referendum on fiscal compact.

Atilathehun

johngalway wrote: »

Tipp Man wrote: »

Yer man on the frontline was some clown alright - he should be kept well away from any media or he'd be giving farmers a bad name

I thought the guy from the ICMSA came across quite well

He was bad alright, all the same there was no need for the Plank to be so insulting towards him. He couldn't control either the panel or the crowd last night.

I wonder does PK, get a bit of SFP, on that bit of land he took control of by moving in, putting up a bit of a gate, and cutting a few bushes.

Begob

@ fodda
Welll I never said the world was perfect,it would be if we could impliment your last paragraph!

The sfp is a payment for a service we farmers provide-cheap food.
Essentially it's only worthy of the description subsidy if you are looking at it as a consumer-its a subsidy for them alright but paid directly to the farmer.
It's not perfect either.

Justice for the individual

Justice for the individual wrote: »

Actually, I was born on a farm. All my relations are farmers, so I am not an outsider. However, I agree with the rest of your post. According to Teagasc, income levels have risen by 30% for 2011. The average small farm income is now €24,800 and the higher level more commercial farm unit income is €56,000. Agreed, not a massive income for a sometimes 24-hour, 7-day week. As you say, that may not last, so growth in other industries is essential to get us out of the mess we are in.

Sorry, missed this detail. Teagasc also stated that the average DAIRY farmer's annual income is €70,000. That means that SOME of these dairy farmers ARE earning in excess of €100,000 per annum. No wonder the ICMSA leader was so happy with life and will vote yes, yes, yes. More of the same please.

fodda

Begob wrote: »

@ fodda
Welll I never said the world was perfect,it would be if we could impliment your last paragraph!

The sfp is a payment for a service we farmers provide-cheap food.
Essentially it's only worthy of the description subsidy if you are looking at it as a consumer-its a subsidy for them alright but paid directly to the farmer.
It's not perfect either.

Origionally grants were given to farmers to modernise and employ people and also produce much needed food going back 50 - 60 years. I havent a clue why they still do it but i doubt it is so the public can have a few cheap sausages.

pakalasa

If this treaty is about balancing budgets and restraining public expenditure, then it's worth remembering that right through the Celtic Tiger, year on year, we had a surplus. I'm not a fan of Declan Ganley but he made some good point last night about the DEBT issue. It's still the elpehant in the room that no one is willing to talk about.

Begob

Justice for the individual wrote: »

Justice for the individual wrote: »

Actually, I was born on a farm. All my relations are farmers, so I am not an outsider. However, I agree with the rest of your post. According to Teagasc, income levels have risen by 30% for 2011. The average small farm income is now €24,800 and the higher level more commercial farm unit income is €56,000. Agreed, not a massive income for a sometimes 24-hour, 7-day week. As you say, that may not last, so growth in other industries is essential to get us out of the mess we are in.

Sorry, missed this detail. Teagasc also stated that the average DAIRY farmer's annual income is €70,000. That means that SOME of these dairy farmers ARE earning in excess of €100,000 per annum. No wonder the ICMSA leader was so happy with life and will vote yes, yes, yes. More of the same please.

Hello?
What nonsense.
Whether you milk 50,a 100 or 500 cows,the consequences of a no or yes vote are the same relatively.
Also this giving out about higher earning farmers is purile,they worked hard to build it up-less of the begrudgery.
My local icmsa chairman would be closer to 50.

Begob

fionnan the yawn wrote: »

Can anyone explain to me how printing more money thus creating more debt(as this newly printed money is now not backed by a metal such as silver or gold but by an IOU s or debt) is going to get us out of debt, this is madness and this is what the YES side advocate printing more money taking on more debt to get us out of debt and keeping those famous ATM s open ,and I ask you who are we keeping them ATM s open for, and how will this debt be paid for because the existing tax base cannot cover the existing debt we have inherited from yesterdays yes men , the only way out of this hole is thru a write down in the 74 Billon of bank debt that those yes men took on in our name at three in the morning and these are the guys you want to follow in to the abyss or to paraphrase morgan kelly said last may we are now going to be reliant on the kindness of strangers ,(note strangers not friends especially friens we have to tug thrr forlock too)

Its a basic economic tool.Print it in bad times and take it away in good times via interest rate hikes.
Trouble with the eurozone is,it's been trying to run before it could walk.
For to work properly it needs countries to behave with their cheque books.

JohnBoy

sh1tstirrer wrote: »

What party would you suggest to vote for? They are all the same when they into power.

I'd suggest that people who propose protest votes in referendums vote on the actual issue and then stop voting back in the same people they want to protest at in the next election instead.


I dont care who people vote for (well ok, I'd really rather they didnt vote for communist sinn fein) just that they vote on the right things at the right times.

johngalway

JohnBoy wrote: »

I'd suggest that people who propose protest votes in referendums vote on the actual issue and then stop voting back in the same people they want to protest at in the next election instead.


I dont care who people vote for (well ok, I'd really rather they didnt vote for communist sinn fein) just that they vote on the right things at the right times.

I would drop of the shock if that were to happen. The Fiscal compact, sure isn't that about septic tanks, turf cutting, water charges, household charges and the pothole outside my house!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

johngalway

Kevin1150 wrote: »

Pat didnt give him much time to comment before disguarding his view. Knowing full well his character, pat purposely agitated him which was unfair. Aside from this his view was daft, and over a separate issue, has been recently expelled from IFA for 12 months.

Pat's no fan of farmers anyway. But yeah, the guy in the audience came across as a bit daft.

Justice for the individual

johngalway wrote: »

Pat's no fan of farmers anyway. But yeah, the guy in the audience came across as a bit daft.

They were all acting daft - including Pat himself - what was he whooping and hollering about - what brought that on.

johngalway

Justice for the individual wrote: »

They were all acting daft - including Pat himself - what was he whooping and hollering about - what brought that on.

I don't always watch the Front line but there's often whooping and hollering from what I've seen. I guess it's the groupies in the audience. Not sure if it was on this thread or the one in Politics, but someone said it might have been better without an audience altogether, find myself agreeing with that.

Justice for the individual

Begob wrote: »

Hello?
What nonsense.
Whether you milk 50,a 100 or 500 cows,the consequences of a no or yes vote are the same relatively.
Also this giving out about higher earning farmers is purile,they worked hard to build it up-less of the begrudgery.
My local icmsa chairman would be closer to 50.

Explain which part is the nonsense?, and I for one do not begrudge the hard work that farmers put in to earn their living. I was quoting the figures from Teagasc, so do you think showing the actual figures earned is begrudgery? Where was I giving out?

By the way, 50 is not old, and at 50 he would be wiser than a young fledging farmer starting out. Which category are you in?

Begob

Justice for the individual wrote: »

Explain which part is the nonsense?, and I for one do not begrudge the hard work that farmers put in to earn their living. I was quoting the figures from Teagasc, so do you think showing the actual figures earned is begrudgery? Where was I giving out?

By the way, 50 is not old, and at 50 he would be wiser than a young fledging farmer starting out. Which category are you in?

Ah now...yer comment on the farmers who are bigger in size was begrudgery.We could do with less of that.
As for closer to 50,it's fairly obvious,I meant in cow numbers,in answer to your nonsense assertion that bigger farmers have more to gain from a yes vote than smaller.
Sweeping statements like.

bbam

The big problem is that we are being asked to make a decision based on the risk of what might happen depending on the outcome of the vote.
The YES crowd say that well be stuck for future funding if we vote no and there is a risk of us being outcasts of Europe. Aparrenty a no vote could stop funding from Europe as money thgthens in the future.
The NO crowd say well be handing away more control and there is a risk that the puppet masters in Europe will dictate tax and other financial matters is we vote yes. They say that even with a no vote we might get another bailout if we need it, based on the "what other choice have they" branch of science.

The way I see it we have no certainties either way, we've to make a decision on what is the lesser risk situation for ourselves and Europe. Personally I'm leaning towards a yes vote. But my preference would be a postponement of the vote for six months to see how things pan out.
My fear of a no vote is we may become more isolated from eu funding which is something that would be bad for the country at the moment. Perhaps in the future we will be strong enough to distance ourselves but at the moment we are in a weak position and the country would be a bleak place without the current funding were receiving.

Justice for the individual

Begob wrote: »

Ah now...yer comment on the farmers who are bigger in size was begrudgery.We could do with less of that.
As for closer to 50,it's fairly obvious,I meant in cow numbers,in answer to your nonsense assertion that bigger farmers have more to gain from a yes vote than smaller.
Sweeping statements like.

I never said big farmers have more to gain from a yes vote than smaller farmers, I was referring to a particular situation. You are not interpreting/deciphering my comments properly, but instead misquoting in a confusing manner. The figures I quoted were facts taking from the Teagasc Report and you appear to think they are my opinion. I accept, as I hope you do, that we will differ on our opinions, and that's fair enough, but let's not take it too personal and respect these opinions.

bbam

^^^^
Mods.
Are we letting everyone on now to pedal their blogs?? It'll ruin the gaff if these guys are given a free hand.