IW/Anything Water Related-Warning in OP

keithclancy

Banjo String wrote: »

Could've sworn I heard Brendan Ogle (among others) call for the complete disbandment of Irish Water, and for an end to water charges and metering yesterday.

Maybe you were there too, and you heard differently

I can only go off what the organisers have on their page:

http://right2water.ie/about

All citizens need clean drinking water and quality sanitation. Right2Water.ie is a public campaign by activists, citizens, community groups, political parties/individuals and trade unionists who are calling for the Government to recognise and legislate for access to water as a human right. We are demanding the Government abolish the planned introduction of water charges.

Why we’re against water charges

Water charges will discriminate against working people and the unemployed in favour of the wealthy and are another regressive tax taking vital money out of the pockets of people and out of our economy. Our public water system is already paid for through general taxation which is progressive and we wish it to remain that way.

Larbre34

I was interested to hear of the unnamed Govt TDs who foolishly told Drive Time that they could "live with" the numbers in yesterdays protest. They dont ever get it, do they?


Saturday January 31st is the day to make them all turn pale.

DamagedTrax

Falthyron wrote: »

4,588,000 = 100% population.
3,645,520 = 79% of the population.
57,000 = your estimate.

3,645,520/57,000 = 1.56%. 1.56% of the 'available' or 'eligible' population turned out for the protest yesterday.

i will refer you to my post on the previous page showing your lack of understanding on how numbers actually work in these situations.

look at the actual turnout levels for previous elections and referendi and it may give you an idea to how these things work.

if we were infact to go on your bizarre thinking, due to the lack of a majority compared to the actual voter turnout, FG probably wouldnt have a mandate to run a corner shop...

luckily for them, your way of trying to twist numbers not widely accepted.

Falthyron

DamagedTrax wrote: »

i will refer you to my post on the previous page showing your lack of understanding on how numbers actually work in these situations.

look at the actual turnout levels for previous elections and referendi and it may give you an idea to how these things work.

if we were infact to go on your bizarre thinking, due to the lack of a majority compared to the actual voter turnout, FG probably wouldnt have a real mandate to run a corner shop...

luckily for them, your way of trying to twist numbers not widely accepted.

70% of the electorate turned out for the general election in 2011.

Electorate: 3,209,244. Turnout (valid vote / electorate): 69.19% (+2.79 compared with 2007). Invalid votes 22,817.

Source: http://www.tcd.ie/Political_Science/staff/michael_gallagher/Election2011.php

I am not twisting numbers, it is simple maths. I took your numbers and worked out what percentage of the population that is.

falan

Neamhshuntasach wrote:

Yeah there was no way yesterday had 27 times the amount of people in that picture. From the aerial view i had before heading down late to the protest. I'd guess it was close enough to 50K maybe. I've seen numerous protests from this view. Including the anti war one in 2003 and the last national protest in October. Yesterday's was way way smaller than the anti war one. And looked a fair bit smaller than the last anti water one. Anyone saying 100K is exaggerating the hell out of the figures.

Anyone saying 30k is seriously underestimating figures. The government are trying to brush the issue under the carpet as usual. The protests were going on months before they were given any airtime. I saw loads of protest videos before the mainstream media reported it. The same has happened here. Since the new concessions have come in they are playing down there is a problem. It's a tactic.

DamagedTrax

Falthyron wrote: »

70% of the electorate turned out for the general election in 2011.



Source: http://www.tcd.ie/Political_Science/staff/michael_gallagher/Election2011.php

and yet they still couldnt get a majority.

high turnout + lesser results = ?

seriously? do you not understand?

Larbre34

1,926,900 people had to work yesterday........

Falthyron

DamagedTrax wrote: »

and yet they still couldnt get a majority.

high turnout + lesser results = ?

seriously? do you not understand?

They received 36.2% of all votes cast. They then formed a coalition, as they are entitled to do. They went up 8% on the previous general election.

Falthyron

Larbre34 wrote: »

1,926,900 people had to work yesterday........

I thought they were asked to take a holiday or a day of leave? Why didn't they?

Little CuChulainn

Daith wrote: »

If a Guard tells you to move, the majority of Irish people will move.

Do these "protesters" think they're immune to the Guards using physical force to move them?

They're doing more harm to your cause than anything.

It's worse than thinking they are above the law, they think they can enforce their own laws. Their facebook pages talk about them detaining, escorting, questioning and releasing workers and reporters. They love to talk about Gardai abusing their authority but the likes of Dublin Says No are abusing authority they don't even have.

Tony EH

Falthyron wrote: »

I thought they were asked to take a holiday or a day of leave? Why didn't they?

Oh yeh, you're "impartial".

hahahah

:pac:

Timberrrrrrrr

shinzon wrote: »

what are you talking about, O Connell street isnt the only thoroughfare through Dublin, convenient for people yes, but are you seriously telling me the entire population of Dublin suddenly couldnt get anywhere cause there was a few gob****es sitting on a bridge, please spare me

No one said the entire population of Dublin, I said hundreds of thousands (which would equate to a large percentage) were severely inconvenienced by the actions of a few gob****es.

So im assuming you mean anything, you aren't saying reasonable force so guns would be ok to is that what your actually saying

Shin

Just LOL :rolleyes:

Falthyron

Tony EH wrote: »

Oh yeh, you're "impartial".

hahahah

:pac:

Could you direct me to a post that states I am pro-IW, anti-IW, please?

DamagedTrax

Falthyron wrote: »

They received 36.2% of all votes cast. They then formed a coalition, as they are entitled to do. They went up 8% on the previous general election.

they had the support of 32% of 70% of the electorate (not popultion). they couldnt make a majority so they took labour in with them knowing that with a party whip system they could just do what they liked... especially as labour would have been looking VERY closely at what happened to the greens before them... unfortunately for labour they didnt look close enough.


so we have 1 party in power with the backing of only 1/3rd of the electorate and another party propping up the numbers while their hands are tied behind their backs.

great.

gene_slackman

Frank O. Pinion wrote: »

I'm sure you'll love this, but I can easily afford the water charges. I'm choosing not to though, because it's so easy to not pay it. They're not going to cut me off, the trickle threat is reversible, and I'll await them sending me to jail. Which isn't going to happen.

so your one of those " wont pay " rather than " cant pay "


people like you make life expensive for me and others

Birneybau

Stop signing off your posts, we can clearly see who you are.

'Bau

Falthyron

DamagedTrax wrote: »

they had the support of 32% of 70% of the electorate (not popultion). they couldnt make a majority so they took labour in with them knowing that with a party whip system they could just do what they liked... especially as labour would have been looking VERY closely at what happened to the greens before them... unfortunately for labour they didnt look close enough.


so we have 1 part in power with the backing of only 1/3rd of the electorate and another party propping up the numbers while their hands are tied behind their backs.

great.

That is how our democracy works, whether that is a good thing or bad thing, I don't know. They had more votes than any other party, therefore we must assume they have a greater claim to 'the will of the people' than any other party or candidate.

That is a greater majority than the 1.56% who turned out yesterday. If only 1.56% turned out for a general election it would have to be organised again for another date, because that is deemed to be an inadequate number of representation.

joe swanson

Larbre34 wrote: »

I was interested to hear of the unnamed Govt TDs who foolishly told Drive Time that they could "live with" the numbers in yesterdays protest. They dont ever get it, do they?


Saturday January 31st is the day to make them all turn pale.

I thought yesterday was going to be the start of the revolution lol

Most decent people saw through the protesters yesterday, attacking gardai, ordinary going about their business and generally acting like thugs.

DamagedTrax

gene_slackman wrote: »

so your one of those " wont pay " rather than " cant pay "


people like you make life expensive for me and others

woah there!!! plenty of us wont pay for genuine reasons.

i could afford it but i wont pay a penny to IW current incarnation. that certainly doesnt mean i have a problem with a charge for water and infrastructure.

'wont pay because it's easy not to' is another cathegory of asshole altogether.

Endaaaagh

Another protest in Jan? T'is all a bit Father Ted

"Is there anything to be said for saying another mass protest. God I love saying mass protesting"

Tony EH

gene_slackman wrote: »

so your one of those " wont pay " rather than " cant pay "


people like you make life expensive for me and others

There's a huge difference between "won't pay" and "won't pay Irish Water"

gene_slackman

zerks wrote: »

They care about the country & it's people,not about the gangsters that are running it.

the naivete

DamagedTrax

Falthyron wrote: »

That is how our democracy works, whether that is a good thing or bad thing, I don't know. They had more votes than any other party, therefore we must assume they have a greater claim to 'the will of the people' than any other party or candidate.
.

and thats the crux of the problem.

and you'll find that most of us go beyond a simple IW argument here. IW is/was a catalyst. the issues that are now being put about eclipse IW massively.

Doctor Jimbob

Endaaaagh wrote: »

Another protest in Jan? T'is all a bit Father Ted

"Is there anything to be said for saying another mass protest. God I love saying mass protesting"

Ah yes but this is the one that's going to matter!







Like the last one and the one before and so on and so on... :pac:

Timberrrrrrrr

Endaaaagh wrote: »

Another protest in Jan? T'is all a bit Father Ted

"Is there anything to be said for saying another mass protest. God I love saying mass protesting"

Half million expected at the next one, Facebook says that's what they are expecting so it must be true!

Birneybau

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Half million expected at the next one, Facebook says that's what they are expecting so it must be true!

I heard it was the entire population, even the newborns from the Coombe and Rotunda, and half of the American public.

shinzon

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

No one said the entire population of Dublin, I said hundreds of thousands (which would equate to a large percentage) were severely inconvenienced by the actions of a few gob****es.





Just LOL :rolleyes:

and if they refused then the guards should have used WHATEVER force necessary to move them

Then you should phrase yourself better in future in all honesty

And as regards yesterday all I can say is people must have poor planning skills, for a month or more it was known this was happening and in all likelihood a splinter group of idiots would try something like this so alternative routes should have been planned rather then coming on here and bitching and moaning about it on the day seems all rather disingenuous to me tbh

Shin

Tony EH

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

Ah yes but this is the one that's going to matter!







Like the last one and the one before and so on and so on... :pac:

It's this attitude that has the Irish people fücked again and again...

Falthyron

DamagedTrax wrote: »

and thats the crux of the problem.

and you'll find that most of us go beyond a simple IW argument here. IW is/was a catalyst. the issues that are now being put about eclipse IW massively.

Yes, but you must be realistic about the figures.

Roughly 2,550,000 people voted in the last General Election. Of those 2,500,000 36.2% voted for Fine Gael, and another 19% voted for Labour. 36.2% = 900,000 people. They gave their vote to FG.

Yesterday's 1.56% gave their vote as being anti-FG, etc. Are you suggesting the 36.2% have been reduced to less than yesterday's 1.56%? If not, then you have to see how insignificant 1.56% is in the grand scheme of things.

Doctor Jimbob

Tony EH wrote: »

It's this attitude that has the Irish people fücked again and again...

Care to expand on that point?