Occupy Galway Group (mod note added)

antoobrien

inisboffin wrote: »

statements that stymie debate, if anything, go against the act of trying to glean more facts.

Sop does refusing the facts that are available - something o.g. are not particularly keen to do when the facts don't suit them

inisboffin

antoobrien wrote: »

inisboffin wrote: »

statements that stymie debate, if anything, go against the act of trying to glean more facts.

Sop does refusing the facts that are available - something o.g. are not particularly keen to do when the facts don't suit them

Ok. Ignoring available info isn't useful I agree with you.

By the same token the repeated claims by someon here, that everyone involved with OG is a 'waster', that everyone is intentionally on the dole and that everyone has exactly the same political leaning - all untrue - is a perfect example of people with wrong facts too.

CrowdedHouse

The City Fathers View

http://t.co/YOuZ9kzx

inisboffin

CrowdedHouse wrote: »

The City Fathers View

http://t.co/YOuZ9kzx

I'm not really sure what the points in the blog are about people on the dole? Nor the ones about people sitting around Galway in the afternoon. Galway IS a party destination, true, but we need a workforce to support that! Half my friends work nights - be it in bars, restaurants, cinemas gigging etc, so yes - you can often see them 'lazing' about in the afternoon - ie their time off.

skelliser

city fathers is correct when he points out the inherint defferences between the US and here.
Im glad tho that occupy cork are actively taking on the state with the NAMA protest.

If anything the problems in ireland are not just down to greed but to the cronyism "jobs for the bhoys" culture which exists.
Ireland as a country should be the dream of any despot dictator. We love group think here and if your in the gang, the gang takes care of their own.
You need only look at Fianna Fail for an example. Party before country.

Im still non the wiser what solutions to our economic problems occupy galway have thou.

inisboffin

skelliser wrote: »

city fathers is correct when he points out the inherint defferences between the US and here.
Im glad tho that occupy cork are actively taking on the state with the NAMA protest.

One thing that's not quite correct is that 'soup kitchen' is the only option in the States. Aid varies state to state but many are eligible for food stamps. This system is basically a laser card that can only buy food. Obviously the system has it's faults (like toiletries are exempt etc) but prevents certain 'abuses'. You can use this card apparently even in some farmers markets. Personally I wouldn't object to the notion partial food card/partial cash system being introduced to social benefits.




Food banks are very common in the states. In fact I know of a couple ofpeople who *choose* to actually get half their groceries in a food bank and make a cash donation to doctors without borders with the money they would have spent. The food bank perishable food is donated by grocers and is often organic and high quality, but for retail and legal reasons must be dumped by x date.
Whatever happened to the food not bombs people that were in Galway for a while?

skelliser

inisboffin wrote: »

One thing that's not quite correct is that 'soup kitchen' is the only option in the States. Aid varies state to state but many are eligible for food stamps. This system is basically a laser card that can only buy food. Obviously the system has it's faults (like toiletries are exempt etc) but prevents certain 'abuses'. You can use this card apparently even in some farmers markets. Personally I wouldn't object to the notion partial food card/partial cash system being introduced to social benefits.

I think you will find that food stamps are limited.
Also if/when you lose your house after you go on food stamps you dont get them anymore cause your homeless.
Then its to the soup kitchen!

This in the richest and most powerful nation on earth!

I think we shouldnt be looking to America for ideas about helping the poor!

inisboffin

skelliser wrote: »

I think you will find that food stamps are limited.
Also if/when you lose your house after you go on food stamps you dont get them anymore cause your homeless.
Then its to the soup kitchen!

This in the richest and most powerful nation on earth!

I think we shouldnt be looking to America for ideas about helping the poor!

Food stamps are income based. So not just the unemployed are eligible for them but the also the 'working poor' (which many people here pretty much are!). It is means tested, and you can get varying amounts...And many homeless people DO get them, they use a shelter address. I'm not saying it's a perfect system, just that there are different ways of looking at things.
Food banks are one way of rebalancing (albeit a tiny amount of) the huge waste we have in the 'Western' world.

As for the richest and most powerful nation on earth? That's neither here nor there! Look where just a few years of 'excess wealth' and those that abused it got us!

hippygran

antoobrien wrote: »

Now because of this mess people are claiming that it's not fair that they should have to pay for a mortgage they though was fair when they bought it or it's not worth what it used to be. Tough sh*t - I'm not paying for it, you took the risk, you suffer.

Should 'you took the risk, you suffer' not apply to bondholders too? All we are asking for is a system that is fair. I agree that if you took out a loan, mortgage, credit card etc it is your responsibility to pay it back. However, many of us didn't accumulate debt during the boom years yet are still paying more and receiving less, whether working or not, while the banks don't have to pay for their mistakes and their directors still get massive bonuses. I have never had a job where you get a bonus when the company is in trouble!

hippygran

inisboffin wrote: »

I'm not really sure what the points in the blog are about people on the dole? Nor the ones about people sitting around Galway in the afternoon. Galway IS a party destination, true, but we need a workforce to support that! Half my friends work nights - be it in bars, restaurants, cinemas gigging etc, so yes - you can often see them 'lazing' about in the afternoon - ie their time off.

It is true that the people who are around the camp most of the time are unemployed..of course, they are the people who have the time to give. That doesn't mean they aren't looking for work. We have had at least 3 people that come to mind that have found jobs since the beginning of the camp. They are replaced by other people who have the time to give to the camp and so it keeps running. We have a lot of regular camp members who have jobs, or are at college, who pop in and out at evenings, weekends and do a lot of work for us at home. I would suggest that you visit on a Saturday when there is usually a programme of events in the afternoon, including music. You will find a lot of people with very different ideas, attitudes, backgrounds etc, who are all committed to the movement.
Whatever reservations people may have about the methods of occupy, the camp itself and its members, there is no getting away from the fact that there is a lot wrong with the world and a wide range of very different people are feeling the need to voice that, including people on the dole who are finding it hard to find a job. The camp provides a hub for those people to get together and exchange ideas.

Head The Wall

Bondholders didn't necessarily take a risk and they would be covered under a completely different legal framework than someone taking out a mortgage so it's not a straight comparison. When the govt guaranteed the banks they committed to pay those bonds and in the same way as a company that can't pay it's bills the only to get out of this is to go bankrupt.

That's not the case though as the govt has access to funds to pay the bonds, whether that's something you agree with or not is for another day. These are just some of the basics everyone in the camp should be aware of, were you?

hippygran

CrowdedHouse wrote: »

The City Fathers View

http://t.co/YOuZ9kzx

Oh my goodness, that is a very misinformed rant, in my opinion. I spend a lot of my time talking to people passing the occupy Galway camp. The vast majority of the people we talk to on a weekday will be tourists or pensioners, mostly tourists. From what I have seen since October, there is no 'tourist season' as such..people visit all the time. Showing a photo of crowds in Galway does not prove that there are loads of unemployed layabouts who don't want to get a job!
I would also say that the occupy movement is about a lot more than just unemployment and the banks. The world is being destroyed by the pursuit of profit...the bank bailouts are just the tip of the iceberg, but they have proved to be the tipping point with a lot of people. The occupy movement is full of people who feel angry at the system, who want a clean environment for their descendants, who want a society that gives more priority to people and life than to economic interest.

hippygran

Deleted User wrote: »

Please organise a weekly march, or a monthly march. Please.

Seriously...PLEASE.

At the very least this will show how far away you are from representing the 99%

We are joining in with several other groups for a protest against the household tax. You can meet at the camp around 3 or be at the City Council offices for half past.

We are also planning a march towards the end of the month to protest the further €2.25 billion being paid to Anglo Irish Bank on the 22nd and 25th. I think this will take place on the 21st but will have to confirm. If you stroll past the camp there is usually a board with a list of upcoming events.

hippygran

antoobrien wrote: »

The fact that I know the answer isn't important.

What is important is to see how many people actually know what the answer is, otherwise decisions on what we should be protesting about are being made with the wrong information.

Let me tell you right now we had a total deficit of €21 billion last year. Of that the banks spending (paid for by loans which we haven't started paying back yet) was €6.8 billion.

That means leaving the banks aside, in 2011 we spent €14.2 billion more that we took in.

To put that in context, we got in €13.798 billion in income tax & usc payments (the biggest singe contributor out of a take of €34.027 billion). To contrast that, we spent a total of €13.427 billion on the dept of SW & €12.83 billion on the dept of health out of a total €46.151 billion in "normal" spending.

So, do you still think it's unimportant to be ignorant of the real problems?

So, given that we have such a large deficit..does it really make sense to continue to pay billions of unsecured, unguaranteed bond losses back? Payments that our current finance minister called "indefensible" and "obscene" less than a year ago? Payments that we have 'no moral or legal obligation to pay' according to another TD around the same time. Enda Kenny himself said we 'won't pay another cent to Anglo Irish Bondholders' before he got into power..yet €2.25 billion will be paid to them at the end of this month alone.
If you do a google for list of Anglo Irish Bondholders these include financial institutions such as Goldman Sachs and Rothschild Group..do they really need it more than the country does?

hippygran

Head The Wall wrote: »

Bondholders didn't necessarily take a risk and they would be covered under a completely different legal framework than someone taking out a mortgage so it's not a straight comparison. When the govt guaranteed the banks they committed to pay those bonds and in the same way as a company that can't pay it's bills the only to get out of this is to go bankrupt.

That's not the case though as the govt has access to funds to pay the bonds, whether that's something you agree with or not is for another day. These are just some of the basics everyone in the camp should be aware of, were you?

I only have a limited understanding of this, but that isn't the way I have understood it from what I have read. Only some of these payments were guaranteed, many of them are unsecured and unguaranteed by my understanding. Many TD's, economists, journalists etc have said that these payments didn't have to be made and there are many people protesting against them across the country. If we have it wrong, then so do a lot of other people. We try to educate ourselves and ensure that the information we have is accurate. If you are an expert in these matters, why don't you come down the camp and put your name down to give a talk on a Saturday afternoon. We hope to have regular speakers on all sorts of matters that concern people, your expertise would be very welcome.

inisboffin

hippygran wrote: »

It is true that the people who are around the camp most of the time are unemployed..of course, they are the people who have the time to give. That doesn't mean they aren't looking for work. We have had at least 3 people that come to mind that have found jobs since the beginning of the camp. They are replaced by other people who have the time to give to the camp and so it keeps running. We have a lot of regular camp members who have jobs, or are at college, who pop in and out at evenings, weekends and do a lot of work for us at home. I would suggest that you visit on a Saturday when there is usually a programme of events in the afternoon, including music. You will find a lot of people with very different ideas, attitudes, backgrounds etc, who are all committed to the movement.
Whatever reservations people may have about the methods of occupy, the camp itself and its members, there is no getting away from the fact that there is a lot wrong with the world and a wide range of very different people are feeling the need to voice that, including people on the dole who are finding it hard to find a job. The camp provides a hub for those people to get together and exchange ideas.

I think you misread my point. I was referring to the blog which remarked that Galway had a much higher amount of people sitting around in the day than other Cities. My point was that as it is a 'party destination', of the jobs, a higher portion may be night jobs, or even shift work in some of the larger companies like BS. Of my friends who are lucky enough to have work, many work irregular hours or are self employed, so DO have time to be around in the day.
I *do* know someone involved (not full time, but when they can) in the camp who falls into this category. Nor do I believe it's any different to be unemployed 'sitting around Eyre Sq' than sitting in your sitting room. Both parties will/won't look for a job as individuals. Yes, people do have more time when out of work. I think people who disagree with Occupy are using this as just another point to diss those protesting.

skelliser

Bondholders arent really treated differently. When we introduced the bank guarantee
A senior bondholder became the same as a depositor. They do and should get there money back.

However unsecured junior bondholders do not share the same rights. In return for a greater risk of losing their money they would get a bigger return on their investment then a senior bondholder. That is the risk.
They are at the bottom of the picking order, normally they are first to get burned.
They understand the risks. In an normal country where this happened they would have immediately written of their chances of getting there money back. They are not stupid.
Christmas came early for them when the Irish Gov said they would pay them all back.

Apparently on the stock exchanges in London Ireland is considered a laughing stock for paying these bonds. I remember reading a story were Lenihan was having a conference call with a few dozen traders and they were sniggering and laughing at him.

The path our esteemed leaders have taken us on is the path to default. The current situation of paying these bonds is unsustainable as the interest on the money we borrow from the IMF/EU deal will lead us to a debt spiral. It is not correct to say we have access to the funds to pay them. Regardless of were it comes from we simply cannot afford to pay them back.
Our only choice in the matter now is the time we choose to default.


Either there is a EU wide approach to dealing with Bondholders and debt right downs then default is inevitable.

I wonder if the occupy galway are aware of the grave situation we are in.

Irishgoatman

CrowdedHouse wrote: »

The City Fathers View

http://t.co/YOuZ9kzx

I've just had a look at this blog.
I don't think it would right of me to comment on it unless I could first speak with the writers psychiatrist.

I would be afraid of sending the writer into an even deeper downward spiral than the one he's already in.

He/She has my sympathy.

hippygran

inisboffin wrote: »

I think you misread my point. I was referring to the blog which remarked that Galway had a much higher amount of people sitting around in the day than other Cities. My point was that as it is a 'party destination', of the jobs, a higher portion may be night jobs, or even shift work in some of the larger companies like BS. Of my friends who are lucky enough to have work, many work irregular hours or are self employed, so DO have time to be around in the day.
I *do* know someone involved (not full time, but when they can) in the camp who falls into this category. Nor do I believe it's any different to be unemployed 'sitting around Eyre Sq' than sitting in your sitting room. Both parties will/won't look for a job as individuals. Yes, people do have more time when out of work. I think people who disagree with Occupy are using this as just another point to diss those protesting.

Yes, sorry. I was sort of trying to back up your point, but didn't quote it right really And it is nice to hear someone finally talk some sense about this issue. There is much more chance, to my mind, of finding a job if you are in a city centre talking to people than if you are in your sitting room.

hippygran

skelliser wrote: »

Bondholders arent really treated differently. When we introduced the bank guarantee
A senior bondholder became the same as a depositor. They do and should get there money back.

However unsecured junior bondholders do not share the same rights. In return for a greater risk of losing their money they would get a bigger return on their investment then a senior bondholder. That is the risk.
They are at the bottom of the picking order, normally they are first to get burned.
They understand the risks. In an normal country where this happened they would have immediately written of their chances of getting there money back. They are not stupid.
Christmas came early for them when the Irish Gov said they would pay them all back.

Apparently on the stock exchanges in London Ireland is considered a laughing stock for paying these bonds. I remember reading a story were Lenihan was having a conference call with a few dozen traders and they were sniggering and laughing at him.

The path our esteemed leaders have taken us on is the path to default. The current situation of paying these bonds is unsustainable as the interest on the money we borrow from the IMF/EU deal will lead us to a debt spiral. It is not correct to say we have access to the funds to pay them. Regardless of were it comes from we simply cannot afford to pay them back.
Our only choice in the matter now is the time we choose to default.


Either there is a EU wide approach to dealing with Bondholders and debt right downs then default is inevitable.

I wonder if the occupy galway are aware of the grave situation we are in.

Thanks, that was very informative and filled in some of the gaps in my knowledge. I am learning as I go along and any help is welcome
I think most of us at Occupy are aware of the seriousness of the situation, and becoming more aware all the time. We are also becoming more and more aware of the large number of different issues arising from the current fashion of putting money and profits before the needs of people and the environment. I do understand some of the criticism of the Occupy movement, and share in some of it, but it is going some way to highlighting issues and bringing different campaigners together and if that is all it does it will be an achievement in my opinion.

skelliser

The question that should be asked is why junior bonds are being paid back in full.
I havent heard a reasoned agrument as to way yet.

The only answer iv heard so far is that they wont invest in ireland ever again for fear of getting burnt.
This is simply not the case. The bond market wasnt born yesterday.
If they see a worthwhile investment they will take the risk.

I would agrue that our reputation abroad is being further damaged by actually paying them and not looking for right downs.
It shows us to be pushovers.

who would invest in a company with the attitude that if it goes pear shaped sure we will pay it all back regardless. No one would take the risk if thats the prevailing attitude.

skelliser

Also imo any money being repaid is immediatly being put into precious metals/save haveans such as gold.
Hence why gold is at record levels.

If you wanted to hurt the "rich" simply start a worldwide orchestrated campaign to buy gold. Buy gold like its going out of fashion. Drive it up to astronomical levels.
Make it so high that it becomes unsustainable. create a gold bubble.

leeving the bondholders with two choices, take 100% bond and buy gold at bubble prices or take 30% right down and walk.
Im sure there are holes in my evil plan! but like in the film "trading places" - the best way to hurt rich people is make them poor people!!

This isnt about equality anymore, its an economic war.

Doc Ruby

skelliser wrote: »

If you wanted to hurt the "rich" simply start a worldwide orchestrated campaign to buy gold. Buy gold like its going out of fashion. Drive it up to astronomical levels.
Make it so high that it becomes unsustainable. create a gold bubble.

Really bad advice. Gold is already in a whopping great bubble.



All you'll end up doing is buying gold off "the rich" who want to cash out before the whole deal collapses, as it will shortly, netting them a handsome profit.

Wompa1

Irishgoatman wrote: »

I've just had a look at this blog.
I don't think it would right of me to comment on it unless I could first speak with the writers psychiatrist.

I would be afraid of sending the writer into an even deeper downward spiral than the one he's already in.

He/She has my sympathy.

I do have feelings you know And a job!

I think what I typed is pretty rational really. I was kind of distracted typing it, it could have been worded a lot better. I'm only one guy so I wouldn't say I'm representative of the working middle class in the city at the moment but we hear about media, protest groups that are apparently reporting on what we're meant to be thinking. I don't think exactly the same way, have a blog and an opinion. So why not

Oh and my psychiatrist would tell you have control issues and an irrational fear of Pandas

antoobrien

hippygran wrote: »

So, given that we have such a large deficit..does it really make sense to continue to pay billions of unsecured, unguaranteed bond losses back?

Before I answer your question, I'm going to try to put some context on the situation, given that you admit a fair amount of ignorance as to the working of the international financial markets. Otherwise the responses will be the usual unfounded rants of the mis-informed(in my view endemic in the o.g. camp).

The legal order of preference in banking is
senior bondholders
depositors
junior bondholders etc

The money that comes from the senior & junior bondholders is the deposits (e.g. credit union savings, bank savings, pension funds etc). The main difference between senior and junior bondholders is the associated risk. The junior bonds therefore attract a higher rate of interest to compensate for the possibility of losing their investment. To mitigate the risk various forms of insurance are available (credit default swaps and others).

Here's the important bit that a lot of people don't realise:
Senior bonds are defacto guaranteed, because they will be paid before the other classes of bondholders - including depositors. As a result these bonds attract lower rates of interest.

You may remember last year the outcry over the BOI proposal to write down the value of the Bristol & West bonds (which they got through a buyout in the 90's) - a pensioner took BOI to court over the proposal.
BOI wanted to give 20% for cash or 40% if the bond holders opted for shares. These bonds were paying 13.75% interest.

Another good example of this is the Wexford credit union which lost €3m on Anglo bonds.

When it gets down to it, the bondholders are as often as not ordinary people. E.g. my bank deposits (including the current account) and pension are backing various bonds issued by the various institutions where I have the money deposited.

So to answer your question, if we write off the bonds we won't be able to get the money to pay for the services that are being funded by that deficit, so paying the bonds is the lesser of two evils.

Doc Ruby

antoobrien wrote: »

You may remember last year the outcry over the BOI proposal to write down the value of the Bristol & West bonds (which they got through a buyout in the 90's) - a pensioner took BOI to court over the proposal.
BOI wanted to give 20% for cash or 40% if the bond holders opted for shares. These bonds were paying 13.75% interest.

They didn't withdraw the write down because of a court order, but because of "administrative difficulties" whatever that means. Bottom line is a debt for equity swap is standard practise for such situations, all around the world, right up until the government issued its blanket guarantee.

skelliser

Doc Ruby wrote: »

Really bad advice. Gold is already in a whopping great bubble.



All you'll end up doing is buying gold off "the rich" who want to cash out before the whole deal collapses, as it will shortly, netting them a handsome profit.

ya your right the time for such a campaign has come and gone.

it was just another one of mt dasterdly schemes/ideas.

none of which iv heard from occupy galway

skelliser

antoobrien wrote: »

So to answer your question, if we write off the bonds we won't be able to get the money to pay for the services that are being funded by that deficit, so paying the bonds is the lesser of two evils.

gotta disagree, junior bondholders should share the burden if not get nothing.

Ireland needs to step up a fight her corner. We need concessions.

I think the gaurantee should not be renewed when its up for renewal, i think next year?
Let the ECB worry about the banks.

Austerity doesnt work. A right wing ideology that only leads to privatisation and social decline.


we need to leave the euro, change to punts or sterling, de-value it, take massive short term pain and then in 5 years come out as competitive as we were in the mid nineties.
The current path is the japanese path of 15 years of stagnation.

eire.man

skelliser wrote: »

Also imo any money being repaid is immediatly being put into precious metals/save haveans such as gold.
Hence why gold is at record levels.

If you wanted to hurt the "rich" simply start a worldwide orchestrated campaign to buy gold. Buy gold like its going out of fashion. Drive it up to astronomical levels.
Make it so high that it becomes unsustainable. create a gold bubble.

leeving the bondholders with two choices, take 100% bond and buy gold at bubble prices or take 30% right down and walk.
Im sure there are holes in my evil plan! but like in the film "trading places" - the best way to hurt rich people is make them poor people!!

This isnt about equality anymore, its an economic war.

i think you mean buy silver? i think thats what Max Keiser was saying

lobes

Audio recording of the 'household tax charge' public talk given at Occupy Galway, Eyre Square on Saturday 7th Jan 2012 in advance of the protest at City Hall on Monday 9th January:

http://soundcloud.com/occupygalway/household-tax-charge-talk