Waterford Politics MEGATHREAD

7upfree

hardybuck wrote: »

Education and HSE are both public sector.

My bad.

7upfree

Cabaal wrote: »

err but shouldn't TD's of any party and none be setting the example for other citizens to follow?

Just because Halligan CAN claim something doesn't mean he should,

If TD's claim less then that actually helps support the very idea of change that the same TD's could then spearhead.

Instead it seems people will claim the system needs changing but they'll happily use and abuse that same system in its current form.

Oh yeah. Turkeys, Christmas, etc. But is it any different to the rampant Social Welfare scamming? You have to change the system.

Sully

I'm assuming these Independent TDs, who are claiming their high expenses are justifiable so they can do policies and research, have receipts and matching documents to backup that their funds are generating such policies? We demand it from the parties and their representatives, but our Independents appear to get a pass even though they contribute sweet fanny adams.

AdMMM

Sully wrote: »

I'm assuming these Independent TDs, who are claiming their high expenses are justifiable so they can do policies and research, have receipts and matching documents to backup that their funds are generating such policies? We demand it from the parties and their representatives, but our Independents appear to get a pass even though they contribute sweet fanny adams.

I think the Independents' proposed legislation that would have required their Leaders Allowance to be fully voucher in the same way. The Government rejected it and said they intend to legislate for it as part of a bigger piece. That was 2011 I think.

robtri wrote: »

In principle it is a great system...

But in reality the money goes into the pockets of the independant TD's....

like all companies, any expense should be vouched.... instead of handed over no questions asked....

I completely agree that all expenses should be vouched. I can't stand over what every Independent TD does, but if they're serious about being re-elected or even trying to do some good for their constituents, then they have to spend that money in the same ways as the parties does but do it in a more thrifty and laser focused way.

A TD that stuffs that money into their back pocket has no place in politics and the sooner the Government legislate for that money being vouched, the better,

On that note, you could then argue that the reason why the Government has delayed legislating for this is tactical i.e. the longer they leave it, the more Independents can be criticised.

7upfree

Sully wrote: »

I'm assuming these Independent TDs, who are claiming their high expenses are justifiable so they can do policies and research, have receipts and matching documents to backup that their funds are generating such policies? We demand it from the parties and their representatives, but our Independents appear to get a pass even though they contribute sweet fanny adams.

Expenses? Don't start now. As for contributing sweet fanny adams the same can be said for our Government "representatives".

Max Powers

on a different note, while i agree with a lot of comments here about most parties, i think it will end up as usual, picking the least worst options. Looking at some independents nationally (Paul Murphy, Ruth Coppinger etc) and indeed one party at least has fanned the flames of water protest to dangerous levels. Take Murphy TD, he was happy at the treatment of joan burton before Xmas but now trying to distance himself from just the language thrown at Michael D., there is a contradiction there. Id say the dog on the street knows that Murphy is these peoples defacto Dail representative and before you do your protest vote, have a think about what life would be like with people/parties like that in charge, say what you like about Fg,lab, FF but im fairly confident i can stand up and say what i like about them, have an opinion they do not like and dont have to fear a gang showing up at my door, work, trying to intimidate me, prevent me from doing my work, burning down my workplace etc etc. (that might seem a bit extreme there at the end but its gone to that stage already and could get worse)

Sully

AdMMM wrote: »

I think the Independents' proposed legislation that would have required their Leaders Allowance to be fully voucher in the same way. The Government rejected it and said they intend to legislate for it as part of a bigger piece. That was 2011 I think.

That's nice to know. But I am unaware of any legislation prohibiting TDs from showing where they spend their money and the results of such? If Independent TDs want to spend every single cent they can, claim as much expenses as they can and then hide behind the "Oh we need the money to research how to run the country by ourselves." and "I propose we prepare legislation to reveal where the money goes but until then, I am afraid I won't be participating. I need to be forced".

7upfree

Max Powers wrote: »

on a different note, while i agree with a lot of comments here about most parties, i think it will end up as usual, picking the least worst options. Looking at some independents nationally (Paul Murphy, Ruth Coppinger etc) and indeed one party at least has fanned the flames of water protest to dangerous levels. Take Murphy TD, he was happy at the treatment of joan burton before Xmas but now trying to distance himself from just the language thrown at Michael D., there is a contradiction there. Id say the dog on the street knows that Murphy is these peoples defacto Dail representative and before you do your protest vote, have a think about what life would be like with people/parties like that in charge, say what you like about Fg,lab, FF but im fairly confident i can stand up and say what i like about them, have an opinion they do not like and dont have to fear a gang showing up at my door, work, trying to intimidate me, prevent me from doing my work, burning down my workplace etc etc. (that might seem a bit extreme there at the end but its gone to that stage already and could get worse)

Wouldn't agree with the treatment of the president (and it's the same voice in all those video) but is what you listed above any different to the financial rape of the Irish people to placate bankers?

robtri

7upfree wrote: »

Wouldn't agree with the treatment of the president (and it's the same voice in all those video) but is what you listed above any different to the financial rape of the Irish people to placate bankers?

or did they do it all so when you went to the ATM you had money and you could buy stuff..... choose... no liquidity in the banks (i.e. no cash in thebanks, so every penny you had in banks was gone, not accessible, think about that, how would everyone buy even the basic food....
or take a Troika bailout and austerity package

which would you choose??? which way would you screw the country on the night...

Max Powers

7upfree wrote: »

Wouldn't agree with the treatment of the president (and it's the same voice in all those video) but is what you listed above any different to the financial rape of the Irish people to placate bankers?

Just Michael D, not joan burtons treatment?
I think you have gone on a tangent there and I dont think you can compare the 2 things really for various reasons, bringing in taxes and spending cuts to try balance our books is necessary and lawful thing to do in our situation, Michael D or joan didnt bring in the bank guarantee, these people are complaining/rioting about having to pay for water, they are not there about the LPT and other taxes most people pay.
Bringing it back to the point i was making, look at behaviour of some of the TDs and parties in relation to our financial situation and water tax, they have been totally irresponsible at best and pouring petrol on disgraceful behaviour at worst. to sum it up, as bad as its been under the present govt and previous ones with increased taxes etc , what would life be like under the likes of Murphy et al.

AdMMM

Sully wrote: »

That's nice to know. But I am unaware of any legislation prohibiting TDs from showing where they spend their money and the results of such? If Independent TDs want to spend every single cent they can, claim as much expenses as they can and then hide behind the "Oh we need the money to research how to run the country by ourselves." and "I propose we prepare legislation to reveal where the money goes but until then, I am afraid I won't be participating. I need to be forced".

My apologies, some further research reveals that the PLA has been renamed the Parliamentary Activities Allowance and now all recipients are required to submit a statement of expenditure (thus bringing Independents in line with the responsibilities of political parties).

SIPO 2013 Report wrote:

http://www.sipo.gov.ie/en/Reports/Annual-Reports/2013-Annual-Report/AnnualReport2013/media/sipoc_ar_2013_english.pdf

Parliamentary Activities Allowance Act
The Oireachtas (Ministerial and Parliamentary Offices)(Amendment) Act 2014 was
recently enacted by the Oireachtas. The Act replaces the Party Leaders Allowance with
the Parliamentary Activities Allowance. The Act provides that non-party members will
now be required to provide a Statement of Expenditure of the allowance to the Standards
Commission. In addition, the Commission may, following consultation and Ministerial
approval, issue guidelines in relation to the use of and reporting on the allowance. The
provisions of the Act come into effect on 1 July 2014.

7upfree

robtri wrote: »

or did they do it all so when you went to the ATM you had money and you could buy stuff..... choose... no liquidity in the banks (i.e. no cash in thebanks, so every penny you had in banks was gone, not accessible, think about that, how would everyone buy even the basic food....
or take a Troika bailout and austerity package

which would you choose??? which way would you screw the country on the night...

It has been acknowledged by economists in the past fortnight (I think Honahan also chimed in) that the bank bailout of Anglo was completely unnecessary.

Some have also said that only one pillar bank (possibly BoI) should have continued trading.

Whichever way you look at it, the whole country in being billed and financially raped because of the activities of a few dozen people.

The aforementioned banks - which shouldn't even be trading if the rules of the capitalist system were followed through - are now, incredibly, repossessing homes. Applying the very rules which were changed to accommodate them.

Also incredibly, the EU (virtually) printed 1.2 TRILLION Euro to "stimulate growth" in the past month. In the past it was called printing money, now it's "quantitative easing".

So you can print money that doesn't exist, and yet expect a country like this to support EIGHT BILLION EURO on interest payments along every year?

The whole charade is completely laughable.

So please, don't trot out the ATM argument. It's beneath you.

And utter bollocks.

7upfree

Max Powers wrote: »

Just Michael D, not joan burtons treatment?
I think you have gone on a tangent there and I dont think you can compare the 2 things really for various reasons, bringing in taxes and spending cuts to try balance our books is necessary and lawful thing to do in our situation, Michael D or joan didnt bring in the bank guarantee, these people are complaining/rioting about having to pay for water, they are not there about the LPT and other taxes most people pay.
Bringing it back to the point i was making, look at behaviour of some of the TDs and parties in relation to our financial situation and water tax, they have been totally irresponsible at best and pouring petrol on disgraceful behaviour at worst. to sum it up, as bad as its been under the present govt and previous ones with increased taxes etc , what would life be like under the likes of Murphy et al.

The local property tax? Which went straight to Irish Water? That tax? :roll eyes:

Necessary and lawful? Just read what you posted again. And slowly this time. Where was the law when the country was going down the toilet?

The same "law" that protects a private entity which should never have existed.

"Lawful" is certainly not a term to be bandied about regarding modern-day Ireland.

The only ones who do are the "capitalist" supporters of those who have stripped the place bare and who are now committing a financial rape of a people.

Max Powers

7upfree wrote: »

The local property tax? Which went straight to Irish Water? That tax? :roll eyes:

Necessary and lawful? Just read what you posted again. And slowly this time. Where was the law when the country was going down the toilet?

The same "law" that protects a private entity which should never have existed.

"Lawful" is certainly not a term to be bandied about regarding modern-day Ireland.

The only ones who do are the "capitalist" supporters of those who have stripped the place bare and who are now committing a financial rape of a people.

You didn't answer my question, you ok with treatment of Joan Burton? You then went of on numerous tangents about the law,capitalism, bla bla bla.I think the only part of your text related to my post was the "lawful" bit, yes they were lawful and necessary, we were and are still in major negative balance of payments territory, even putting our bank debts to one side we would still have needed cuts and taxes, its not pretty, no one likes it but yes they are lawful and necessary.

wellboytoo

Max Powers wrote: »

You didn't answer my question, you ok with treatment of Joan Burton? You then went of on numerous tangents about the law,capitalism, bla bla bla.I think the only part of your text related to my post was the "lawful" bit, yes they were lawful and necessary, we were and are still in major negative balance of payments territory, even putting our bank debts to one side we would still have needed cuts and taxes, its not pretty, no one likes it but yes they are lawful and necessary.

Hope that goes well for you

7upfree

Max Powers wrote: »

You didn't answer my question, you ok with treatment of Joan Burton? You then went of on numerous tangents about the law,capitalism, bla bla bla.I think the only part of your text related to my post was the "lawful" bit, yes they were lawful and necessary, we were and are still in major negative balance of payments territory, even putting our bank debts to one side we would still have needed cuts and taxes, its not pretty, no one likes it but yes they are lawful and necessary.

As you say yourself, blah, blah, blah. More errant nonsense, defending a system which has failed utterly. And is still going down the pan.

Finnbar01

robtri wrote: »

or did they do it all so when you went to the ATM you had money and you could buy stuff..... choose... no liquidity in the banks (i.e. no cash in thebanks, so every penny you had in banks was gone, not accessible, think about that, how would everyone buy even the basic food....
or take a Troika bailout and austerity package

which would you choose??? which way would you screw the country on the night...

But why did we save Anglo Irish bank? Wasn't that bank a wholesale bank, a bank with even no atms?

I think we should have let that bank go.

wellboytoo

7upfree wrote: »

As you say yourself, blah, blah, blah. More errant nonsense, defending a system which has failed utterly. And is still going down the pan.

It's arrant! but errant might be a Freudian slip seeing as it means straying from the norm, as in your norm.

wellboytoo

Finnbar01 wrote: »

But why did we save Anglo Irish bank? Wasn't that bank a wholesale bank, a bank with even no atms?

I think we should have let that bank go.

In hindsight we probably should have, but remember some of the biggest cash deposits in Anglo at the time were Credit Union deposits, so that would have bust a clatter of them, and your and my money would be gone?

Max Powers

7upfree wrote: »

As you say yourself, blah, blah, blah. More errant nonsense, defending a system which has failed utterly. And is still going down the pan.

ah now 7up, that is just a childish post, surely you are better than that at trying to defend your stance, unwilling to continue the conversation or answer straight questions on your position. That and some of your other posts may as well have read 'liar liar pants on fire' for all its relevance to what is being discussed. I will take it from you continuous avoiding the question that you were happy with the treatment of Joan Burton (couple months back) in tallaght.

7upfree

Max Powers wrote: »

ah now 7up, that is just a childish post, surely you are better than that at trying to defend your stance, unwilling to continue the conversation or answer straight questions on your position. That and some of your other posts may as well have read 'liar liar pants on fire' for all its relevance to what is being discussed. I will take it from you continuous avoiding the question that you were happy with the treatment of Joan Burton (couple months back) in tallaght.

Now, Max. Sticks, stones, etc. I have pointed out the shambles that is capitalism. no-one can present a vliid counter-argument. You can dance around it, but that system has failed us. Miserably.

As for Joan Burton - the same voices are heard on those videos time and again. They do their cause no good.

I would be in favour of more dignified protest, such as lining the streets and turning your back on them. Just as they have done to us.

7upfree

wellboytoo wrote: »

It's arrant! but errant might be a Freudian slip seeing as it means straying from the norm, as in your norm.

Pedantic as always WB2.

7upfree

Finnbar01 wrote: »

But why did we save Anglo Irish bank? Wasn't that bank a wholesale bank, a bank with even no atms?

I think we should have let that bank go.

Ah come on Finbar!

You can't go punting out the truth.......;)

wellboytoo

7upfree wrote: »

Pedantic as always WB2.

And correct, but I do it all for you 7upfree and lay it all at your feet on your pedestal of righteousness and certitude .

wellboytoo

7upfree wrote: »

Ah come on Finbar!

You can't go punting out the truth.......;)

So you would have been for busting over half the Credit unions in Ireland and all the "common man's savings?

robtri

7upfree wrote: »

It has been acknowledged by economists in the past fortnight (I think Honahan also chimed in) that the bank bailout of Anglo was completely unnecessary.

Some have also said that only one pillar bank (possibly BoI) should have continued trading.

Whichever way you look at it, the whole country in being billed and financially raped because of the activities of a few dozen people.

The aforementioned banks - which shouldn't even be trading if the rules of the capitalist system were followed through - are now, incredibly, repossessing homes. Applying the very rules which were changed to accommodate them.

Also incredibly, the EU (virtually) printed 1.2 TRILLION Euro to "stimulate growth" in the past month. In the past it was called printing money, now it's "quantitative easing".

So you can print money that doesn't exist, and yet expect a country like this to support EIGHT BILLION EURO on interest payments along every year?

The whole charade is completely laughable.

So please, don't trot out the ATM argument. It's beneath you.

And utter bollocks.

Hindsight is great.... and every economist can tell us that....

the fact was that the banks where ****ed....

the government was given a choice...

take the bailout

or

the banks have no liquidity in a very short time....

That where the choices faced.....
without the bailout the banks would have failed and the common man would have been destroyed no money in bank.... the little money they have, gone up in smoke....

that was the reality of what was been faced, cause that what ecomonists and experts presented to the government....

amazing these economists all come out of woodwork afterwards giving advice...

Max Powers

7upfree wrote: »

Now, Max. Sticks, stones, etc. I have pointed out the shambles that is capitalism. no-one can present a vliid counter-argument. You can dance around it, but that system has failed us. Miserably.

As for Joan Burton - the same voices are heard on those videos time and again. They do their cause no good.

I would be in favour of more dignified protest, such as lining the streets and turning your back on them. Just as they have done to us.

to be fair 7up, i wasnt naming you personally just some of your responses as childish because they were so irrelevant to what was being responded to, anyway im glad that you distance yourself from those crazies and the flying picketers of W and KK facebook says no. Yeah, we were all let down by capitalism with the crash, most in the Dail did support it and its easy to look back with retrospect and say we should have let anglo go, course we should have, looking back.
Was it Churchill who said something like 'capitalism is rubbish, but then you look at the alternatives' (and you realise its the best option). The alternative to capitalism doesnt exist in Ireland, at least, there is no credible voices, SF, murphy, coppinger, socialist workers and all the others will have you believe we can scrap water tax, LPT, USC (probably about 10 billion) and tell our creditors to sod off without consequences whilist maintaining welfare, public jobs etc by just replacing all the above with a super tax on wealthy. This has not only have uncalcuable risks but also would bring in about 500million. So we have come full circle, to our original post couple weeks back of the need for legitmate and necessary taxes such as the LPT, Water tax, USC, prsi, PAYE.........
Added and right back to my OP, i will say again, look at those TDs and parties who make the claims about you can scrap all the taxes and replace with one super rich tax, look at their behaviour, fanning the flames of violence, indicated in various cover ups of violence and sex abuse, what would life be like under those. Id rather grin and bear a few taxes in safe knowledge that i can stand up and criticise the govt without them burning down my house, stopping me from working, threats to family or worse.

wellboytoo

Maybe Max they should form an alliance and call it the Hans Christian Anderson party and they will all live happily ever after.
Unless of course you read the original publications of his fairy tales which were much more gory, macabre and had a lot of blood letting in the end.

Max Powers

Max Powers wrote: »

to be fair 7up, i wasnt naming you personally just some of your responses as childish because they were so irrelevant to what was being responded to, anyway im glad that you distance yourself from those crazies and the flying picketers of W and KK facebook says no. Yeah, we were all let down by capitalism with the crash, most in the Dail did support it and its easy to look back with retrospect and say we should have let anglo go, course we should have, looking back.
Was it Churchill who said something like 'capitalism is rubbish, but then you look at the alternatives' (and you realise its the best option). The alternative to capitalism doesnt exist in Ireland, at least, there is no credible voices, SF, murphy, coppinger, socialist workers and all the others will have you believe we can scrap water tax, LPT, USC (probably about 10 billion) and tell our creditors to sod off without consequences whilist maintaining welfare, public jobs etc by just replacing all the above with a super tax on wealthy. This has not only have uncalcuable risks but also would bring in about 500million. So we have come full circle, to our original post couple weeks back of the need for legitmate and necessary taxes such as the LPT, Water tax, USC, prsi, PAYE.........
Added and right back to my OP, i will say again, look at those TDs and parties who make the claims about you can scrap all the taxes and replace with one super rich tax, look at their behaviour, fanning the flames of violence, indicated in various cover ups of violence and sex abuse, what would life be like under those. Id rather grin and bear a few taxes in safe knowledge that i can stand up and criticise the govt without them burning down my house, stopping me from working, threats to family or worse.

On saying that, i think there is scope for looking at the way its (capitailism) working. Why? well, not just Ireland but a lot of the world f-ed it up back at the start of the crisis. Disillsuionment with politics, the rich are getting richer, the 1% owning 50%+ of world wealth, thats not right in anyones book and as history has proven, that will go so far and suddenly there will be a push back, this could take the form of a guillotine session in paris or moving towards some crazy group who say all our problems are becasue of some minority or something. Also, it just feels like the EU especially (and the world in general) need to take a look at themselves, what are we at, didnt we set this thing up to prevent violence/war and for the betterment of the continent etc

hardybuck

Max Powers wrote: »

On saying that, i think there is scope for looking at the way its (capitailism) working. Why? well, not just Ireland but a lot of the world f-ed it up back at the start of the crisis. Disillsuionment with politics, the rich are getting richer, the 1% owning 50%+ of world wealth, thats not right in anyones book and as history has proven, that will go so far and suddenly there will be a push back, this could take the form of a guillotine session in paris or moving towards some crazy group who say all our problems are becasue of some minority or something. Also, it just feels like the EU especially (and the world in general) need to take a look at themselves, what are we at, didnt we set this thing up to prevent violence/war and for the betterment of the continent etc

You could get into a really technical and emotive argument there. Some of it theoretical, much of it based on your general opinions.

I would point to the significant amount of social protections and equality that we have in Ireland versus other parts of the world.

Some people certainly abuse that. It's possible never to be bothered working a day in your life but to be provided with a house, access to medical services, money to live on etc. These people have exactly the same amount of say in society as those who are paying six or seven figure sums in taxes.

Very few places in the world would you get such great access to politicans. You can literally write an email to a Minister or our Prime Minister and get a response within a week or so. Try that in China.

We have free speech. We have democracy. We have no idea of what real poverty is.