping.

cue

I will be going to the march on Saturday. I think that it is a good thing and that is based mostly on my gut feeling. I visit Dame st at lunchtime most days just to be there, to be part of it. I am 42, have 2 kids and feel powerless over what is going on. I feel odd amongst the tents and the dreadlocks and slogans. I also feel odd amongst the politicians that I grew up with. I want to get a bit of hope back and I’m not getting that off any political parties. Right now, I just want to be with ordinary people like myself. Pure and simple. I don’t agree with half of the demands, but such is life. I’m gonna turn up and make the best of it.

Peanut

meglome wrote: »

The biggest problem we've got isn't getting revenge, it's fixing the mess. No matter who we put in prison what's done will still be done.

I think it's fair to say that it's easier to convince people that they need to take their share of cuts if they can see that there's some form of social justice being done.

The difficulty arises when they also expect that the situation will be fixed primarily by seeking retribution, without the addition of some kind of realistic plan for growth.

The protesters need to make a clear distinction between the demands for justice and the proposals to address the economy.

meglome

cue wrote: »

I will be going to the march on Saturday. I think that it is a good thing and that is based mostly on my gut feeling. I visit Dame st at lunchtime most days just to be there, to be part of it. I am 42, have 2 kids and feel powerless over what is going on. I feel odd amongst the tents and the dreadlocks and slogans. I also feel odd amongst the politicians that I grew up with. I want to get a bit of hope back and I’m not getting that off any political parties. Right now, I just want to be with ordinary people like myself. Pure and simple. I don’t agree with half of the demands, but such is life. I’m gonna turn up and make the best of it.

You know I am tempted to to down there but I'm genuinely concerned about how I'd react if I had to listen to enough rhetoric and bull****. Honestly I'm very angry about how things have worked out. I didn't borrow big or support what FF were doing in any way. I told anyone who would listen several years ago that we needed to stop what we were doing. I really don't think I can stand listening to people trying to magic our problems away though.

20Cent

meglome wrote: »

You know I am tempted to to down there but I'm genuinely concerned about how I'd react if I had to listen to enough rhetoric and bull****. Honestly I'm very angry about how things have worked out. I didn't borrow big or support what FF were doing in any way. I told anyone who would listen several years ago that we needed to stop what we were doing. I really don't think I can stand listening to people trying to magic our problems away though.

Why don't you go and make your voice heard. There is an open mike there anyone can stand up and say what they want.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

amk2

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Could you elaborate on this one please - being a taxpayer in a "far-flung constituency" is there any public infrastructure I am "entitled" to in exchange for the taxes I paid?

It extends to students who refuse to pay tuition fees to attend university.

And the same question applies to 3rd level education.

meglome

amk2 wrote: »

Could you elaborate on this one please - being a taxpayer in a "far-flung constituency" is there any public infrastructure I am "entitled" to in exchange for the taxes I paid?

I believe he means that outside of Dublin and Cork most places are receiving money they didn't pay in taxes, the people of Dublin and Cork paid it.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

hatrickpatrick

meglome wrote: »

I don't think you'd find many people who wouldn't want those directly responsible for what happened to be punished for it. How harshly would depend on what they did. However it won't do a damn thing to stop what's happening right now. This is in the past and we need to look to the future.

Imagine I murdered a member of your family or one of your friends. Someone could easily say "Justice won't make them come back" but it would still bring you some closure wouldn't it?
Or are you suggesting we forgive all fugitives and unsolved crimes because "that's in the past"?

I personally had some tough times in 2008/09 financially and was living on next to nothing. Yet I'd still gladly take more pain if it helped us get out of this mess. How many on Dame street would cheer on their welfare being cut by a third? Which is what needs to happen.

You're once again stereotyping the type of people who protest. I can't tell you how wrong you are, you need to go down there and meet these people for yourself. People from all walks of life are there, not just welfare recipients.

Secondly, don't you think fairness would make a bitter pill easier to swallow?
If I could give you an analogy, how would you feel if you were in school and someone punched you, you punched back and only you got detention? Wouldn't it be much easier to put up with being in detention if you knew the guy who started it hadn't got off scott free?

Fine but what will that do to fix anything now? (And don't get me wrong I'd love if the likes of Sean Fitz were sitting in a gaol cell).

It won't, it will just make the situation we all have to deal with easier, psychologically, to deal with - if we know the people who caused it aren't walking away with millions.

Again, I would find it much easier to accept my college fees going up and excise, vat etc going up if I didn't feel that money was paying the WAGES of people who are responsible for causing this mess. As it stands now, I will absolutely refuse to accept any of it whatsoever as long we we're actually directly paying wages and pensions to the people who f*cked up.

I don't see apathy. I see people seeing this protest for what it is. There is a mass of things wrong and they go after bull**** and/or imaginary things. To be honest it's a ****ing joke.

Have you read the manifesto? Demand number 3:

#OccupyDameStreet wrote:

Our demand is that the private bank debt that has been socialised and burdened upon the population of the country who had nothing to do with it be lifted. We will not pay and let our children and their children pay for this crisis that private banks and bondholders have caused. It is their problem, not ours.

I agree entirely, so why hasn't the protest made a point of this? If they did they would get far more people to join in. Right now I see a lot of people down there who want all our problems to magically disappear of be someone else's problem. I cannot... will not... agree with that.

Read above.
No one expects the problems to disappear. Why do you keep assuming this is a proposed solution? It isn't. It's a demand for JUSTICE.

Again agreed it's terrible... pity the protests didn't mention this.

For the Nth time, yes they did. Read above.

The biggest problem we've got isn't getting revenge, it's fixing the mess. No matter who we put in prison what's done will still be done. Our overspending is the greatest threat to this state, it actually worries me a lot. Quite honestly it pisses me off that all these protesters could do was shout about getting 'the man' or making it someone else's problem. What a complete waste. If I spent more than half an hour down there I'd be in a fistfight with someone. What's so difficult to get, piling crap on top of a mess isn't helping.

What's so difficult to get? I want the tax I pay to go towards fixing the mess, not paying a bunch of assholes' wages when they're the people responsible for making the mess. I will not accept any of the crap being piled on US, the people, while the criminals responsible for the mess are walking away from it and not being chased down.
Bank debt in Anglo IS "somebody else's problem". I didn't have any loans with them. Did you? Why should you or I pay for their mistakes?
Why should we also pay for the people working in that bank when they're the people who made the mess? Shouldn't they be paying US?!

steve9859

There's not many at the march. They haven't even closed off dame street. 300 people maybe, maximum, just in the area in front of the bank.

Is that a reflection of the strength of feeling about this? Or that people still think the protesters are saying nothing more than "down with this kind of thing"?

Whichever way, it's hardly a 99%!!

hatrickpatrick

steve9859 wrote: »

There's not many at the march. They haven't even closed off dame street. 300 people maybe, maximum, just in the area in front of the bank.

Is that a reflection of the strength of feeling about this? Or that people still think the protesters are saying nothing more than "down with this kind of thing"?

Whichever way, it's hardly a 99%!!

Actually to be honest it's the woeful lack of PR. If I hadn't been there I wouldn't have heard about this. They desperately need a better leafleting / awareness campaign next time they do a march.

Not knocking them, it's incredibly tough to organize anything like this as I know only too well myself, but the lack of turnout isn't a reflection of popularity alone, it's also a reflection of the fact that a huge number of people hadn't heard this march was happening.

Suryavarman

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Have you read the manifesto? Demand number 3:

Just out of interest do you have a link to the demands of OccupyDameStreet? Had a quick look through the thread and on Google and I couldn't see anything.

steve9859 wrote: »

There's not many at the march. They haven't even closed off dame street. 300 people maybe, maximum, just in the area in front of the bank.

Is that a reflection of the strength of feeling about this? Or that people still think the protesters are saying nothing more than "down with this kind of thing"?

Whichever way, it's hardly a 99%!!

The weather isn't ideal for a day out in fairness. Could have something to do with a poor turnout, as well as Irish peoples general apathy towards protesting.

meglome

Suryavarman wrote: »

Just out of interest do you have a link to the demands of OccupyDameStreet? Had a quick look through the thread and on Google and I couldn't see anything.

I saw them originally on The Journal here

hatrickpatrick

Suryavarman wrote: »

Just out of interest do you have a link to the demands of OccupyDameStreet? Had a quick look through the thread and on Google and I couldn't see anything.

We have a leaflet which was agreed on in a general assembly a day or two ago. It could be that they haven't had a chance to update the website yet. There's a media committee which I'm not on (but I'm hoping to join it next week) but they've been more busy responding to the amount of press interest and trying to publicize the march today.
If I can find a copy I'll scan it in. The original leaflet had 4 key demands.

From memory, they include ending the bailout of the financial sector and making those responsible for the mess pay for it,
Ending the policy of placing the burden of private speculator debt on the general population as opposed to the individuals who chose to take it on,
Demanding a better deal for Ireland's oil and gas reserves which were, in the opinion of the movement, criminally given away by Ray Bourke, and
Implementing a real participatory democracy in which the people are more involved and "representatives" power to do whatever they want for 5 totally unaccountable years is diluted. In other words, where the people have more of a say and "representatives" actually have to represent what the people want.

These demands were agreed by consensus and anyone is free to suggest further ones. General Assembly meets twice a day, at 1PM and 6PM, idea there is that people can either come to it on their lunch breaks from work or college, or on their way home. Again, it's a leaderless movement and if anyone has better suggestions they're free to propose them at the aforementioned meetings.

Suryavarman

meglome wrote: »

I saw them originally on The Journal here

Thanks a million.

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

We have a leaflet which was agreed on in a general assembly a day or two ago. It could be that they haven't had a chance to update the website yet. There's a media committee which I'm not on (but I'm hoping to join it next week) but they've been more busy responding to the amount of press interest and trying to publicize the march today.
If I can find a copy I'll scan it in. The original leaflet had 4 key demands.

From memory, they include ending the bailout of the financial sector and making those responsible for the mess pay for it,
Ending the policy of placing the burden of private speculator debt on the general population as opposed to the individuals who chose to take it on,
Demanding a better deal for Ireland's oil and gas reserves which were, in the opinion of the movement, criminally given away by Ray Bourke, and
Implementing a real participatory democracy in which the people are more involved and "representatives" power to do whatever they want for 5 totally unaccountable years is diluted. In other words, where the people have more of a say and "representatives" actually have to represent what the people want.

These demands were agreed by consensus and anyone is free to suggest further ones. General Assembly meets twice a day, at 1PM and 6PM, idea there is that people can either come to it on their lunch breaks from work or college, or on their way home. Again, it's a leaderless movement and if anyone has better suggestions they're free to propose them at the aforementioned meetings.

Thanks Hatrick!

I must say I do agree with the first 2 demands although they do seem to be the same thing really. Was the article meglome quoted correct in stating that one of the demands was to get the IMF & ECB out of our affairs?

Would a better deal for the oil and gas involve renegotiating the previous deal or the state nationalising the reserves?

Does the 4th demand go into any specifics about how diluted a politicians power would become?

Maura74

There seems to be unrest all over...:(

www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-15320416

Scofflaw

steve9859 wrote:

There's not many at the march. They haven't even closed off dame street. 300 people maybe, maximum, just in the area in front of the bank.

Is that a reflection of the strength of feeling about this? Or that people still think the protesters are saying nothing more than "down with this kind of thing"?

Whichever way, it's hardly a 99%!!

It's representative protesting, presumably.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Bannasidhe

Good turn out at Cork with a lot people joining the spontaneous march through the city centre. Great mix of people too. As I left, preparations were being made to set up camp by the Left-Footed solider at the Grand Parade end of the South Mall.

It was great to see there is still a bit of rebellious spirit alive and well in Cork.

hatrickpatrick

Suryavarman wrote: »

Thanks a million.



Thanks Hatrick!

I must say I do agree with the first 2 demands although they do seem to be the same thing really. Was the article meglome quoted correct in stating that one of the demands was to get the IMF & ECB out of our affairs?

Yes actually that was the one I was forgetting. Although I think the wording of that has since been altered to more specifically refer to the bailout of the financial sector, that was certainly discussed at the meeting anyway.

Would a better deal for the oil and gas involve renegotiating the previous deal or the state nationalising the reserves?

Again I don't think the idea has developed into specifics just yet, although I could be wrong about that. The initial aims of most of these are to get people talking about them. What would you propose incidentally?

Does the 4th demand go into any specifics about how diluted a politicians power would become?

It hasn't yet, but as I say the demands were agreed only days ago, I'm sure specifics will emerge once there has been further discussion.

I for one think the demands in themselves are fantastic in the sense of opening up a public debate on these subjects, to begin with. These things don't happen overnight. As I said in a comment at the meeting, I think society at large has become addicted to instant gratification, in the sense that the revolution in Tunisia took a week, but when Libya took months everyone started declaring that the Arab Spring had "failed".

A bit of patience is required in any revolution.

Suryavarman

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Yes actually that was the one I was forgetting. Although I think the wording of that has since been altered to more specifically refer to the bailout of the financial sector, that was certainly discussed at the meeting anyway.

Probably a better choice to keep it focused on just the financial sector.

Again I don't think the idea has developed into specifics just yet, although I could be wrong about that. The initial aims of most of these are to get people talking about them. What would you propose incidentally?

I'm not a fan of Government control of any industry bar security and defense so I would like to see the resources exploited(for want of a better word) by a private company and taxed when it comes ashore. I don't know enough about the current deal to critique it so I won't.

It hasn't yet, but as I say the demands were agreed only days ago, I'm sure specifics will emerge once there has been further discussion.

I'd be interested to see how that proposal works out. Personally I think giving the dail a 5 year term and the president 7 years is too long. At the same time I wouldn't like to see referendums on every issue as everything could just be voted down without an alternative proposed.

I for one think the demands in themselves are fantastic in the sense of opening up a public debate on these subjects, to begin with. These things don't happen overnight. As I said in a comment at the meeting, I think society at large has become addicted to instant gratification, in the sense that the revolution in Tunisia took a week, but when Libya took months everyone started declaring that the Arab Spring had "failed".

A bit of patience is required in any revolution.

In fairness to the protesters the demands are a lot easier to stomach than the rubbish coming out of the Wall Street protesters. I'm surprised at the lack of a left wing bias in the demands also, on the face of it they seem like something people of any political persuasion can agree on.

Has the protest been growing or stagnant over the last few days?

Scofflaw

Would a better deal for the oil and gas involve renegotiating the previous deal or the state nationalising the reserves?

Again I don't think the idea has developed into specifics just yet, although I could be wrong about that. The initial aims of most of these are to get people talking about them. What would you propose incidentally?

To be honest, I would drop this one entirely, because even if it were done, it would pretty much have to be reversed a few years later. The Irish offshore sector isn't a rich prospect, and to develop an indigenous industry would not only take years and a lot of money but - given the advanced state of the industry and the fact that Irish offshore prospects are on the technological frontier for the oil majors - piggybacking off the existing companies for expertise.

I suspect the demand is based on the belief that there is a lot more out there than has ever been demonstrated to be, and that tapping it is a matter of saying "make it so".

Despite the supposed giveaway deal offered by Burke (and since revised), the amount of oil brought onshore in Ireland to date is zero, and the amount of gas little larger. And no, the oil majors aren't sitting on what they've found - they've allowed their licenses to lapse, because they haven't found anything worth drilling. So the belief that there's billions and trillions of oil and gas just waiting to be found (or admitted to) is based on nothing more than a couple of very silly journalistic articles (by Tom Prendiville, in the first instance).

So, to be honest, I think this demand combines a very specifically socialist aim with sheer fantasy, and by extension makes the protesters look like they have a particular political bent as well as being detached from reality. In addition, it associates them with S2S, who don't really enjoy the level of public support they believe they're entitled to.

cordially,
Scofflaw

oppenheimer1

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Nonsense, short-sellers are not motivated by exposing anyone. They are motivated by profit. People forget that financial markets are not a true science with fundamental laws like physics. What they are is entirely a human construct that collects and aggregates human behaviours and opinions. Such systems are vulnerable to attack from rumour and crowd behaviour. With an increase in the ease of communication these days, all it would take these days is one tweet to send the markets into a tailspin.

The financial industry will consume itself with its insatiable greed. Maybe usury should be illegal/immoral again?

amk2

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Unless the aforementioned 18-year-olds are all ophans, I would have thought that their parents have paid for their education with their taxes. Either the kids should get free education, or the parent should get a tax return - one or the other.

Suryavarman

amk2 wrote: »

Unless the aforementioned 18-year-olds are all ophans, I would have thought that their parents have paid for their education with their taxes. Either the kids should get free education, or the parent should get a tax return - one or the other.

Should their parents get a tax return if the taxes they pay only cover the costs of the healthcare they receive?

Bannasidhe

amk2 wrote: »

Unless the aforementioned 18-year-olds are all ophans, I would have thought that their parents have paid for their education with their taxes. Either the kids should get free education, or the parent should get a tax return - one or the other.

So by this logic it is only 'fair' that the State is subsiding private schools to the tune of 100 million euro a year while at the same time increasing class sizes and cutting SNAs in national primary schools - after all, one would imagine the parents who can afford to pay thousands in school fees also pay more tax so their children are entitled to have more spent on their education....:rolleyes:

cue

I'm glad I went. I really liked the energy at Dame st afterward and I came away with a few things to think about. Biggest thing is probably "what sort of a society do I want and what steps am I willing to take to achieve it".

Scofflaw

cue wrote: »

I'm glad I went. I really liked the energy at Dame st afterward and I came away with a few things to think about. Biggest thing is probably "what sort of a society do I want and what steps am I willing to take to achieve it".

Do people not think about that kind of thing pretty regularly?

perturbed,
Scofflaw

Godge

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

We have a leaflet which was agreed on in a general assembly a day or two ago. It could be that they haven't had a chance to update the website yet. There's a media committee which I'm not on (but I'm hoping to join it next week) but they've been more busy responding to the amount of press interest and trying to publicize the march today.
If I can find a copy I'll scan it in. The original leaflet had 4 key demands.

From memory, they include ending the bailout of the financial sector and making those responsible for the mess pay for it,
Ending the policy of placing the burden of private speculator debt on the general population as opposed to the individuals who chose to take it on,
Demanding a better deal for Ireland's oil and gas reserves which were, in the opinion of the movement, criminally given away by Ray Bourke, and
Implementing a real participatory democracy in which the people are more involved and "representatives" power to do whatever they want for 5 totally unaccountable years is diluted. In other words, where the people have more of a say and "representatives" actually have to represent what the people want.

These demands were agreed by consensus and anyone is free to suggest further ones. General Assembly meets twice a day, at 1PM and 6PM, idea there is that people can either come to it on their lunch breaks from work or college, or on their way home. Again, it's a leaderless movement and if anyone has better suggestions they're free to propose them at the aforementioned meetings.

The bit in bold sums up the stupidity of this protest. Not only was it Ray Burke, but those licences have since expired and a new system put in place by the previous government.

It is a bit like something from a Monty Python sketch. It might go something like this: "Down with the king" shout the protesters. On being told that the king is dead and we now have a republic they shout "Down with the President".

Godge

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

1: social welfare recipients and average public servants didn't cause the mess through corruption. For me, this is about punishing those who actively encouraged corruption. IE, handing over €65bn to Anglo because the people in charge of it are personal friends, etc.

If a company in the public sector had been bailed out and had had a direct part in causing the mess, I would absolutely object to my money paying its wages. The reason that isn't a priority for my complaints (and I'm not saying it isn't for others) is because I'm primarily concerned with the blatant injustice of me paying the wages of the people who have ruined my prospects of living comfortably myself.

That might be overly dramatic but I don't understand the apathy here. Why should you pay for Drumm, FitzPatrick etc? We now own Anglo. It's OUR money paying for these assholes' pensions. It's THEIR mistakes which will damage OUR lives.

The injustice simply makes me absolutely sick. They should be penalized, not rewarded.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Drumm#The_.22Golden_Circle.22

David Drumm: €3m pension on resigning under scandal. €3m being paid for by you and me. €3m which could easily fund hospitals, schools, roadworks, things which benefit Ireland as a whole.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seán_FitzPatrick#Career

Read this one yourself. It makes me rage too hard. €4m is the figure here.

Again, that's going to be paid by you and me. We own that bank, even though we never asked to own it. The guy and his cronies should be being savaged by the criminal assets bureau, not being bailed out by the taxpayer. They played a huge role in causing the general misery in this country.

An I honestly the only one who abhors this situation? Do you want me to name anymore names of people who are being funded by the taxpayer after they screwed up of their own free will and lost the ability to fund themselves?

Sure, social welfare and PS pay are too high. But there's a difference between that, and actively paying for people who are criminals and who caused unbelievable amounts of sh!t for the rest of us. They should be in prison.

We own that bank because FF stupidly chose to nationalise it after their stupid bank guarantee. The time to protest was 30 September 2008. If you buy something with a one-day guarantee and it breaks down on the second day, tough, you don't get a refund. That is where we are. What is done is done and the job is to find the cheapest and easiest way out of the mess. Given that FF caused the mess, and that SF and the ULA are operating on another planet thinking that we can reverse what was done, the only people capable of getting us out of the mess are the current government.

On a side-point, the owners of Anglo, the shareholders got nothing and will get nothing.

cue

Scofflaw wrote: »

Do people not think about that kind of thing pretty regularly?

perturbed,
Scofflaw

In Gandhi's case, probably. In my own case, no. I'm not a poster boy for focused concentrated thought. I don't know what other people think about. Mostly the people I know talk about getting by, the ins and outs of everyday life, the general uselessness of politicians, the unfairness of the system as it impacts on them, the way that money influences most decisions, their little joys, hobbies and opinions, paying their bills, their kids.
I do see your point however, even if I don't know what "perturbed" means.

Bannasidhe

AJAI CHOPRA, the IMF’s European deputy director, has told a conference in Kerry that the most damaging factor leading to the eurozone debt crisis has been the “deep intertwining between sovereigns and domestic banks’ balance sheets”.
Chopra was delivering a speech entitled ‘Strengthening the Financial Stability Framework of the EU’ at the 2011 Economic Workshop in Kenmare.
He said that the “vicious feedback loops” as a result of links between states and banks “that can lead to a crippling downward spiral are painfully evident here in Ireland”.
Chopra has also called for an EU-wide deposit insurance scheme, and more coordinated regulation of the banks. He recommended the appointment of a European Resolution Authority in order to break the link between the balance sheet of the banks and the balance sheet of the state, and that when a bank fails, the cost should be borne by an EU-wide resolution fund.
Chopra said that losses should be borne first by “shareholders and holders of equity-like instruments, and second by uninsured creditors, including senior creditors”.
Referring to Ireland’s unemployment rate Chopra said that the country would not be able to “pop the campagne” until the rate starts to come down, even if Ireland has started to get a handle on its banking problems.

http://businessetc.thejournal.ie/imfs-chopra-says-link-between-state-and-banks-led-to-irelands-crippling-downward-spiral-255186-Oct2011/

Well, well, well...Mr Chopra appears to agree with many of the protesters...The link between the State and the Financial sector needs to be severed and the bondholders should bare the bulk of the burden.

steve9859

Bannasidhe wrote: »

http://businessetc.thejournal.ie/imfs-chopra-says-link-between-state-and-banks-led-to-irelands-crippling-downward-spiral-255186-Oct2011/

Well, well, well...Mr Chopra appears to agree with many of the protesters...The link between the State and the Financial sector needs to be severed and the bondholders should bare the bulk of the burden.

That's not new. Maybe the first time that it has been so clearly and forcefully stated, but the IMF from a very early stage was always at odds with the ECB about imposing losses on bondholders. I'm not sure there is anyone other than the ECB who does not agree that a managed haircut on the bank part of the bailout, and imposing losses on bondholders, is not the way to go.

But what the IMF will not support is the idea espoused by the "IMF OUT" protesters who suggest that Ireland should walk away from ALL its debts, including those incurred through the expenditure for running of the country for the last 10 years