Ireland's "Peaceful Protestors" - Pest Control?

Fr. Ned

Dean0088 wrote: »

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.

TBF, I don't think beaner has really thought his idea's through......
Any likes on that page yet?


Edit; Nope, not too many going to make public their support of water taxes.

Rightwing

IW like the rest of the Public Sector is a joke. Cleaning out the private sector workers so they can get bonuses. Bonuses for what ? The fact that it rains :rolleyes:

Timberrrrrrrr

KomradeBishop wrote: »

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

Yeah

I mean it's not like the anti water crowd woul stoop to that level

Fukuyama

Fr. Ned wrote: »

TBF, I don't think beaner has really thought his idea's through......
Any likes on that page yet?

What would 'Likes' on a Facebook page be a measure of? The page itself looks like a joke.

I just think he'd garner more support for his Facebook page if he created worthwhile content that both sides would be interested in seeing.

Little CuChulainn

Fr. Ned wrote: »

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

Why would he need one? Unless he plans onmaking stuff up.

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.

Why? I don;t see that stuff posted on the likes of "Dublin says no"

Dean0088 wrote: »

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.

Unfortunately it's a tactic already being used to intimidate Irish Water workers, security guards and sheriffs so as long as he posts the details of people doing the same thing I can;t see why there would be any issue.

My name is URL

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.

You don't even have the stones to link the page to your personal account :pac:

This page is for the silent majority in Ireland. Those people that do their best to get on with their lives through hard work. d not just the usual middle income earners.

Joined Facebook - 2nd February 2014

Likes - 0

That is a fairly silent majority isn't it?!

Fukuyama

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Yeah

I mean it's not like the anti water crowd woul stoop to that level

So why follow them?

Water meters are going in and charges are following. There's no need to break the law or use online intimidation. So far, the anti-water meter crowd have done a fine job of ruining their own reputation with the silent majority by uploading their videos.

DarkyHughes

Fair play to them I say.

Timberrrrrrrr

Dean0088 wrote: »

So why follow them?

Water meters are going in and charges are following. There's no need to break the law or use online intimidation. So far, the anti-water meter crowd have done a fine job of ruining their own reputation with the silent majority by uploading their videos.

I'm not following them am just not bothered if someone uses their own tactics against them

Fukuyama

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

Why would he need one? Unless he plans onmaking stuff up.



Why? I don;t see that stuff posted on the likes of "Dublin says no"



Unfortunately it's a tactic already being used to intimidate Irish Water workers, security guards and sheriffs so as long as he posts the details of people doing the same thing I can;t see why there would be any issue.

From what I can tell, he plans to publish the employment details and online profiles of people as an intimidation tactic.

I suppose leaders of these groups open themselves up for public scrutiny. And if he posts actual info in a journalistic fashion then fair enough. But collecting info and trying to bully normal protesters is just cowardly. Especially considering he doesn't attach his name to the work.

I'm aware that IW workers are being targeted online, along with security guards. The failure of the anti-IW crowd to condemn these actions does the work of silent majority. Why try to intimidate people when their own intimidation tactics will be their undoing?

Fukuyama

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

I'm not following them am just not bothered if someone uses their own tactics against them

I am because it creates not only a vicious circle, but a downward spiral. As if the level of debate surrounding water meters couldn't get any lower, now we have both sides threatening and intimidating.

My OP condemns these actions by the anti-IW side. I'll not support them (or ignore them) just because it suits me.

Although this thread was about handling illegal protests, I have said multiple times that I'd love to see an alternative to water charges (as I don't want to pay them. Who does? But will, just like the ESB bill, gas etc...). So I don't want people too afraid of being targeted to speak out with alternatives.

Fukuyama

My name is URL wrote: »

You don't even have the stones to link the page to your personal account :pac:



That is a fairly silent majority isn't it?!

The page itself seems inactive. And you're ignoring the viral nature of social media.

Facebook is a terrible place to get info or organise politically anyways. It's bottom of the barrel crap.

My name is URL

Dean0088 wrote: »

The page itself seems inactive. And you're ignoring the viral nature of social media.

Facebook is a terrible place to get info or organise politically anyways. It's bottom of the barrel crap.

Aye, that's kind of my point though. If the guy was in any way serious about what he's saying, he would have shared the page via his own personal one by now, garnering at least one or two likes from friends etc.

Page has been up for 9 months and there is no interest or posts on it. Shows how seriously the guy takes it really. All talk, no trouser by the looks of it.

KomradeBishop

Dean0088 wrote: »

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.

The whole of Europe is about to enter into a deflationary spiral, if the EU does not adjust course very soon - we're not going to be out of this crisis anytime soon:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/11154553/Dam-breaks-in-Europe-as-deflation-fears-wash-over-ECB-rhetoric.html

Europe as a whole could undertake Yanis Varoufakis' 'Modest Proposal' plan, without making any treaty changes (though it's likely to be politically impossible, due to Germany):
http://yanisvaroufakis.eu/euro-crisis/modest-proposal/

Locally, we could undertake this very clever plan by Rob Parenteau, without any EU help, to boost our recovery:
http://neweconomicperspectives.org/2013/12/exit-austerity-without-exiting-euro.html
It is very complicated to understand though, and I've tried to address most of the common misconceptions about it here:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057100005


Even without all of this though, the water charges are not necessary, the funds can just be collected with taxes instead, as they always have been. The way the charges/metering are being implemented, is incredibly poor, and looks a lot like government is preparing to sell-off an essential national asset, when the next crisis hits.

Fukuyama

KomradeBishop wrote: »

The whole of Europe is about to enter into a deflationary spiral, if the EU does not adjust course very soon - we're not going to be out of this crisis anytime soon:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/11154553/Dam-breaks-in-Europe-as-deflation-fears-wash-over-ECB-rhetoric.html

Europe as a whole could undertake Yanis Varoufakis' 'Modest Proposal' plan, without making any treaty changes (though it's likely to be politically impossible, due to Germany):
http://yanisvaroufakis.eu/euro-crisis/modest-proposal/

Locally, we could undertake this very clever plan by Rob Parenteau, without any EU help, to boost our recovery:
http://neweconomicperspectives.org/2013/12/exit-austerity-without-exiting-euro.html
It is very complicated to understand though, and I've tried to address most of the common misconceptions about it here:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057100005


Even without all of this though, the water charges are not necessary, the funds can just be collected with taxes instead, as they always have been. The way the charges/metering are being implemented, is incredibly poor, and looks a lot like government is preparing to sell-off an essential national asset, when the next crisis hits.

Thanks for posting those links. I'll have a read through the Parenteau proposal when I get a chance. I'm already a little miffed by it and it certainly seems to reject some economic principles. It's also very anti-Germany. It says that Germany didn't have a deficit within 3% a decade ago, and so is in no position to support the new 3% deficit clause in the stability treaty?! ?

I just think people should pay for usage. Payment through taxes suggests only working people will be paying, and simple maths says they'll have to pay for the water of those not working. This is unfair in my books.

KomradeBishop

Ya paying for usage makes sense, especially to reduce consumption - the way government has gone about that though, is a gigantic mess, which is well worth protesting about.

CosmicSmash

Beaner1 wrote: »

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

So not only are you hiding behind your keyboard, you're doing it from another country. Big brave man right there, you must have little to do if you have the time to try to dig up dirt on people in a country you don't even live in. You must lead a very sad life if you feel the need to do sh1t like that.

Fukuyama

KomradeBishop wrote: »

Ya paying for usage makes sense, especially to reduce consumption - the way government has gone about that though, is a gigantic mess, which is well worth protesting about.

The main issue seems to be that people don't want to pay for water as "they already pay for it" through taxes.

I pay for Dublin Bus via taxes yet still have to pay to use it.

Ireland is running a deficit and has huge debt. The water infrastructure is in bits. We need to reduce the deficit. Money needs to be collected and I'd like it done in a fair way which also encourages less consumption. Taxing the wealthy even more (and they pay A LOT - I'm not one of them either so I'm not biased here) is shooting yourself in the foot, economically.

Fukuyama

Monkeykube wrote: »

So not only are you hiding behind your keyboard, you're doing it from another country. Big brave man right there, you must have little to do if you have the time to try to dig up dirt on people in a country you don't even live in. You must lead a very sad life if you feel the need to do sh1t like that.

I wouldn't entertain his threats. He's certainly in the minority in this thread. Few people would condone what he's wishing to do.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

Why? I don;t see that stuff posted on the likes of "Dublin says no"

That's something you need to take up with the likes of "Dublin says no".

But one way or the other, it's the internet. I like to be able to check the sources and - if we're talking morals here, the morals - of the people publishing the information.

You can't get up on a pedestal and preach while lurking underground.

catallus

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

You can't get up on a pedestal and preach while lurking underground.

What!?!

Course you can! :pac:

Little CuChulainn

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

That's something you need to take up with the likes of "Dublin says no".

But one way or the other, it's the internet. I like to be able to check the sources and - if we're talking morals here, the morals - of the people publishing the information.

You can't get up on a pedestal and preach while lurking underground.

That's what the internet is made for.

KomradeBishop

Dean0088 wrote: »

The main issue seems to be that people don't want to pay for water as "they already pay for it" through taxes.

I pay for Dublin Bus via taxes yet still have to pay to use it.

Ireland is running a deficit and has huge debt. The water infrastructure is in bits. We need to reduce the deficit. Money needs to be collected and I'd like it done in a fair way which also encourages less consumption. Taxing the wealthy even more (and they pay A LOT - I'm not one of them either so I'm not biased here) is shooting yourself in the foot, economically.

Todays taxes + Water Charges = More overall payments to government. Basically an increase in tax.

Reducing the public deficit through taxes and cuts, puts a squeeze on the private economy, slowing growth in aggregate demand, and hampering the paying-down of private debt (private debt is a much bigger problem than public debt) - and we are about to slip into deflation and debt-deflation as a result of this. That, austerity/cuts/tax-increases, is a big part of the cause for the coming deflationary spiral.

If the EU doesn't change course, we may slip into semi-permanent stagnation, and end up like Japan and their Lost Two Decade's.

What Europe should have done (and should still do), is utilize the 'Modest Proposal' plan I mentioned for massive fiscal spending/deficits using low-interest-rate debt (which presents no sustainability problem), or the second plan I mentioned which entails massive fiscal spending with no interest payments at all.

Fukuyama

KomradeBishop wrote: »

The whole of Europe is about to enter into a deflationary spiral, if the EU does not adjust course very soon - we're not going to be out of this crisis anytime soon:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/11154553/Dam-breaks-in-Europe-as-deflation-fears-wash-over-ECB-rhetoric.html

Europe as a whole could undertake Yanis Varoufakis' 'Modest Proposal' plan, without making any treaty changes (though it's likely to be politically impossible, due to Germany):
http://yanisvaroufakis.eu/euro-crisis/modest-proposal/

Locally, we could undertake this very clever plan by Rob Parenteau, without any EU help, to boost our recovery:
http://neweconomicperspectives.org/2013/12/exit-austerity-without-exiting-euro.html
It is very complicated to understand though, and I've tried to address most of the common misconceptions about it here:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057100005


Even without all of this though, the water charges are not necessary, the funds can just be collected with taxes instead, as they always have been. The way the charges/metering are being implemented, is incredibly poor, and looks a lot like government is preparing to sell-off an essential national asset, when the next crisis hits.

Tax Anticipation Notes?!

That's robbing peter to pay paul. The interest rates are low but they're effectively bonds that mature after one year. The Irish government would need to use TANs every year given the scale of the bailout required a few years back, the interest upon which would year-on-year be greater than the bailout was thank to Britain giving us a good rate and Enda securing better conditions upon election with the ECB.

Your alternative is very "far out" there in terms of economics - and would be almost impossible to pass politically.

The entire piece is based on the premise that "expenditures can be financed only by borrowing in the open market, in competition with businesses".

States borrow from the ECB and IMF (when needs be) at better rates than businesses. For example, Britain loaned us a billion at a rate lower than the intra-bank rate thanks to their good credit rating. No "business" would secure such a rate given similar conditions.

Ireland can still borrow from open markets (now that we've returned to them) by issuing bonds. This is the very reason we didn't burn the bond holders as Ireland would never be able to use that route of financing again if we did. People love giving countries loan via bonds as they're WAY more secure than normal loans, and pay decent interest too.

Of course the very reason the stability mechanism was set up was to lower government (and EU) debt and keep deficits within the 3% zone. So really, Ireland should be looking to inwardly finance itself instead of running to easy pools of debt money as we did during the boom. This is done through sensible taxation (I guess we'll see on Tuesday) and other policies like water meters.

KomradeBishop

Dean0088 wrote: »

Tax Anticipation Notes?!

That's robbing peter to pay paul. The interest rates are low but they're effectively bonds that mature after one year. The Irish government would need to use TANs every year given the scale of the bailout required a few years back, the interest upon which would year-on-year be greater than the bailout was thank to Britain giving us a good rate and Enda securing better conditions upon election with the ECB.

Your alternative is very "far out" there in terms of economics - and would be almost impossible to pass politically.

The entire piece is based on the premise that "expenditures can be financed only by borrowing in the open market, in competition with businesses".

States borrow from the ECB and IMF (when needs be) at better rates than businesses. For example, Britain loaned us a billion at a rate lower than the intra-bank rate thanks to their good credit rating. No "business" would secure such a rate.

Ireland can still borrow from open markets (now that we've returned to them) by issuing bonds. This is the very reason we didn't burn the bond holders as Ireland would never be able to use that route of financing again if we did. People love giving countries loan via bonds as they're WAY more secure than normal loans, and pay decent interest too.

Of course the very reason the stability mechanism was set up was to lower government (and EU) debt and keep deficits within the 3% zone. So really, Ireland should be looking to inwardly finance itself instead of running to easy pools of debt money as we did during the boom. This is done through sensible taxation (I guess we'll see on Tuesday) and other policies like water meters.

You don't understand them, you've made the common mistake of assuming they carry interest, which is wrong. You also make the very common mistake, of thinking they are borrowing in the open market - they are not.

They will take you a lot of reading to understand properly (as they did for me) - they do not function exactly like bonds, and they do not function exactly like money - so you can't apply common understanding of bonds/money to them, they are unique.

My name is URL

Dean0088 wrote: »

The main issue seems to be that people don't want to pay for water as "they already pay for it" through taxes.

I pay for Dublin Bus via taxes yet still have to pay to use it.

Ireland is running a deficit and has huge debt. The water infrastructure is in bits. We need to reduce the deficit. Money needs to be collected and I'd like it done in a fair way which also encourages less consumption. Taxing the wealthy even more (and they pay A LOT - I'm not one of them either so I'm not biased here) is shooting yourself in the foot, economically.

I don't mind paying for water. I don't want to pay the salaries (via levies, taxes, charges or anything else) of a board of directors including bonuses or 'performance related pay increases' for a company that is run for profit.

A consultation paper on the roll-out of water charges next October by the new water regulator also says Irish Water will:

* Be allowed to keep more profits if they fix leaks faster and install water meters faster.

* Hold on to the money for six years before passing on any cost savings to householders.

* Take over water infrastructure worth €11bn.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/irish-water-will-be-allowed-raise-prices-every-year-29798831.html

Fukuyama

KomradeBishop wrote: »

You don't understand them, you've made the common mistake of assuming they carry interest, which is wrong. You also make the very common mistake, of thinking they are borrowing in the open market - they are not.

They will take you a lot of reading to understand properly - they do not function exactly like bonds, and they do not function exactly like money - so you can't apply common understanding of bonds/money to them, they are unique.

They can and normally do carry interest. If they don't, then you're digging you own grave as the amount paid back will be less than the amount borrowed due to inflation (I'm aware it's nor actually borrowing money, but effectively, that's what they're used for and as). This is ignoring the basics of modern economics and would be madness for the Irish government to pursue as their main method of finance.

I'm aware they're not open market borrowing. That's what's so dangerous about them in a modern economy.

I understand TANs and the thinking behind them. They're dangerous and the easy way out. They've no place in modern economics.

Fr. Ned

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

Why would he need one? Unless he plans onmaking stuff up.






as long as he posts the details of people doing the same thing I can;t see why there would be any issue.

So, there is an issue when people against charges do it but not if people for that charges do it. Ok, I see the double standard there.

Regarding the first line of your post, I'll bow to your obvious knowledge of the law in relation to posting people's personal details without their consent.

end of the road

Dean0088 wrote: »

And yet again, you fall back on your 'old faithful' argument of accusing those who don't agree with you to be anti-democratic fascists.

Not a single call for any additional garda tactics yesterday as the protest passed off peacefully and legally. That was the purpose of this thread.

It's your inability to make an argument that stops the majority of people from agreeing (or at very least, aligning themselves) with your cause.

our boys are using the tactics that are known to work without causing any extra problems. they can arrest those who need arresting with no violence. fair play to them. your dreams of smashed crushed bones brains and blood splattered all over the streets will not be realized

Fr. Ned

Where's beaner gone?