Nigel Farage MEP

McDave

NAP123 wrote: »

Ireland has a sovereign debt crisis because of a private banking crisis.

Ireland has a sovereign debt crisis because of:

1. Massive annual budget overspend; and

2. Commitments to cover private financial losses.

The first part is down to our government overspend and is a crisis in its own right. It's there for all to see. There's no point in denying it.

NAP123

McDave wrote: »

Ireland has a sovereign debt crisis because of:

1. Massive annual budget overspend; and

2. Commitments to cover private financial losses.

The first part is down to our government overspend and is a crisis in its own right. It's there for all to see. There's no point in denying it.

Nobody is denying that we have a deficit.

How we deal with that deficit is the problem. Dealing with a deficit when you have incurred 70 billion of private bank debt and have had your hands tied by a Central Bank not of your making is the problem.

We had a 40 billion of sovereign debt before the banks collapsed.

We could have borrowed from the sovereign bondmarkets and cut at the same time, if we did not socialise private bank debt.

Everything about our deficit was manageable without the banking crisis, the ECBs insistence on not letting any EU Banks fail and our forced bank reparations deal with the EU/ECB/IMF.

Our current deficit is caused by unemployment and waste within our public servive.

It won,t be solved by austerity, it will be solved by investment.

The bank reparations deal caused by our private bank collapse has prevented us from making our own decisions and hence added further to our problems.

McDave

NAP123 wrote: »

We had a 40 billion of sovereign debt before the banks collapsed.

Of course, it's not €40 billion sovereign debt any more. You're conveniently ignoring that the sovereign debt has been further bloated every year since the banks collapsed because bubble era tax revenues from a phoney economy the banking sector was also based on collapsed.

McDave

NAP123 wrote: »

Everything about our deficit was manageable without the banking crisis, the ECBs insistence on not letting any EU Banks fail and our forced bank reparations deal with the EU/ECB/IMF.

Our current deficit is caused by unemployment and waste within our public servive.

Easier said than done. It was very easy for FF to shovel money into benchmarking, bloated PS numbers, pensions, social welfare payments and lazily conceived projects like PPARS, electronic voting, etc. etc. etc. All on credit.

And of course that's not taking into account FF's banking and finance non-policies, their bank guarantee and loading of the Anglo/INBS debts onto the taxpayer. The coalition has undone some of the damage here, but dealing with the shortcomings of our so-called systemic banks is another matter.

Nope, it'll take quite some time to undo 14 years of FF profligacy and wind our deficit down to manageable proportions. With luck the coalition can do it by 2015. But at what opportunity cost.

McDave

NAP123 wrote: »

Our current deficit is caused by unemployment and waste within our public servive.

It won,t be solved by austerity, it will be solved by investment.

What investment? With who's money? Specifics please.

As I see it, the way things have panned out, there's no way to balance our budget other than to bring our state spending in line with our income. That will require reductions all round. That's not 'austerity'. That's bringing our expectations into line with our earnings.

McDave

NAP123 wrote: »

The bank reparations deal caused by our private bank collapse has prevented us from making our own decisions and hence added further to our problems.

The sovereignty we lost was down to our own poor domestic politics. Our government wasn't obliged by anybody else to pursue pro-cyclical policies, or to turn a complete blind eye to the chicanery of the financial sector.

No. Running a successful economy means taking the right decisions, including hard ones. Not pleasing a credulous electorate as Ahern & Co did.

There's a reason we're in hock. It's because we goofed up, and we're now borrowing money from entities who have got their act together. Maybe in de course we can learn the lessons and get ourselves into the position that our economy is in the black, and that we are one of the countries which is in a position to lend to others. And reap concomitant rewards.

Hunchback

Saw Farage slated to sustained applause by a speaker in the EP on Thursday in relation to what the speaker criticised as the aforementioned's objectionable racism towards the newer accession states.

McDave

CKonetheonlyone wrote: »

Saw Farage slated to sustained applause by a speaker in the EP on Thursday in relation to what the speaker criticised as the aforementioned's objectionable racism towards the newer accession states.

Any link to a clip or report? Could be interesting.

Farage has form with disparaging behaviour. Like Belgium not being a proper country back in Rompuy's early days: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/feb/25/nigel-farage-herman-van-rompuy-damp-rag

What a weasel Farage is.

Farage says some things that need to be said. He's a good orator too but, typical for a leader of a 'protest party', finds it easy to criticise but useless at being constructive.

He has identified problems correctly in the UK but his diagnosis is incorrect and his solutions, no imigration and exiting the EU are not the right ones.

McDave

Deleted User wrote: »

Farage says some things that need to be said. He's a good orator too but, typical for a leader of a 'protest party', finds it easy to criticise but useless at being constructive.

He has identified problems correctly in the UK but his diagnosis is incorrect and his solutions, no imigration and exiting the EU are not the right ones.

I personally have no objection to keeping 'the establishment' honest. And representative politics at EU level is crushingly boring.

But AFAIC there's no call for personal insults and making fun of countries or cultures as gratuitously as Farage does. It really is a measure of the man. And to me he doesn't measure up to much.

Scofflaw

CKonetheonlyone wrote: »

Saw Farage slated to sustained applause by a speaker in the EP on Thursday in relation to what the speaker criticised as the aforementioned's objectionable racism towards the newer accession states.

The more I see of the man, the more I am reminded of Enoch Powell. Of course in those days, it was immigration from the Commonwealth that was the rallying issue.

cordially,
Scofflaw

NAP123

McDave wrote: »

The sovereignty we lost was down to our own poor domestic politics. Our government wasn't obliged by anybody else to pursue pro-cyclical policies, or to turn a complete blind eye to the chicanery of the financial sector.

No. Running a successful economy means taking the right decisions, including hard ones. Not pleasing a credulous electorate as Ahern & Co did.

There's a reason we're in hock. It's because we goofed up, and we're now borrowing money from entities who have got their act together. Maybe in de course we can learn the lessons and get ourselves into the position that our economy is in the black, and that we are one of the countries which is in a position to lend to others. And reap concomitant rewards.

You can convince yourself of the lack of responsibility of the ECB and individual countries and private banks within those EU countries, for our banking crisis, all you want.

You can also refuse to acknowledge their part in the stoking of our property bubble, but you will never convince me, that if we were not forced into a private bank reparations deal by the ECB/EU and Germany, we would not have had the capacity to correct our budget deficit with cuts and investments.

As for where the investment would have come from, it would have come from the 24 billion worth of investment we could have borrowed from the pension reserve fund, if we were not forced to repay 64 billion of private bank debt.

biko

Must say I like him. Here he is doing what he does best, showing how EU is using taxpayer's money to sustain itself.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5aROq6Q2jC0

Coyler

Meanwhile in Russia, journalists often die by falling down a flight of bullets.:eek:

Any chance you could link to something that verifies what he is saying? Is it by any chance the similar process that saw the "EU" "correct" this very forum through TalktoEU? Also, putting up just videos is against the charter which I thought a Mod should read/know.

Scofflaw

Coyler wrote: »

Meanwhile in Russia, journalists often die by falling down a flight of bullets.:eek:

Any chance you could link to something that verifies what he is saying? Is it by any chance the similar process that saw the "EU" "correct" this very forum through TalktoEU? Also, putting up just videos is against the charter which I thought a Mod should read/know.

[MOD]We're not as strict about it when it's not an OP, but yes, the video in question should come with a text summary for those who won't or can't watch the video. Usually we would just delete it, but since you've replied that option is no longer available.[/MOD]

In this case, Farage is talking about a couple of million the Parliament are proposing to set aside for correcting misrepresentations and explaining their role in the run-up to the Euro elections in 2014. The sums involved are mostly being taken from other budgets, with something like €750k being fresh funding. On a per country basis, that works out as €75k per country, which will buy not very much, but there's a suggestion that they may concentrate on the more eurosceptical countries, because that's where most of the misrepresentations happen. I can't see that that's particularly arguable.

As to how this compares with spending by other parliaments on similar social media initiatives, I couldn't say - where it happens, I suspect it's a little more than €75k per country.

The origin is likely to be this Telegraph exclusive: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/9845442/EU-to-set-up-euro-election-troll-patrol-to-tackle-Eurosceptic-surge.html

The European Parliament is to spend almost £2 million on press monitoring and trawling Eurosceptic debates on the internet for "trolls" with whom to debate in the run-up and during euro-elections next year amid fears that hostility to the EU is growing.

And that in turn has generated a certain amount of push-back from the Parliament:

One can argue the EU, and the EP within it, should not exist at all. One might begrudgingly accept its existence and still berate it for being ‘out of touch’ with ordinary people in the member states.

What a serious broadsheet should not do with a straight face, is berate that same institution for trying to get a sense of what people want, need and feel, for offering people a way to stay in touch and keep an eye on its workings, and for communicating what it has to say through means that ensure the message is received by the widest possible number of people.

In any case the European Parliament is emphatically not setting up euro-election ‘troll patrol’ to “tackle Eurosceptic surge” and it is dishonest to imply so. The somewhat sinister sounding “public opinion monitoring tools” to “identify at an early stage whether debates of political nature among followers in social media and blogs have the potential to attract media and citizens’ interest” are commonly used modern tools of communication, as the reporter knows very well.

The traditional "damned if you do, damned if you don't" option, basically - fail to listen/engage, and you're out of touch and remote, try to engage, and you're Big Brother. But it plays well for Farage's audience, and that's what counts. And it's certainly true that - from experience - money spent tracking down eurosceptic trolls and debating with them would be money completely wasted.

cordially,
Scofflaw

McDave

NAP123 wrote: »

You can convince yourself of the lack of responsibility of the ECB and individual countries and private banks within those EU countries, for our banking crisis, all you want.

You can also refuse to acknowledge their part in the stoking of our property bubble

The ECB had zero responsibility for our property bubble. Our property bubble, and its subsequent collapse, was down to FF's dire procyclical and 'light-touch' regulation policies, the unethical behaviour of our banks, and to an extent the credulousness of our electorate who never sought to put the brakes on Ahern-McCreevy's self-serving profligate ways.

No matter how much the likes of Farage sneer at EU institutions, our fate as a *sovereign* state was in our own hands all the way through the Ahern-McCreevy-Cowen-Lenihan years until the bank guarantee and the promissory notes. We blew it. Ourselves alone.

The proof? Plenty of other EZ and non-EZ countries behaved quite prudently in the face of the availability of cheap money, and didn't allow bubbles to dictate their economies.

McDave

NAP123 wrote: »

but you will never convince me, that if we were not forced into a private bank reparations deal by the ECB/EU and Germany, we would not have had the capacity to correct our budget deficit with cuts and investments.

If you, or anyone else, can demonstrate we were formally forced in such a scenario, believe me there'll be no problem in legally transferring the full net costs of the collapse of our pirate banks onto the EZ at some point in the future.

McDave

NAP123 wrote: »

As for where the investment would have come from, it would have come from the 24 billion worth of investment we could have borrowed from the pension reserve fund, if we were not forced to repay 64 billion of private bank debt.

That sounds suspiciously to me like classic government borrowing.

I, for one, would prefer to see the NPRF dedicated to its original purpose, not gambled on investments.

NAP123

Scofflaw wrote: »

[MOD]We're not as strict about it when it's not an OP, but yes, the video in question should come with a text summary for those who won't or can't watch the video. Usually we would just delete it, but since you've replied that option is no longer available.[/MOD]

In this case, Farage is talking about a couple of million the Parliament are proposing to set aside for correcting misrepresentations and explaining their role in the run-up to the Euro elections in 2014. The sums involved are mostly being taken from other budgets, with something like €750k being fresh funding. On a per country basis, that works out as €75k per country, which will buy not very much, but there's a suggestion that they may concentrate on the more eurosceptical countries, because that's where most of the misrepresentations happen. I can't see that that's particularly arguable.

As to how this compares with spending by other parliaments on similar social media initiatives, I couldn't say - where it happens, I suspect it's a little more than €75k per country.

The origin is likely to be this Telegraph exclusive: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/9845442/EU-to-set-up-euro-election-troll-patrol-to-tackle-Eurosceptic-surge.html



And that in turn has generated a certain amount of push-back from the Parliament:



The traditional "damned if you do, damned if you don't" option, basically - fail to listen/engage, and you're out of touch and remote, try to engage, and you're Big Brother. But it plays well for Farage's audience, and that's what counts. And it's certainly true that - from experience - money spent tracking down eurosceptic trolls and debating with them would be money completely wasted.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Of course it would. Sure we are just against everything Europe.

Would that experience come from the failure to force your opinion on others?

Why would you spend money tracking down Eurosceptics?

Why would you label eurosceptics, trolls?

Scofflaw

NAP123 wrote: »

Of course it would. Sure we are just against everything Europe.

Would that experience come from the failure to force your opinion on others?

Why would you spend money tracking down Eurosceptics?

Why would you label eurosceptics, trolls?

Sadly, I don't think any of that really requires an answer.

regards,
Scofflaw

Robbo

A reasonable omnibus of some of the more "colourful" members and actions of UKIP.

I really don't see how Farage can have any truck with wasted expenses when he presides over what's esentially an abstentionist party (except when it comes to expenses).

biko

Thanks Scofflaw for not deleting the video and elaborating on the content.

NAP123

Scofflaw wrote: »

Sadly, I don't think any of that really requires an answer.

regards,
Scofflaw

Indeed it is sad.

Scofflaw

The historically rather grumpy Marta Andreasen has defected to the Tories, calling Nigel some rude names en route:

Marta Andreasen defects to Conservatives

A senior member of the UK Independence Party has said she is leaving the party to join the Conservatives.

Marta Andreasen, a South East region MEP, sent her resignation letter to UKIP leader Nigel Farage on Friday.

It comes two weeks after she accused the UKIP leader of bullying and being "anti-women" and "a Stalinist" and threatened to leave the party.

In response, Mr Farage said the Tories "deserve what is coming to them" and added: "The woman is impossible."

In an open letter expressing her dissatisfaction with UKIP, she accused Mr Farage of treating any views other than his own with contempt.

She said Mr Farage surrounded himself with "an old boys club of like-minded sycophants", whereas Conservative leader David Cameron had shown "he can listen, adapt and do what is right for the country, not just for personal gain".

Meanwhile, in a statement issued on Friday, the UKIP leader said: "Having left the OECD, the European Commission and UKIP in unpleasant circumstances, the Conservative Party deserve what is coming to them.

"The woman is impossible."

I'm not entirely inclined to disagree with Farage here, but on the other hand Andreasen's criticisms aren't particularly incredible either. I doubt she's a straw in the wind, but on the other hand her involvement with UKIP was something of propaganda point for them. Her constituent's opinions on the switch do not seem to be recorded.

cordially,
Scofflaw

darkhorse

McDave wrote: »

:pac:

You mean like the UKIP 'Respect the Ahrish No' stunt in the EP where their MEPs practically dressed up as leprechauns. Like they give a toss...

First of all, it was "Respect the Irish Vote", and not as stated above. Secondly, how many Irish politicians did you count in that clip from the European Parliament. Third, could give me some idea as to what senior irish politicians, in you esteemed view, gives a toss about the Ahrish people.

McDave

darkhorse wrote: »

First of all, it was "Respect the Irish Vote", and not as stated above. Secondly, how many Irish politicians did you count in that clip from the European Parliament. Third, could give me some idea as to what senior irish politicians, in you esteemed view, gives a toss about the Ahrish people.

If you detect a lack of respect on my part for the UKIP yocks and jocks in the EP and their patronising stunt, you're quite on the money. They don't represent Irish constituencies, and their smart aleck behaviour deserves contempt.

Farage's lame little Lisbon canvassing stunt at the GPO was equally deserving of ridicule. As is any notion that this bunch of jingoistic opportunists gives a damn about the "Ahrish". But feel free to extol Nigel's virtues.

darkhorse

biko wrote: »

Must say I like him. Here he is doing what he does best, showing how EU is using taxpayer's money to sustain itself.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5aROq6Q2jC0

Ya gotta admit, it would be hard to find any holes in anything that the man says.

darkhorse

McDave wrote: »

There's a reason we're in hock. It's because we goofed up.

Who is the we?

darkhorse

McDave wrote: »

What a weasel Farage is.

Is a weasel someone who tells the truth, if so, thats exactly what he is.

darkhorse

McDave wrote: »

If you, or anyone else, can demonstrate we were formally forced in such a scenario, believe me there'll be no problem in legally transferring the full net costs of the collapse of our pirate banks onto the EZ at some point in the future.

Letters show extent of pressure put on Lenihan for bailout - The Irish ...




Trichet says letters to Lenihan should not be published ...

darkhorse

darkhorse wrote: »

First of all, it was "Respect the Irish Vote", and not as stated above. Secondly, how many Irish politicians did you count in that clip from the European Parliament. Third, could give me some idea as to what senior irish politicians, in you esteemed view, gives a toss about the Ahrish people.

McDave wrote: »

If you detect a lack of respect on my part for the UKIP yocks and jocks in the EP and their patronising stunt, you're quite on the money. They don't represent Irish constituencies, and their smart aleck behaviour deserves contempt.

In other words, McDave, your answer is, "I don't know". No need to stand on formalities, just say, I don't know. Now, I've read over the past couple of years from our goverment politicians, that we put the green jersey on, but maybe if said politicians wore the green jersey that actually demanded respect for the Irish citizens, (like the ones the UKIP party wore in the EP), well, just ponder that one.

Scofflaw

darkhorse wrote: »

Letters show extent of pressure put on Lenihan for bailout - The Irish ...




Trichet says letters to Lenihan should not be published ...

It's quite extraordinary the number of people who apparently can't tell the difference between 2008 and 2010.

The bank bailout by the Irish State started in 2008. The State's bailout by the EU/IMF began in 2010. There is a 2-year gap, during which nearly all the bonds in the banks were paid off.

regards,
Scofflaw

McDave

darkhorse wrote: »

Who is the we?

Irish electorate - Irish government - Irish institutions. You know, essential components of a sovereign Irish state.

Assuming you feel you have no part in the blame, who do *you* think goofed up?

McDave

darkhorse wrote: »

Letters show extent of pressure put on Lenihan for bailout - The Irish ...




Trichet says letters to Lenihan should not be published ...

And just like I actually said, if coercion can be demonstrated, we'll be able to make our case for an EZ-wide solution quite forcefully.

So, what's your *net* point?

McDave

darkhorse wrote: »

In other words, McDave, your answer is, "I don't know". No need to stand on formalities, just say, I don't know. Now, I've read over the past couple of years from our goverment politicians, that we put the green jersey on, but maybe if said politicians wore the green jersey that actually demanded respect for the Irish citizens, (like the ones the UKIP party wore in the EP), well, just ponder that one.

I can speak for myself thank you darkhorse. I don't need you to put words in my mouth.

My answer was quite clear. I've no respect for that populist smart aleck Farage and his risible attention-seeking stunts. I'd take most Irish politicians over him most days of the week. But feel free to bat for him if you will.

shanered

McDave wrote: »

I'd take most Irish politicians over him most days of the week. But feel free to bat for him if you will.

Well I truly believe that the politicians we've had over the last good few years have been dreadful. None stood up against Europe in any sense, shape or form. we've been a pushover and hence half the woes of our current recession.
The last few treaties have been double voted in because the Paymasters and the puppets didn't like our democratic vote.
Bit of a farce in my view.
I have to say I respect the way Nigel has the balls to stand up against the powers that be such as the EU president and others.
Also think he is right about whatever he is talking about from any clips of him I can find.
I dont see many Irish politicians of his caliber, though we're not famous for good politicians at this stage are we?

oscarBravo

shanered wrote: »

None stood up against Europe...

...which is only a problem if you perceive "Europe" as a malevolent external actor working against our interests, as opposed to a union in which we are a participant. But then:

...the Paymasters and the puppets didn't like our democratic vote.

I guess that is, indeed, how you view it.

BlitzKrieg

Nigel has the balls to stand up against the powers that be such as the EU president

ffs...

McDave

shanered wrote: »

Well I truly believe that the politicians we've had over the last good few years have been dreadful. None stood up against Europe in any sense, shape or form. we've been a pushover and hence half the woes of our current recession.
The last few treaties have been double voted in because the Paymasters and the puppets didn't like our democratic vote.
Bit of a farce in my view.
I have to say I respect the way Nigel has the balls to stand up against the powers that be such as the EU president and others.
Also think he is right about whatever he is talking about from any clips of him I can find.
I dont see many Irish politicians of his caliber, though we're not famous for good politicians at this stage are we?

I think you're right about the calibre of our politicians. However IMO 'Europe' is the wrong target. Our problem was our politicians didn't show enough leadership in developing a sustainable economy. Instead Ahern & co. just threw away the best chance we had to construct a stable economy and lay the foundations for real wealth and a proper infrastructure.

All Farage does is posture an insult. He doesn't have a particularly positive agenda. It's easy to snipe from the sidelines with cheap jingoistic patter playing to his gallery.

darkhorse

McDave wrote: »

Irish electorate - Irish government - Irish institutions. You know, essential components of a sovereign Irish state.

Assuming you feel you have no part in the blame, who do *you* think goofed up?

I'm touched that you consider me an essential component of a former sovereign state, but I really can't take any of the credit for voting for FF/FG/Labour/PDs or Greens. In answer to your question, who do I think goofed, I would have to say that pure greed, dishonesty and deception played the biggest part our recession. So, really, apart from the government at the time, I dont thinked anyone goofed, they knew what they were doing. Oh, by the way, I, like the majority of people, never partied or went mad.

shanered

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

ffs...

Is that really all you can add?
I'm expressing my opinion ffs.
No need for posts like that tbh.

I am not for one moment saying Europe is the enemy or should be, its just respect for the Irish electorate when we vote no in a referendum.
I'm sure Iceland doesn't want to be an enemy of Europe even when the burnt the bondholders, but it was nessessary to get their house in order and not lose control of their own situation.
We should always be part of European dialogue and we should be involved with the EU, but the sometimes blatent disregard and contempt that sometimes comes from the top brass in the EU really annoys me.
It not black and white either, there somewhere inbetween where we are now being Europes lapdog and completely leaving the Eurozone is what we need. A direction the UK is slightly taking recently.

darkhorse

oscarBravo wrote: »

...which is only a problem if you perceive "Europe" as a malevolent external actor working against our interests,

I do perceive it that way.

Here’s another little stat to chew on. The European banking crisis is just that – a European crisis. But as we know, this has not been addressed at European level. Rather, the cost has been delegated to individual countries regardless of their size or ability to pay. For instance:

• Ireland makes up 0.9 percent of the EU population
• The Irish economy makes up 1.2 percent of EU GDP

Ok, we’re small. So how much of the entire European banking debt have we paid?
The Irish people have paid 42 percent of the total cost of the European banking crisis

darkhorse

oscarBravo wrote: »

But then: I guess that is, indeed, how you view it.

There is no other way to view it. We had to vote twice.

EU referendum: Ireland rejects Lisbon Treaty - Telegraph






RTÉ News: Morning Ireland - Lisbon Treaty Referendum 2009

darkhorse

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

ffs...

I can't follow that.

oscarBravo

darkhorse wrote: »

There is no other way to view it. We had to vote twice.

And who has the sole and only authority to determine whether a referendum will be called?

I'll give you a hint: it's the Oireachtas. Read Article 46 of our Constitution.

darkhorse wrote: »

I can't follow that.

I'll spell it out for you, although it's a bit depressing to have to. One: there's no such thing as an "EU President". Two: assuming that it's a standard misrepresentation of the role currently held by Herman Van Rompuy, that of President of the European Council, to describe that role as "the powers that be" indicates either a laughable lack of understanding of how the EU institutions work, or - more likely - a willingness (probably due to confirmation bias) to accept caricatures of such roles as fact.

Or, in short: ffs.

Scofflaw

darkhorse wrote: »

I do perceive it that way.

Here’s another little stat to chew on. The European banking crisis is just that – a European crisis. But as we know, this has not been addressed at European level. Rather, the cost has been delegated to individual countries regardless of their size or ability to pay. For instance:

• Ireland makes up 0.9 percent of the EU population
• The Irish economy makes up 1.2 percent of EU GDP

Ok, we’re small. So how much of the entire European banking debt have we paid?
The Irish people have paid 42 percent of the total cost of the European banking crisis

The figure is completely false, quite aside from the fact that there is no such thing as a "European bank", and therefore no such thing as a "European bank bailout". The Member States were determined to retain the power to regulate banks in their own hands, and therefore never created a European mechanism to handle banking resolution.

That's how "the EU" works - it has only the powers given to it. Because the Member States didn't make it responsible for banking resolution before the crisis, it had no responsibility for banking resolution in the crisis, and there is therefore no question of the EU "delegating" the cost to the Member States - on the contrary, the Member States had failed to delegate it in advance to the EU.

The correct figures for the cost of national bailouts around the EU can be found here: http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/government_finance_statistics/excessive_deficit/supplementary_tables_financial_turmoil

Those are the figures the "42%" is supposedly based on, but that number is made up by only using part of the figures - the "capital transfers" part of bailouts. Ireland's bailout was mostly done by "capital transfers", whereas everyone else's bailouts were handled by "financial transactions". The real figure for our bailout as a proportion of all recorded bailout costs is closer to 7%, and its disproportion to our population reflects the grotesque pre-crisis size of our banks.

As usual, there's a good Seamus Coffey article pointing out how false the figure is: http://economic-incentives.blogspot.ie/2013/02/deficit-debt-and-expenditure-impacting.html

cordially,
Scofflaw

McDave

darkhorse wrote: »

I'm touched that you consider me an essential component of a former sovereign state, but I really can't take any of the credit for voting for FF/FG/Labour/PDs or Greens. In answer to your question, who do I think goofed, I would have to say that pure greed, dishonesty and deception played the biggest part our recession. So, really, apart from the government at the time, I dont thinked anyone goofed, they knew what they were doing. Oh, by the way, I, like the majority of people, never partied or went mad.

I would primarily blame the Irish government. However, the Irish electorate set the tone for the government by repeatedly endorsing low standards. The electorate cannot be given a free pass for its credulousness and naïveté. Practically no controls were placed on FF 's narrow self-interest by voters here. And we can see the direct results of FF selling the country down the river.

But remember, we did all this as a sovereign state. Now we're in hock, we've no-one to blame but ourselves. Individual protestations of innocence count for little. I never 'partied' or voted for FF. But what difference did that make in the end? Ahern got 70% endorsements in opinion polls. Too many adults ran up massive credit card debts, bought 4-wheel drives, overpaid for houses and bragged about it at dinner parties. I'm afraid they set the tone for an appalling bout of consumerism. The culture of materialism and excess was palpable and pervasive. Irish society created that reality entirely of its own volition.

I certainly wouldn't blame the EU for the hole we dug for ourselves. Most other EZ democracies managed to steer clear of the excesses we fell for. Ireland made its own bed.

KyussBishop

An opposing argument to that, is that all EU member states share blame for not implementing proper regulatory controls within the EU, upon agreeing to the single currency, and for not implementing proper recovery/stabilization policies at the same time either, which was complete madness really as the Euro was bound to blow up eventually (and many economists warned of this).

When you've got a single currency, shared by many member states, you pretty much can't put 100% blame for a countries economic problems on any one member state, when a massive contributing part to the reason things blew up, is that the entire EU put in place a disastrously dangerous system, without the proper checks and limits.


In the context of talking about recovery too, it misses the point, because the Euro is very much an 'all together' or 'all apart' kind of thing, because if member states don't stop the bickering/blame-game, and don't implement actual recovery policies, then the Euro will fail (even if it takes the best part of a decade to happen), and many countries will suffer significant damage in moving back to local currencies.

darkhorse

McDave wrote: »

They don't represent Irish constituencies.

You are, of course right, but these people do. Can ya spot the irony?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yjhxp-JJqDo&feature=player_detailpage

McDave

darkhorse wrote: »

You are, of course right, but these people do. Can ya spot the irony?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yjhxp-JJqDo&feature=player_detailpage

I don't subscribe to the 'default' school of thinking. Regrettably the real damage was done by the frontloading of a decade's worth of growth into the spending of the Ahern-McCreevy-Cowen bubble years. And the utter failure to put any brakes on the entire financial system - whether they be pirate banks, 'systemic' banks, building societies or even credit unions.

I can't personally blame Noonan for a problem he didn't cause. Hence you'll forgive me if I don't see the irony you see yourself. The link between Farage and Noonan is, I'm afraid, simply too tenuous for words.