Ireland's "Peaceful Protestors" - Pest Control?

end of the road

mickydoomsux wrote: »

Cancel all peacekeeping missions because we shouldn't have to contribute to international affairs so that cheapskates don't have to pay for water at home but when we destroy our own economy through utter greed at all levels of our society we should go begging the international community to bail us out.

I understand the anti side completely now.

not really, i'm against the charges however i don't believe our military should be scrapped and its equipment sold off.

end of the road

coolemon wrote: »

Most of the equipment of the defence forces does not serve Search and rescue functions.

I do not think the expenditure can be justified.

it serves vital functions, the expenditure absolutely can be justified. its not being sold off so you won't have to pay for water. either simply don't pay, or pay up, but our military isn't going anywhere, end of

Timberrrrrrrr

Fr. Ned wrote: »

What would you call the wish to beat and pepper spray all protesters off the streets, Dean?
Democratic?

Do you want me to dig up the posts where this was called for?

Oh please do.

Fr. Ned

Dean0088 wrote: »

There's plenty of people vocally supporting (or at least showing their tacit support) for it on Facebook. The idea of a 'pro' tax group is ridiculous. Why organize to implement something that's already on the way in? :pac:

On a local level, and I can only speak for myself here, I'd be wary of outright confronting protesters where I live as many of them are the type of people who I wouldn't want neighborly conflict with. They also seem to have all the time in the world for this craic whereas I don't. I've seen tyres slashed, property damaged etc... over trivial things.

I'd have no trouble debating the issue, but it's another thing to engage with the few 'leaders' who seem to condone intimidation and violence (well, the Dublin Says No group anyways).

There's a hell of a lot more people protesting against this scam than the group you mention.
Not everyone against water tax is a scumbag.
There were civil servants, private sector employers and employees and every type of person you can think of on the march yesterday.
Maybe you should broaden your view on this and not be coloured by what one or two groups are doing?
If 100,000 (or even the 20,000 according to RTE:o) turned up yesterday, you can be guaranteed there's a multiple of that who won't pay for this scam quango.
There's another nameless government TD in the paper this morning saying that Tuesday's budget will be a giveaway budget as he reckons it'll be the last one this government will put forward. An attempt to 'buy' the electorate.
But remember, anything you see in your paypacket will be cancelled out by the water tax.

Fukuyama

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Oh please do.

He will deliberately cherrypick sentences where such tactics were called for, completely ignoring the context (mini-riots in housing estates) where they were called for.

Yesterdays march passed off peacefully and despite disagreeing with the ridiculous arguments made during the speeches, I have no desire for AGS to attack them.

Not as 'North Korean' as some posters would like me to be. I guess that'd actually add some validity to their sunken arguments.

end of the road

Grand Moff Tarkin wrote: »

i like having Uncle Sam and his mighty war machine watching over my country so if they wish to use Shannon as a stop over before they bring their enemies of the state to justice than best of luck to them.

Uncle Sam doesn't give a **** about us and would wipe us off the map if it meant some gain for them. they have no enemies, they make them up to install corrupt puppet governments who jump to their tune. hopefully they will meet their match one day, and the sespit is taken down and put in their place

Fr. Ned

Dean0088 wrote: »

Go ahead, dig up all the quotes where myself and several posters discussed increased garda tactics. It'd add no more weight to your argument.

It's pretty obvious to anyone that reads the thread that calls were made for arrests etc... in cases where the law was broken (Public Order Act). There was video evidence of violence and intimidation.

There were no calls to the effect of an organized garda crack down on protesting. And everyone pretty much agreed that there's no apatite for such actions.

Feel free to fall back on your old faithful argument though.

There was one poster in particular who made the comments about "beating and pepper spraying protesters off the streets"
TBF, it's a poster I now have on ignore and will not respond to.
I think we can argue the points without that type of flaming.

end of the road

VinLieger wrote: »

What's wrong with refuse privatisation? We now have several options and each has to actively compete for our money and business.

Surely it's a much better system than a state run monopoly where pay is determined by the unions and not the market?

because many don't have options, are being screwed, and greedy private companies aren't entitled to make money from vital public services. having a state monopoly where pay is determined by the unions means a fair wage, whereas the morket would mean slavery and low pay

Fr. Ned

Who called you North Korean, Dean?

Timberrrrrrrr

Dean0088 wrote: »

He will deliberately cherrypick sentences where such tactics were called for, completely ignoring the context (mini-riots in housing estates) where they were called for.

Yesterdays march passed off peacefully and despite disagreeing with the ridiculous arguments made during the speeches, I have no desire for AGS to attack them.

Not as 'North Korean' as some posters would like me to be. I guess that'd actually add some validity to their sunken arguments.

He won't show.post because there are no.posts where anyone asks for ALL protesters to be beaten off the streets. I see he claims to have me on ignore as he doesn't like to.answer the hard questions.

Fukuyama

Fr. Ned wrote: »

There's a hell of a lot more people protesting against this scam than the group you mention.
Not everyone against water tax is a scumbag.
There were civil servants, private sector employers and employees and every type of person you can think of on the march yesterday.
Maybe you should broaden your view on this and not be coloured by what one or two groups are doing?
If 100,000 (or even the 20,000 according to RTE:o) turned up yesterday, you can be guaranteed there's a multiple of that who won't pay for this scam quango.
There's another nameless government TD in the paper this morning saying that Tuesday's budget will be a giveaway budget as he reckons it'll be the last one this government will put forward. An attempt to 'buy' the electorate.
But remember, anything you see in your paypacket will be cancelled out by the water tax.

Not everyone is a scumbag. I didn't say that. But there are clear elements, often at the forefront of these local protests who are. There is plenty video evidence posted in this very thread. I don't fancy damage being done to my property when I'm not there by even the one or two idiots who would attempt it.

100,000 is a huge number. From what I've seen, the 20,000 number looks generous.

In what way is my view narrowed. I'd say I've done a lot more research on this subject than most. There simply isn't any way the country can continue to NOT charge for water AND reduce the deficit. I've looked on Sinn Feins, PbP and Dublin Says No's websites/Facebooks. No plans, no alternative. Nothing.

They funny thing about money is that it all adds up in the end.

So far, the best arguments were along the lines of "Enda Kenny earns XYZ, Garda drivers, Anglo etc...". No actual numbers, facts or plans to continue to upgrade Ireland's water system.

Ireland needs to retain access to the stability mechanism set up two years ago by EU states. This means reducing the deficit. Nobody is going to skip to the Post Office to pay this new bill, and if there was an actual plan put forward which offers an alternative to "No Consent, No Contract etc..." I'd vote for it. But there isn't.

20,000 or 100,000 people marching doesn't change a thing when it comes to building a country that'll still be on its feet in 10, 20 and 100 years time.

The original purpose of this thread was handling illegal and unlawful "protests" which contained elements using violence and intimidation against workers and gardaí. Yesterday's protest is a shining example of a lawful protest so is quite irrelevant to this thread which concerns dealing with illegal protests and self-proclaimed 'local representative' vigilante groups on people's door steps.

end of the road

Dean0088 wrote: »

They're bin men. Nothing wrong with the job but it's hardly worth €16 per hour. Sure it's a dirty job, but there's plenty willing to do it. I wish an angry mob would show up at my low-skilled job and make my boss pay me more.

An interesting thing to note however is that Joan Collins etc... got elected a few years back to Dublin city council on the "No Bin Charges" ticket, and these rent-a-mobs actively took part in protests blocking Dublin City Council bin trucks etc...

Now they seem to have switched sides and are advocating for higher wages for privatized bin companies, which would result in a RISE in bin charges. :pac:

its worth 16 euros an hour. there aren't plenty willing to do it, they just say it to make themselves feel better but when they see what is involved they will be whining and running away. the privatized companies have a duty to pay a fair wage and greyhound deserves to be forced to pay for the things its owners have done.

Little CuChulainn

Fr. Ned wrote: »

There's posters on here who want the Gardai to 'beat and pepper spray' protesters off the street.
The same posters who harp on about democratic process, elected to do a job and all that, yet want people beaten off the street for disagreeing with that process.
Is it Ireland or North Korea we live in?

Similarly there were people who hoped for Garda heads on pikes and a chance to break up any security guards IW may hire.

Fukuyama

end of the road wrote: »

its worth 16 euros an hour. there aren't plenty willing to do it, they just say it to make themselves feel better but when they see what is involved they will be whining and running away. the privatized companies have a duty to pay a fair wage and greyhound deserves to be forced to pay for the things its owners have done.

There's not much involved in it. It's entirely un-skilled. As far as I can see, it's pretty repetitive, low-intensity manual labour. They don't even lift the bins like years ago. It's a basic job. I have a pretty basic job too and I'm not asking for a doubling of my pay just because my job isn't all that desirable.

There are graduates in this country who are walking into graduate jobs paying 20,000 (if they're lucky).

Greyhound didn't seem to have much trouble finding people to do it when the strikes were on.

Fr. Ned

Dean0088 wrote: »

Ireland needs to retain access to the stability mechanism set up two years ago by EU states. This means reducing the deficit. Nobody is going to skip to the Post Office to pay this new bill, and if there was an actual plan put forward which offers an alternative to "No Consent, No Contract etc..." I'd vote for it. But there isn't.

According to FG, even without water tax, we're going to be below the 3% deficit this year.
There's talk of a giveaway budget, a very FFail way to try and buy votes.
In my opinion there should be a water authority in control of water supply, however, I believe it should be funded from general taxation.
That's the difference between you and me.

The reason for this quango is to get the water provision off the government books so we can look good to our betters in the EU.
It has nothing to do with conservation of water and there won't be any improvement in the infrastructure that wouldn't have happened if it was left in the control of the LA's.
This is Ireland we're talking with, the home of strokes and cute hoorism, not a proper functioning country like you see elsewhere in the developed world.

Fr. Ned

Dean0088 wrote: »

There are graduates in this country who are walking into graduate jobs paying 20,000 (if they're lucky).

Greyhound didn't seem to have much trouble finding people to do it when the strikes were on.

Any graduates sign up with them?

Fr. Ned

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

Similarly there were people who hoped for Garda heads on pikes and a chance to break up any security guards IW may hire.

Was there?
If so, you could class them as 'scumbags' ok.
Still, my point stands, we have a professional and unarmed police force in this state who are dealing with the protests in a professional manner.
Calls for them to beat people and pepper spray them off the streets are excessive and are not part of their culture nor should we want it to be.

Fukuyama

Fr. Ned wrote: »

According to FG, even without water tax, we're going to be below the 3% deficit this year.
There's talk of a giveaway budget, a very FFail way to try and buy votes.
In my opinion there should be a water authority in control of water supply, however, I believe it should be funded from general taxation.
That's the difference between you and me.

I think people should pay for what they use.

The reason for this quango is to get the water provision off the government books so we can look good to our betters in the EU.

You seem infatuated by the structure of Irish Water. It's a semi-state, run by Board Gáis who won the contract fair and suqare, based on their experience of running a successful semi-state utility.

Is Board Gáis or the former ESB another super scary quango?

It has nothing to do with conservation of water and there won't be any improvement in the infrastructure that wouldn't have happened if it was left in the control of the LA's.

You know this how?

This is Ireland we're talking with, the home of strokes and cute hoorism, not a proper functioning country like you see elsewhere in the developed world.

Um, Ireland is the 11th most developed nation on Earth. We're ahead of many of our "betters" in the EU, including the UK.

According to UN Development Index anyways.

KomradeBishop

Dean0088 wrote: »

I'd say I've done a lot more research on this subject than most. There simply isn't any way the country can continue to NOT charge for water AND reduce the deficit. I've looked on Sinn Feins, PbP and Dublin Says No's websites/Facebooks. No plans, no alternative. Nothing.

I've done more research on this than probably anyone on the entire forum, and while there are no political parties here presenting alternatives, viable alternatives (to the countries general financial problems) do exist - most of those alternatives have to be taken up at an EU level, but there are still local alternatives left, that can help to actually resolve the crisis (rather than stagnating, as we are now).

While I think water charges are a good idea for dissuading overconsumption, if done correctly (which it's not right now - abysmal implementation) - while I think that, there is nothing about them that is 'necessary' at all, they are just a different way of leveraging taxes.

Beaner1

Plenty of fun to come. I will be picking a particular active water protestor every week and doing an expose on them. Their employment history, alias accounts, facebook analytics etc.

Fr. Ned

Beaner1 wrote: »

Plenty of fun to come. I will be picking a particular active water protestor every week and doing an expose on them. Their employment history, alias accounts, facebook analytics etc.

I can see there being plenty of fun for you in that ok.
Do you have a good solicitor?

Beaner1

Fr. Ned wrote: »

I can see there being plenty of fun for you in that ok.
Do you have a good solicitor?

I don't need one for numerous reasons, not least the fact that I don't live in Ireland.

Fr. Ned

Beaner1 wrote: »

I don't need one for numerous reasons, not least the fact that I don't live in Ireland.

Good luck to you so, you'll need it.
I'd suggest you get some legal advice before you go on your campaign though, just in case.

Fr. Ned

BTW beaner, is that a facebook page you set up?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Beaner1 wrote: »

Plenty of fun to come. I will be picking a particular active water protestor every week and doing an expose on them. Their employment history, alias accounts, facebook analytics etc.

If that's the case, then you should really start with your own employment histroy, alias accounts, facebook analytics and so on. For transparency.

Fr. Ned

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

If that's the case, then you should really start with your own employment histroy, alias accounts, facebook analytics and so on. For transparency.

It's all there on his new facebook page.......oh, wait, no it's not!

KomradeBishop

A bit silly really - what even would be the purpose behind that? Seems like a pathetic attempt to try and threaten/encourage intimidation/harassment.

Fukuyama

KomradeBishop wrote: »

I've done more research on this than probably anyone on the entire forum, and while there are no political parties here presenting alternatives, viable alternatives (to the countries general financial problems) do exist - most of those alternatives have to be taken up at an EU level, but there are still local alternatives left, that can help to actually resolve the crisis (rather than stagnating, as we are now).

While I think water charges are a good idea for dissuading overconsumption, if done correctly (which it's not right now - abysmal implementation) - while I think that, there is nothing about them that is 'necessary' at all, they are just a different way of leveraging taxes.

Economy grew by 5% over the past 12 months.We're the only country in the EU without water charges and implementing them was recommended by the EU, troika and IMF. Asking the EU to fix our problems (again) isn't a way out of this.

There's no need for Ireland to go bowl in hand again to the EU. We're the fastest recovering 'bailout' nation with positive FDI and an improving live register. By 2017 we'll be back on track.

I've never seen a plan presented as an alternative to current government policy. I'd love to read one (genuinely). I'd vote for whoever came out with a workable alternative.

Fr. Ned

KomradeBishop wrote: »

A bit silly really - what even would be the purpose behind that? Seems like a pathetic attempt to try and threaten/encourage intimidation/harassment.

I'd be interested to see how many likes it gets.

Fukuyama

Beaner1 wrote: »

Plenty of fun to come. I will be picking a particular active water protestor every week and doing an expose on them. Their employment history, alias accounts, facebook analytics etc.

Would like to state that this is a low, cowardly tactic and that I don't support it.

Even if you dig up dirt on a particular person, it'd just diminish your own position. Ad hominem does nothing for an argument or debate. You'd be better off making a YouTube video, report, infographuc or webpage which explains you position. The Internet can be used for debate and information, not to be a Keyboard Warrior trying to intimidate others who post online.