The all new and only slightly recycled off topic thread (read post 1)

Howard Juneau

Lads! Less of the Breaking Bad stuff, I'm about to start season 1 episode 2 tonight!

duckysauce

.ak wrote: »

Is it just me or does the same stuff happen over and over?

They get in bed with a bad guy. Make lots of money. Things go sour with the bad guy. They **** over the bad guy. Then onto the next bad guy. Rinse repeat.

that's what drug dealing is all about

Buer

Howard Juneau wrote: »

Lads! Less of the Breaking Bad stuff, I'm about to start season 1 episode 2 tonight!

Silence b*tch!

Hagz

.ak wrote: »

Is it just me or does the same stuff happen over and over?

They get in bed with a bad guy. Make lots of money. Things go sour with the bad guy. They **** over the bad guy. Then onto the next bad guy. Rinse repeat.

That's a pretty black and white view of things, but it's not a completely false view either. I suppose I don't know where you are so I can't really comment too much about it, but the series really peaks around the time where Walt is working for Gus Fring. He's on a completely different level to the bad guys you're introduced to earlier. But at a certain point it stops being about the bad guys and more about Walt and Jessie's personal demons.

Podge_irl

Howard Juneau wrote: »

Lads! Less of the Breaking Bad stuff, I'm about to start season 1 episode 2 tonight!

You're a poo poo head

Howard Juneau

Podge_irl wrote: »

You're a poo poo head

Hmm, didn't click on the spoiler, clicked on reply & the spoiler tag disappears in the reply!
Smelly bum!

Hagz

Has anybody had any luck with GTA multiplayer?

Mahatma Geansai

Hagz wrote: »

Has anybody had any luck with GTA multiplayer?

Still working on getting single player working.

Grimebox

I started GTA4 recently since I don't have a console and the hype was too much. It's awful. Played almost 10 missions and its so drab. The setting and the characters don't do anything for me. Anyone know if it gets better?

Ugo Monye spacecraft experience

Grimebox wrote: »

I started GTA4 recently since I don't have a console and the hype was too much. It's awful. Played almost 10 missions and its so drab. The setting and the characters don't do anything for me. Anyone know if it gets better?

GTA4 is terrible. GTA5 is a massive improvement

Swiwi.

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I personally think it's absolutely disgraceful that a minority could destroy something just to get their own way on an issue. They should all be sitting at the table and negotiating. I could never support people like that

Let's start a thread to discuss the issue...you first Irishbucsfan

.ak

I'm one of the few people who really enjoyed GTA4 it seems. Loved the NYC style setting, real grimey, and the radio stations were the 2nd best in the series (after VC ofcourse)

.ak

Hagz wrote: »

Has anybody had any luck with GTA multiplayer?

I'll give it a few days until it irons out... i.e the weekend! Sorry missus, I feel a match 'injury' coming on!

thomond2006

Soooooooooo

Yes or no on Friday?

Buer

thomond2006 wrote: »

Soooooooooo

Yes or no on Friday?

For which?!

Yes to both for myself currently but I need to do more reading on the court of appeal referendum to make a proper decision.

molloyjh

Need to edu-ma-cate myself on the court of appeals issue. Don't have a rashers about that.

As for the Seanad I'm going with a No myself. Not because I have any great belief in the Seanad itself, but more because I feel the whole thing needs to be reviewed rather than just getting the hatchet out to one house. We're massively over represented in the Dail. Which facilitates TD Jim-Bob looking after the pot hole down the road for Mary Constituent rather than actually doing his job properly.

mfceiling

molloyjh wrote: »

Need to edu-ma-cate myself on the court of appeals issue. Don't have a rashers about that.

As for the Seanad I'm going with a No myself. Not because I have any great belief in the Seanad itself, but more because I feel the whole thing needs to be reviewed rather than just getting the hatchet out to one house. We're massively over represented in the Dail. Which facilitates TD Jim-Bob looking after the pot hole down the road for Mary Constituent rather than actually doing his job properly.

I'm going no myself...

TBH i'd trust norris and fergal quinn sooner than some of the goons that are there at the minute.

It needs to be looked at and not just wiped out completely.

Tox56

First time I qualify for a vote

No to the senate thing for me, reform should be explored first before abolishing it completely, it's too fundamental to the Irish system

Buer

mfceiling wrote: »

I'm going no myself...

TBH i'd trust norris and fergal quinn sooner than some of the goons that are there at the minute.

It needs to be looked at and not just wiped out completely.

This much is true but I simply have no belief or faith that the purpose and powers of the Seanad are going to be altered significantly at any point in foreseeable future if it is maintained.

People have been calling for the undemocratic nature of it to be revised for years but there have never been any real efforts to do so. Those in power are never going to cut their noses off to spite their face.

If I thought a no vote would result in an in depth review of its function and action on the basis of the resulting recommendations, I would happily vote no. I think the question should have been to either abolish or to carry out in depth reforms proposed. As it is, I simply don't think we will reform our political system to the detriment of those in power which is a fairly pessimistic view, I accept, but one which I can't escape.

One of the arguments is that the Seanad acts as a check on the Dáil. To be honest, if we're looking at reform, I'd rather see a new entity established to perform this function. The current senate is made up of 80% from the major political parties and simply acts as the second string who are waiting for a call up to the top league.

matthew8

It's a relatively pointless institution that needs to be got rid of. May as well be another quango. A single parliament is all that is needed for such a small country.

As for the US government shutdown, I would have strong republican leanings but it's about time they dropped the healthcare thing (though I find the idea they're doing it so poor people will die on the streets ridiculous), Obama is doing a good job, achieving both federal savings and recovery in the economy, but the term "shutdown" is a massive overexaggeration. Anyone who actually has something important to do in the public service is still doing it.

Buer

matthew8 wrote: »

It's a relatively pointless institution that needs to be got rid of. May as well be another quango. A single parliament is all that is needed for such a small country.

It has a function and, if it was genuinely implemented with an extension of its remit, it would be a very useful entity. However, as it stands, the senate cannot prevent or delay a bill unless the Dáil agree to it so it's basically operates in an advisory capacity with no power.

There are some good people in it who are intelligent and operate soundly but the vast majority appear to be feathering their nests. I can only hope those people aren't lost to politics as many of them would win elections if they were to run for a seat in the general election but funding would be an obvious issue (but not all, eh Feargal?)

What irritates me is that the question is essentially "Do you want to vote to abolish the senate or vote for it to remain the same?"

Podge_irl

The Seanad needs reform badly (simply eliminating the Taoiseach's picks would be a very decent start) but I've found the entire way that FG have approached the whole thing distasteful. They playing on people's current distaste for politicians (Yay, fewer politicians is a good thing) and wilfully lying about the money savings. The Irish government is absurdly weighted towards the cabinet as it is.

Not that I can vote of course.

Swiwi.

thomond2006 wrote: »

Soooooooooo

Yes or no on Friday?

Can't vote...but, I think in theory the Seanad is a good idea but seriously needs reform, at the moment it's where a lot of retired or rejected politicians go on the whim of political parties. I think the Seanad would work well with genuine experts appointed to it (?by whom though). Wouldn't be at all keen on Joe Public electing to the Seanad, otherwise you end up with the likes of Mick Wallace & Ming Flanagan, who are not remotely suited for the functions of the Seanad.

On the American thing, I think it's reprehensible that 800,000 people can be on unwanted unpaid leave (no doubt with mortgages etc), because the Republicans can't except what has been passed into law and ratified by the supreme court. Extremists one might say...

Podge_irl

Podge_irl wrote: »

Not that I can vote of course.

Speaking of which I'll be thrilled if this constitutional convention idea of allowing expats to vote goes through. I used to fly home for elections/referenda when I was in England, but its way too much of a pain in the arse from here.

Howard Juneau

Podge_irl wrote: »

Speaking of which I'll be thrilled if this constitutional convention idea of allowing expats to vote goes through. I used to fly home for elections/referenda when I was in England, but its way too much of a pain in the arse from here.

It's not really workable though is it?
How can you guarantee that the 5 Irish girls working in the orphanage at the foot of Mount Kilimanjaro in Tanzania are going to be the people voting, how can it be verified & how much would a setup like this cost?

matthew8

Why would the senate have a role? If you keep it undemocratic but actually give it power then it undermines the whole idea of democracy, ie you would have unelected people making some of the decisions. If you make it democratic and give it power then it's just a clone of the Dáil. What function would you guys suggest for it?

As for the cabinet having too much power, look at the United States right now. A government "shutdown" because you need too many branches of government to agree on an issue in order to keep things going.

P_1

Howard Juneau wrote: »

It's not really workable though is it?
How can you guarantee that the 5 Irish girls working in the orphanage at the foot of Mount Kilimanjaro in Tanzania are going to be the people voting, how can it be verified & how much would a setup like this cost?

Set up an office or a stand at the Embassy/Consulate in a country, have people show their passports, match them off the list, et voilla.

Leaning towards a No/Yes vote myself. Not too keen on the idea of power being concentrated (in law anyway) within just the Dail and I do think the appeal court idea has some merit.

Swiwi.

Another English side going down in the CL. How over-rated is the English premiership?

P_1

Swiwi. wrote: »

Another English side going down in the CL. How over-rated is the English premiership?

In fairness they are playing Das Machine

Edit: und drei!!

thomond2006

Man City are getting absolutely murdered here.

Swiwi.

matthew8 wrote: »

Why would the senate have a role? If you keep it undemocratic but actually give it power then it undermines the whole idea of democracy, ie you would have unelected people making some of the decisions. If you make it democratic and give it power then it's just a clone of the Dáil. What function would you guys suggest for it?

As for the cabinet having too much power, look at the United States right now. A government "shutdown" because you need too many branches of government to agree on an issue in order to keep things going.

The problem is the whip. People obliged to vote along party lines at the threat of expulsion. Fair enough. But at least the seanad should be able to debate it philosophically and intellectually, in an independent manner.

Howard Juneau

P_1 wrote: »

Set up an office or a stand at the Embassy/Consulate in a country, have people show their passports, match them off the list, et voilla.

Leaning towards a No/Yes vote myself. Not too keen on the idea of power being concentrated (in law anyway) within just the Dail and I do think the appeal court idea has some merit.

But ideas like that aren't workable. Tanzania is 14 times the size of Ireland, bugger all infrastructure, could take days to get to Dar es Salem to cast a vote
Not practical at all on that continental, or Irish guys working in Aus mine's etc.
can't see it being a runner

matthew8

Swiwi. wrote: »

Another English side going down in the CL. How over-rated is the English premiership?

Wouldn't describe it as overrated. If Bayern were in the premiership they'd be favourites, and most people who follow the premiership know this. If the scores stay the same it will be played 8 won 6 lost 2 for the premiership so far this CL.

Swiwi.

P_1 wrote: »

In fairness they are playing Das Machine

Edit: und drei!!

This is the City side that massacred Man U. I've always enjoyed watching Arsenal, so at least they are tracking ok so far I guess.

Swiwi.

matthew8 wrote: »

Wouldn't describe it as overrated. If Bayern were in the premiership they'd be favourites, and most people who follow the premiership know this. If the scores stay the same it will be played 8 won 6 lost 2 for the premiership so far this CL.

Been a while now since an English side put in a decent CL challenge though. Well I guess Chelsea, but that was more luck than design.

P_1

Swiwi. wrote: »

This is the City side that massacred Man U. I've always enjoyed watching Arsenal, so at least they are tracking ok so far I guess.

Yeah but Man U were beaten at home by West Brom last week so that result may have to be taken with a pinch of salt. Besides I'd say most teams would find it hard to cope with Das Machine at the moment.

Juve being beaten by Gala at home is a bit of an eyebrow raiser though

matthew8

Swiwi. wrote: »

Been a while now since an English side put in a decent CL challenge though. Well I guess Chelsea, but that was more luck than design.

Still though as a whole I would put the English sides above the German sides (and on a par with the Spanish), but great sides like Bayern distort people's views of the non-English leagues. For instance Bayer Leverkusen would get nowhere in the EPL.

P_1

matthew8 wrote: »

Still though as a whole I would put the English sides above the German sides (and on a par with the Spanish), but great sides like Bayern distort people's views of the non-English leagues. For instance Bayer Leverkusen would get nowhere in the EPL.

Yeah you could argue that in the Prem you'd have about 4 or 5 teams in contention for honours but the likes of the Bundesliga or la Liga are really only two horse races with a lot of cannon foddrer

Tox56

English league used to be awesome in terms of depth and competitiveness in the CL throughout the 00s. It would be a shock if at least 1 English team wasn't one of the 4 semi-finalists, often there was 2 and once there was even 3. English teams have dipped a bit and other teams have improved but overrated is harsh, people probably haven't fully adjusted

Swiwi.

Tox56 wrote: »

English league used to be awesome in terms of depth and competitiveness in the CL throughout the 00s. It would be a shock if at least 1 English team wasn't one of the 4 semi-finalists, often there was 2 and once there was even 3. English teams have dipped a bit and other teams have improved but overrated is harsh, people probably haven't fully adjusted

No soccer expert, but it kind of started when Ronaldo went to Spain - suddenly players didn't automatically flock to the PL. But I'm happy to get shot down on this, I'm no "history of football" guru

matthew8

I wonder what Joe Brolly made of that tackle.

P.Walnuts

Podge_irl wrote: »

Speaking of which I'll be thrilled if this constitutional convention idea of allowing expats to vote goes through. I used to fly home for elections/referenda when I was in England, but its way too much of a pain in the arse from here.

Does the bill just cover expats voting for everything? including general elections?

thomond2006

That own goal... :eek:

Podge_irl

P.Walnuts wrote: »

Does the bill just cover expats voting for everything? including general elections?

Nah, just referenda and presidential elections - at least for now.

I think its perfectly workable. Sure they never check if its actually you voting if you vote in Ireland as long as you have a polling card.

P.Walnuts

Podge_irl wrote: »

Nah, just referenda and presidential elections - at least for now.

I think its perfectly workable. Sure they never check if its actually you voting if you vote in Ireland as long as you have a polling card.

Ye, that would work fine.

I think i'd draw the line at general elections though, wouldn't be in favour of that.

Howard Juneau

Minister James O'Reilly wants to make Ireland tobacco free by 2025.
A document published today outlines 60 recommendations to try to eliminate smoking.
Could it happen?

Podge_irl

Howard Juneau wrote: »

Could it happen?

No.

It would take a generation, at least.

Howard Juneau

Podge_irl wrote: »

No.

It would take a generation, at least.

Today's children are going to be the adult generation of 2025, so perhaps it's doable.
It would cost the state a fortune in both lost revenue & withdrawal meds. Be they nicotine patches, gum, e cigs etc. But personally, I do think it's doable.

Podge_irl

Howard Juneau wrote: »

Today's children are going to be the adult generation of 2025, so perhaps it's doable.

Yeah, but even if none of them started smoking (which I think is an incredibly ambitious, and unlikely, goal) you'd still have all the current smokers who you aren't going to get to stop.

10 years, in the grand scheme of things, just isn't that long a time.

Grimebox

Howard Juneau wrote: »

Minister James O'Reilly wants to make Ireland tobacco free by 2025.
A document published today outlines 60 recommendations to try to eliminate smoking.
Could it happen?

What does tobacco free mean exactly? People to only smoke in private? Or outright criminalisation?

I always had the hair brained idea of increasing the legal smoking age by one year every decade or so, thus eventually phasing it out. It wouldn't affect any smokers whatsoever except those that take it up underage (which is every smoker I guess)