Denis O'Brien Irelands Sinister Fringe.

Wurly · 13-12-2014 6:07pm

Beaner1 wrote: »

You're talking about a closed, protectionist economy which has been shown to be a ruinous policy the world over.

Cool. I'm very interested in the topic and want to know about it as much as possible. Can you link me to some further information so I can have a read of it? Thanks.

Dean0088 wrote: »

So let's say, you invent a cure for cancer right there in you basement labratory. Good luck conquering the world. The first anitbiotics for cow pox were only discovered, manufactured and distributed thanks to the industrial revolution

That keyboard your typing on might have been put in a box in Cork (if it's a Mac) but it was designed in California, with help from a team of European engineers, Canadian programmers and highly illegal labor somewhere in China.

It's not nice to think about, but at least we can type about it.

I don't remember a big meeting where everyone made local economies illegal or shuttered local business. In fact, most businesses start off as one person, an idea and a garden shed. None have ever succeeded on that scale for the betterment of humanity though.

Yeah. They start small and keep getting bought out. I am regularly shocked when I google a product in my kitchen and i'm being brought from page to page in terms of it's owners. The end result is usually some american conglomerate. It's scary.

So the reason I talk about local is an attempt to dismantle the big corporations having such a large monopoly.

We could do as much as we could locally. And then fund the big projects collectively. If we made the process completely transparent so that people could see who's involved and where every penny goes, then this could be a good solution maybe? Could we have both?

Is it not better to try? The fact is, the current model works very well for a small number, generally average for a lot of people and then very badly for a massive amount. So we can't really say it's working in that case, can we?

Autonomous Cowherd · 13-12-2014 6:09pm

Dean0088 wrote: »

I think you're equating a system (capitalism) to power, which is quite the same as equating money too power seeing as capitalism is based on the green stuff.

Money is quite a good measurement of success because it stacks just so damn neatly. People on a large enough scal (like say, populations) stack just like money too. So it's damn easy to have power of a population without using money as a tool.

Your economic examples, I suspect, are based on your political ideas (which, I'm guessing, are socialist) instead of logic. We could spend ages comparing economic models that are based on politics instead of logic. In my opinion, capitalism kicked off during the Industrial Revolution and has been thriving since.

If we all switched to local markets instead of Tesco/Aldi/Lidl I think two things would happen:
We'd need more unskilled workers which are useless to the economy and over their lifetime are a drain (we're leaving emotions out of this debate, right?)

Prices would go up particularly in rural areas.

So yeah, unemployment would drop to 1% but go speak to an LC student or a college grad and ask them if their life's ambition in 2014 is to work as a baker or carpenter in a system not unlike the one that existed in the Middle Ages (local business for local markets under local economies).

Today's world is all about money. And so was yesterdays world. We could go back to the year 0AD and discover every Tom, Dick and Harry was more interested in making a buck than he was in fixing the worlds problems.

The idea of "wealth distribution", while vague on the tactics that'd be used to implement it is interesting. But ultimately I couldn't care. People can redistribute whatever they hell they want. We'd still have lemmings creaming themselves over the next iPhone, stores filled on Black Friday, idiots getting 30% credit cards, school leavers buying investment property and taxi men cursing the government. Within a few years the rich would be rich and the poor would be poor, with the exception of a small percentage who understand power and actually seize their ill gotten opportunity (and fair play) and those who were rich due to corruption, nepotism who never worked a day in their lives.

If you're interested in power stay away from the self help crap. It's all disillusioning "Empowering" logic circle jerks.

Machiavelli, Plato and Sun Tzu ( Sun Tzu for tactics) are great reads. I think most people read them as they are (ie. political or military manuals) but at their core they contain very applicable, logical explanations of people and why we bend to power.

Mentioned several jobs in this post. Not knocking any profession or career - just citing for examples' sake.

you sound very rational and informed and personally I have found Plato, Machiavelli and Sun Tzu to be interesting also. And to a fair degree you describe and perhaps defend the staus quo as justifiable and essentially fair an natural. I disagree and not simply because I lean towards the left, but because Capitalism works only on the basis of perpetual growth. And no matter how one dickies up the philosophy or the political reasoning, we live on a finite planet with finite resources and infinite growth has led us to environmental and social catastrophe.

No matter what way we are living here as emperors of the world in the 'free' capitalist west, we are a minority indulged class (and being out rapidly bred). Tell the boys and girls scrabbling through the toxic, burning digital dumps in Africa that Plato finds this present system reasonable. (Such ends and an infinity like them cannot be justified by any means.)

Jawgap · 13-12-2014 6:25pm

Wurly wrote: »

Here's the thing though. The fed is privately owned. So it's not owned by the government. It's owned by the banks.

Sorry, are you saying that private banks have controlling equity in the US Federal Reserve????

Wow, there's conspiracy theories and there's conspiracy theories:pac:

Regionally, banks are required to become members of the local Fed as each is organised as a corporation, but their investment to purchase stock gives them no voting tights over executive actions. It's a device to make them put 'skin in the game.'

Member banks elect some of the board members for each regional Fed.

And even if it was publicly owned it would be a terrible investment - it smokes tens of billions of dollars of profits each year, nearly 98% of which goes to the non-shareholding US Government - about 0.5% gets paid as a dividend to its 'shareholders.'

Wurly · 13-12-2014 6:29pm

Jawgap wrote: »

Sorry, are you saying that private banks have controlling equity in the US Federal Reserve????

Wow, there's conspiracy theories and there's conspiracy theories:pac:

I respect your opinion. I have a question about it though. If you are in disagreement with the above, then can I ask where your opinion came from? Was it your own research into the topic or did you read it somewhere or what? Genuine question.

waking dreams · 13-12-2014 6:37pm

Jawgap wrote: »

Sorry, are you saying that private banks have controlling equity in the US Federal Reserve????

Wow, there's conspiracy theories and there's conspiracy theories:pac:

Regionally, banks are required to become members of the local Fed as each is organised as a corporation, but their investment to purchase stock gives them no voting tights over executive actions. It's a device to make them put 'skin in the game.'

Member banks elect some of the board members for each regional Fed.

And even if it was publicly owned it would be a terrible investment - it smokes tens of billions of dollars of profits each year, nearly 98% of which goes to the non-shareholding US Government - about 0.5% gets paid as a dividend to its 'shareholders.'

I don't really understand your post at all. What I think you are saying is that banks must become members of the local fed bank. I understand that. So your reasoning for the fed bank to want members is so they can invest to purchase 'stock' but not have a say in how the bank is ran?

I guess my question would be why is there a need for a fed bank? Is it for regulation or what is the purpose?

Highflyer13 · 13-12-2014 6:39pm

That man could have complete control over the running of this country if he wanted to. Its a scary thought but he could. All he needs to do is give the right people a few extra € or some gifts or promise lucrative positions on various boards. When you are that wealthy your appetite for power is insatiable and you just want more. A lot of the wealthy are like that and a lot of the time its part of how they become so successful in the first place. Ultimate power at all costs.

Fukuyama · 13-12-2014 6:40pm

Autonomous Cowherd wrote: »

you sound very rational and informed and personally I have found Plato, Machiavelli and Sun Tzu to be interesting also. And to a fair degree you describe and perhaps defend the staus quo as justifiable and essentially fair an natural. I disagree and not simply because I lean towards the left, but because Capitalism works only on the basis of perpetual growth. And no matter how one dickies up the philosophy or the political reasoning, we live on a finite planet with finite resources and infinite growth has led us to environmental and social catastrophe.

No matter what way we are living here as emperors of the world in the 'free' capitalist west, we are a minority indulged class (and being out rapidly bred). Tell the boys and girls scrabbling through the toxic, burning digital dumps in Africa that Plato finds this present system reasonable. (Such ends and an infinity like them cannot be justified by any means.)

I **** you not, this planet contains humans and that's all we need to survive. We're the smartest mother****ers in the galaxy and observable universe. We are so high on the food chain it's ridiculous. We're actually growing food and body parts in labs when just a few years ago it was a theory. Within five years battery technology will be at a point that drones will be able to fly for weeks and a tatoo on your arm will be electrified to change and display messages. We'll have chips implanted in our retinas and be able to get in a car, go asleep and wake up in America thanks to Virgins "travel pod" plans.

Every idea and notion you have about the economy and collectivism is the antithesis to this and ultimately people won't go for it because it'll put a stop to advancement of the human race. In simple terms, if you take away someone iPhone (or potential future iPhone) they'll throw a strop.

Within 40 years we'll be colonizing Mars. throughout thousands of years humans have done nothing but grow, and grow and grow. The population of Europe was cut in HALF just a few hundred years ago by the plague and we're still ticking.

At the end of the day every human is self-interested. You, me, everyone. We look after "me and mine". The only reason populations band together in times of war, emergency or nationalism (woo! Hitler!) is because it appeals to each individuals self interest to do so.

The system of Capitalism is so natural it exists in everyone. Charity and social institutions (many of which I support - education and healthcare) only exist and remain self sufficient when the money's been earned to pay for them. I only give away my crusts when I've had my fill of bread - survival. But we live in a modern society with soft cushions to sit on and plenty planned towns, right angles everywhere etc... so we forget that.

Society is one big malfunction that depends on everyone making themselves happy first, and their neighbor second.

You speak of catastrophe - the world is doing great. Intolerance is at an all time low. Murder is down to negligible levels (compared to the 1800s and previous). Wartime deaths are nothing compared to any random year throughout history. Yes we have billionaires, but we have more open education, skilled jobs and living standards than ever before.

Fukuyama · 13-12-2014 6:42pm

Highflyer13 wrote: »

That man could have complete control over the running of this country if he wanted to. Its a scary thought but he could. All he needs to do is give the right people a few extra € or some gifts or promise lucrative positions on various boards. When you are that wealthy your appetite for power is insatiable and you just want more. A lot of the wealthy are like that and a lot of the time its part of how they become so successful in the first place. Ultimate power at all costs.

Yeah, real Gordon Gekko our Denis is.

Jawgap · 13-12-2014 6:50pm

Wurly wrote: »

I respect your opinion. I have a question about it though. If you are in disagreement with the above, then can I ask where your opinion came from? Was it your own research into the topic or did you read it somewhere or what? Genuine question.

No, I've heard 'the Fed is privately owned and controlled by foreign interests' conspiracy theory before.

Someone even floated it in an economics lecture I was attending once.

All this makes me laugh though......everyone is railing against DO'B but I doubt no more than 5% of people know the name of the manager of their Local Hospital Group - I wonder who will wreck more citizens' lives and who will people protest against???

jimgoose · 13-12-2014 6:51pm

Denis O'Brien is not too long gone from the campfire and has the business acumen of a whelk. He is a shining example of how wealth is redistributed in this country, and as such of how not to do it. In a more civilised jurisdiction, like Texas, he'd be in solitary in Port Laoise.

Fukuyama · 13-12-2014 6:52pm

jimgoose wrote: »

Denis O'Brien is not too long gone from the campfire and has the business acumen of a whelk. He is a shining example of how wealth is redistributed in this country, and as such of how not to do it. In a more civilised jurisdiction, like Texas, he'd be in solitary in Port Laoise.

How civilized and geographically correct.

Highflyer13 · 13-12-2014 6:52pm

Dean0088 wrote: »

Yeah, real Gordon Gekko our Denis is.

Aside from the snide remarks should he not have been penalised over the findings of the Moriarty report? Do you think its acceptable that little or nothing happened Denis when he was found to be corrupt? Whos to say he won't do it again? Fool me once......

Jawgap · 13-12-2014 6:55pm

waking dreams wrote: »

I don't really understand your post at all. What I think you are saying is that banks must become members of the local fed bank. I understand that. So your reasoning for the fed bank to want members is so they can invest to purchase 'stock' but not have a say in how the bank is ran?

I guess my question would be why is there a need for a fed bank? Is it for regulation or what is the purpose?

The Fed is the US Central Bank - it controls and manages the money supply, in addition to other Central Bank type functions - it's organised on a regional basis and to benefit from its protection banks must buy in.

Stock, shares, equity etc all come in different classes. Lots of companies and corporations sell shares that allow you to draw a dividend, but don't give you voting rights.

kowloon · 13-12-2014 6:55pm

Sir Osis of Liver. wrote: »

Who knows what that evil bastard keeps in his fridge.

Nothing sinister, just a selection of hooker heads.

waking dreams · 13-12-2014 6:55pm

Dean0088 wrote: »

I **** you not, this planet contains humans and that's all we need to survive. We're the smartest mother****ers in the galaxy and observable universe. We are so high on the food chain it's ridiculous. We're actually growing food and body parts in labs when just a few years ago it was a theory. Within five years battery technology will be at a point that drones will be able to fly for weeks and a tatoo on your arm will be electrified to change and display messages. We'll have chips implanted in our retinas and be able to get in a car, go asleep and wake up in America thanks to Virgins "travel pod" plans.

Every idea and notion you have about the economy and collectivism is the antithesis to this and ultimately people won't go for it because it'll put a stop to advancement of the human race. In simple terms, if you take away someone iPhone (or potential future iPhone) they'll throw a strop.

Within 40 years we'll be colonizing Mars. throughout thousands of years humans have done nothing but grow, and grow and grow. The population of Europe was cut in HALF just a few hundred years ago by the plague and we're still ticking.

At the end of the day every human is self-interested. You, me, everyone. We look after "me and mine". The only reason populations band together in times of war, emergency or nationalism (woo! Hitler!) is because it appeals to each individuals self interest to do so.

The system of Capitalism is so natural it exists in everyone. Charity and social institutions (many of which I support - education and healthcare) only exist and remain self sufficient when the money's been earned to pay for them. I only give away my crusts when I've had my fill of bread - survival. But we live in a modern society with soft cushions to sit on and plenty planned towns, right angles everywhere etc... so we forget that.

Society is one big malfunction that depends on everyone making themselves happy first, and their neighbor second.

I agree with almost everything you said, and you said it so well. My opinion differs to yours with regards to humans and how we think. I do not believe that people value products rather or over human life. And I think if presented with a life or death situation that humans would naturally drop the iphone to spare their actual life.

I would love if we could say with absolute assurance that we will never be presented with a life or death situation on a global level. A situation that we as humans have created. If the consumer world continues in the fashion in which it is headed we will eventually have to face that ultimatum.

How does the human race prevent something like that from happening now? I hear a lot about world leaders and how they own my as*, I would much rather hear about the actual efforts that are going into making a positive change in the world. Obviously RTE cant help me here ha ha

jimgoose · 13-12-2014 6:56pm

Dean0088 wrote: »

How civilized and geographically correct.

The sort of neckbeard who feels the need to point out to me that Port Laoise is not in Texas is unlikely to influence my view one way or t'other.

Fukuyama · 13-12-2014 6:57pm

Highflyer13 wrote: »

Aside from the snide remarks should he not have been penalised over the findings of the Moriarty report? Do you think its acceptable that little or nothing happened Denis when he was found to be corrupt? Whos to say he won't do it again? Fool me once......

If it goes through an actual court, yes. If it's mob justice, no.

I couldn't give a **** either way. It's a storm in a teacup as far as I'm concerned. A sideshow to distract people.

"Political Donations" is the oldest scandal going.

Whether Denis O Brian gets a smack of a truck or earns another billion tomorrow, I'm still gonna make a cup of tea and watch The Simpsons. You feel free to either celebrate or protest, it won't make a shred of actual difference to you, Ireland, the world or your bank balance. And you've wasted a day.

KomradeBishop · 13-12-2014 6:59pm

Dean0088 wrote: »

...

Good article here, from an ex-NASA physicist:
http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the-math/2012/04/economist-meets-physicist/

Summary: Economic growth is inextricably tied to growth in power generation (even if only by a small amount, that is still enough to cause problems), and growth in power generation is (by the laws of thermodynamics) inextricably linked to increased waste-heat being put out into the Earth's atmosphere.
At our current rate of exponential growth, Earth's surface would reach boiling point (100°C) in 400 years - obviously this is unsustainable.

Our level of economic growth - and capitalism in its current form, depends upon neverending economic growth - is simply unsustainable, and the pressures that the current dominant economic system will bring upon the planet, will bring that economic system crashing down long before 400 years.

In 100 or more years time, historians will probably look back on our current economic system, as bizarre and insane.

Highflyer13 · 13-12-2014 7:00pm

moxin wrote: »

It's ironic that the brigade who moan about balancing the national accounts promoting water charges, spending cuts etc also support an exiled tax billionaire controlling our media and fuel stations.

Reading through the thread now and Its unreal. I was just about to post this. Its all the same posters.

jimgoose · 13-12-2014 7:01pm

Dean0088 wrote: »

If it goes through an actual court, yes. If it's mob justice, no.

I couldn't give a **** either way. It's a storm in a teacup as far as I'm concerned. A sideshow to distract people.

"Political Donations" is the oldest scandal going.

Whether Denis O Brian gets a smack of a truck or earns another billion tomorrow, I'm still gonna make a cup of tea and watch The Simpsons. You feel free to either celebrate or protest, it won't make a shred of actual difference to you, Ireland, the world or your bank balance. And you've wasted a day.

Roll another spliff, why dontcha. This is what has us where we are.

Wurly · 13-12-2014 7:03pm

Jawgap wrote: »

No, I've heard 'the Fed is privately owned and controlled by foreign interests' conspiracy theory before.

Everything is just a theory though. How do you know yours is a fact? So that's why i'm asking you how you arrived at your belief that it's the contrary to what i'm saying.

Someone even floated it in an economics lecture I was attending once.

Who and in what context?

All this makes me laugh though......everyone is railing against DO'B but I doubt no more than 5% of people know the name of the manager of their Local Hospital Group - I wonder who will wreck more citizens' lives and who will people protest against???

Fair point. We should know this information.

What makes you think that people won't protest against this? Why are you angry at protesters? One thing at a time. I'll happily stand in solidarity with you to protest against the hospital groups.

Fukuyama · 13-12-2014 7:07pm

waking dreams wrote: »

I agree with almost everything you said, and you said it so well. My opinion differs to yours with regards to humans and how we think. I do not believe that people value products rather or over human life. And I think if presented with a life or death situation that humans would naturally drop the iphone to spare their actual life.

I would love if we could say with absolute assurance that we will never be presented with a life or death situation on a global level. A situation that we as humans have created. If the consumer world continues in the fashion in which it is headed we will eventually have to face that ultimatum.

How does the human race prevent something like that from happening now? I hear a lot about world leaders and how they own my as*, I would much rather hear about the actual efforts that are going into making a positive change in the world. Obviously RTE cant help me here ha ha

If the world is ever faced with a big race ending problem, we'll turn to the scientists to fix it and compensate them greatly. In fact, we're doing that already.

I don't think people would chose an iPhone over a human life in an actual life or death moment. Nobody pulls an iPad from a burning building. That wasn't what I was saying and that's not the issue in the modern economy.

However, we're more than happy to buy and iPhone once we don't have to look at the poor little Chinese kid who makes it. The real question is whether we want to sacrifice our modern lifestyles for that kid. And we won't.

The only people who buy sweatshop free clothes from American Apparel and the few other brands that make them are young white hipsters with their parents money. It's literally a fashion statement to buy "eco" products or "sweatshop free" products and then tweet about it from an iPhone manufactured by Foxxcon whose workers literally kill themselves on the factory floor the conditions are so terrible.

That might sound like an argument AGAINST capitalism but actually I'm just pointing out how absurd humans can be. Give people (even the most raging, rebellious socialist) a choice between their iPhone and existing in a "local" economy in all its 1850's glory and I think you'll know what (selfish but reasonable) decision he'll make.

Fukuyama · 13-12-2014 7:12pm

KomradeBishop wrote: »

Good article here, from an ex-NASA physicist:
http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the-math/2012/04/economist-meets-physicist/

Summary: Economic growth is inextricably tied to growth in power generation (even if only by a small amount, that is still enough to cause problems), and growth in power generation is (by the laws of thermodynamics) inextricably linked to increased waste-heat being put out into the Earth's atmosphere.
At our current rate of exponential growth, Earth's surface would reach boiling point (100°C) in 400 years - obviously this is unsustainable.

Our level of economic growth - and capitalism in its current form, depends upon neverending economic growth - is simply unsustainable, and the pressures that the current dominant economic system will bring upon the planet, will bring that economic system crashing down long before 400 years.

In 100 or more years time, historians will probably look back on our current economic system, as bizarre and insane.

I doubt it. That guy is most probably right concerning global warming, however we'll come up with a way to prevent it. We need smart guys like him to warn us of the dangers that lie ahead. And so we adjust course as we are doing right now.

Oil and Coal still dominate world energy. However, it's rapidly switching to nuclear, wind, solar and biochemical solution that are so crazy they just might work. We've used fire since man first stood upright so it'll take another 40 years to make a full switch. But switch we shall.

tipptom · 13-12-2014 7:14pm

Beaner1 wrote: »

I believe that he was involved in corruption back then. I don't think this has only relevance to the current situation as DOB, Irish politicians and society has moved on quite a bit since.

Do you take Dennis money envelopes straight to FG Sarah or do you get someone further down the line to do it.

Autonomous Cowherd · 13-12-2014 7:16pm

Dean0088 wrote: »

If the world is ever faced with a big race ending problem, we'll turn to the scientists to fix it and compensate them greatly. In fact, we're doing that already.

I don't think people would chose an iPhone over a human life in an actual life or death moment. Nobody pulls an iPad from a burning building. That wasn't what I was saying and that's not the issue in the modern economy.

However, we're more than happy to buy and iPhone once we don't have to look at the poor little Chinese kid who makes it. The real question is whether we want to sacrifice our modern lifestyles for that kid. And we won't.

The only people who buy sweatshop free clothes from American Apparel and the few other brands that make them are young white hipsters with their parents money. It's literally a fashion statement to buy "eco" products or "sweatshop free" products and then tweet about it from an iPhone manufactured by Foxxcon whose workers literally kill themselves on the factory floor the conditions are so terrible.

That might sound like an argument AGAINST capitalism but actually I'm just pointing out how absurd humans can be. Give people (even the most raging, rebellious socialist) a choice between their iPhone and existing in a "local" economy in all its 1850's glory and I think you'll know what (selfish but reasonable) decision he'll make.

Smiles. You are right on many issues. Sounds like perfect utilitarianism. But you have enormous faith in some transhumanist future that presumes we will evolve into a benevolent trekkie-style species. I do not believe we can do this without at some point examining our rampant consumerism and self-interest. Call it a spiritual awakening, if you will. We can only depend on science to save a portion of us, those who can afford augmentation like you outline....pity about the rest.

Fukuyama · 13-12-2014 7:17pm

tipptom wrote: »

Do you takr Dennis money envelopes straight to FG Sarah or do you get someone further down the line to do it.

These kind of comments are pure garbage and the reason the left in Ireland are a laughing stock. Any differing opinion and suddenly you're an FG member, "Blueshirt" or somehow directly involved in corruption.

Always light on reason or explanation or actual, workable solutions that don't come from IndyMedia.

Carry on though, you're doing a 5hite job at promoting socialism in Ireland.

KomradeBishop · 13-12-2014 7:20pm

Dean0088 wrote: »

If the world is ever faced with a big race ending problem, we'll turn to the scientists to fix it and compensate them greatly. In fact, we're doing that already.

Dean0088 wrote: »

I doubt it. That guy is most probably right concerning global warming, however we'll come up with a way to prevent it. We need smart guys like him to warn us of the dangers that lie ahead. And so we adjust course as we are doing right now.

Oil and Coal still dominate world energy. However, it's rapidly switching to nuclear, wind, solar and biochemical solution that are so crazy they just might work. We've used fire since man first stood upright so it'll take another 40 years to make a full switch. But switch we shall.

There is nothing to show that technology will provide any silver bullets - that is a faith-based argument; by the time we start having useful commercial fusion plants, it will have been more than a century since the idea was first realized, and will probably be closer to a century and a half before it's widely adopted (which shows that these promises of technological 'silver bullets', tend to be wildly overoptimistic).

The physicist in that link, explains how we are already past the point where technology can save us, from a pain-free transition to more renewable energy sources.

In the end: You have to end endless exponential growth, to prevent eventual climate change - that is straight-out incompatible with our current form of capitalism, which requires neverending growth.

Jawgap · 13-12-2014 7:23pm

Wurly wrote: »

Everything is just a theory though. How do you know yours is a fact? So that's why i'm asking you how you arrived at your belief that it's the contrary to what i'm saying.

All knowledge is contestable - there are no truths. What I do know is there is an act of congress, there is an institution and they file returns. I'm content with accepting what I've read from various sources both supportive and critical of the model. People are obviously free to interrogate other sources and take a different view.

Wurly wrote: »

Who and in what context?

Well let's see, it was nearly 10 years ago, there were about 200 people in the lecture and I didn't get everyone's name, but it was Durham Uni Business School.

Wurly wrote: »

Fair point. We should know this information.

What makes you think that people won't protest against this? Why are you angry at protesters? One thing at a time. I'll happily stand in solidarity with you to protest against the hospital groups.

Because Ireland is a parochial country.

Also, I'm not against or angry at the protesters - I think the priorities are screwed up and they are letting themselves be manipulated. Why not turn some of that skepticism on the leaders of the water protest......

.....if those leaders were truly interested in social justice, they'd tell people "don't pay, now let's go help some people....."

And you miss the point on the LHGs - the organisational structure is not the problem, it's the lack of accountability. Maybe if people were interested in resolving the problems with the health services, they'd understand the extent of the accountability deficit therein

Fukuyama · 13-12-2014 7:26pm

Autonomous Cowherd wrote: »

Smiles. You are right on many issues. Sounds like perfect utilitarianism. But you have enormous faith in some transhumanist future that presumes we will evolve into a benevolent trekkie-style species. I do not believe we can do this without at some point examining our rampant consumerism and self-interest. Call it a spiritual awakening, if you will. We can only depend on science to save a portion of us, those who can afford augmentation like you outline....pity about the rest.

Consumerism came from post-war USA. Wants suddenly became needs and corporations made us all insecure so we HAD to buy the new car, house, phone, shirt whatever.

This wasn't evil or a conspiracy. It was and is marketing.

The youngest generations (born after 9/11) are remarkably marketing savvy. Millennial and Gen Xers are too. Brand loyalty is in the toilet for these age groups and corporations don't know what to do about it because more marketing isn't the answer. It might seem like there are brands everywhere but Starbucks and MacDonalds are loosing ground to small groups of college students setting up cafés and burrito joints. They've had a bigger impact on their profits and share price than any protest, injunction or boycott.

So, remarkably, tacking corporations isn't best done through socialism but through capitalism.

And if you think Apple and Samsung aren't scratching their heads at how to tackle this little gem then you're wrong.

Setting up a business and tackling problems for the average person is easier now than it every has been throughout history. And, to balance things out, you can open your laptop and buy Apple shares if you fancy.

I also don't put faith in a trans-human future. The technology exists and is being used. Soldiers with no limbs are having bionic legs hooked up to their brains while a new leg is being grown in Berlin for them. We're sending humans to Mars soon to live there forever.

Fukuyama · 13-12-2014 7:41pm

KomradeBishop wrote: »

There is nothing to show that technology will provide any silver bullets - that is a faith-based argument; by the time we start having useful commercial fusion plants, it will have been more than a century since the idea was first realized, and will probably be closer to a century and a half before it's widely adopted (which shows that these promises of technological 'silver bullets', tend to be wildly overoptimistic).

The physicist in that link, explains how we are already past the point where technology can save us, from a pain-free transition to more renewable energy sources.

In the end: You have to end endless exponential growth, to prevent eventual climate change - that is straight-out incompatible with our current form of capitalism, which requires neverending growth.

I'm no expert on gloabal warming so I don't know how much I can offer here but what I will say is that it's a wild argument against Denis O Brian and capitalism because there are no reasonable alternatives (I know you weren't targeting him in saying it).

I'd rather a painful switch to biofuels or whatever than a painful (and bloody) switch to world-wide socialism. Particularly the brand of socialism advocating asset redistribution.

Germany is leading the pack IMO when it comes to alternative energy because they binned nuclear, told NIMBY moaners to shut it and built more windfarms and experimental solar farms than God could.

A few months back (a year?) Ireland was proposing a wind farm that would have put us in a sellers position (main market - UK). Straight away the issue was canned because people didn't want a windfarm spoiling their view in the bog arse of Leitrim or somewhere.

Where was the social unity there? Ireland could have literally held a huge trump card against the "old enemy" and put ourselves in a great position to be Europe's little Atlantic generator with a finger on the power button.

People are self interested and any solution has to work with, not against that human trait.

Autonomous Cowherd · 13-12-2014 7:42pm

Dean0088 wrote: »

Consumerism came from post-war USA. Wants suddenly became needs and corporations made us all insecure so we HAD to buy the new car, house, phone, shirt whatever.

This wasn't evil or a conspiracy. It was and is marketing.

The youngest generations (born after 9/11) are remarkably marketing savvy. Millennial and Gen Xers are too. Brand loyalty is in the toilet for these age groups and corporations don't know what to do about it because more marketing isn't the answer. It might seem like there are brands everywhere but Starbucks and MacDonalds are loosing ground to small groups of college students setting up cafés and burrito joints. They've had a bigger impact on their profits and share price than any protest, injunction or boycott.

So, remarkably, tacking corporations isn't best done through socialism but through capitalism.

And if you think Apple and Samsung aren't scratching their heads at how to tackle this little gem then you're wrong.

Setting up a business and tackling problems for the average person is easier now than it every has been throughout history. And, to balance things out, you can open your laptop and buy Apple shares if you fancy.

I also don't put faith in a trans-human future. The technology exists and is being used. Soldiers with no limbs are having bionic legs hooked up to their brains while a new leg is being grown in Berlin for them. We're sending humans to Mars soon to live there forever.

no, no you misunderstand me..I dont think EVERYTHING is a conspiracy..just because some things ARE. I know it was marketing and i know the age of interruption marketing is over and I know on mobile digital devices the marketers are at their wits end because NOTHING works...

But no, it is still easier to do business if you are wealthy in the first place. That is why there has been a verifiably HUGE transfer of wealth from the middle and lower classes to the richest people on earth since the bank collapse in 2008

And...i do not want to live on Mars. I like it here

Wurly · 13-12-2014 7:46pm

Jawgap wrote: »

All knowledge is contestable - there are no truths. What I do know is there is an act of congress, there is an institution and they file returns. I'm content with accepting what I've read from various sources both supportive and critical of the model. People are obviously free to interrogate other sources and take a different view.

So why is the model in such a mess?
Who do congress report to? Who are congress?
What institution? Where do they file their returns to?

I'm not trying to be pedantic or square up to you or anything.

I'm asking these questions to see if anyone actually knows the answers to these questions. It seems to me that we hear the word 'congress' or 'returns' and we go "oh, okay then". I've certainly been guilty of this in the past. How do we know we can trust these 'returns' or 'congress'? If we can, why all the secrecy? Why all the mess? Why all the corruption and scandal?

What sources for and against have you read that stood out for you? I'm genuinely interested because I really want to learn as much as I can. if you could link me to a few bits, that would be great.

Well let's see, it was nearly 10 years ago, there were about 200 people in the lecture and I didn't get everyone's name, but it was Durham Uni Business School.

I asked for more information on it because you mentioned it in your post. I thought there was more to the story. My mistake.

Also, I'm not against or angry at the protesters - I think the priorities are screwed up and they are letting themselves be manipulated. Why not turn some of that skepticism on the leaders of the water protest......

Do you think the protesters should question the interest of the anti water charge leaders? Why?
As a protester, i'd like to know how I am being manipulated. Can you be more specific? And how are our priorities screwed up? I ask because I think the movement could do with some tweaking and i'm trying to figure out a way to make it better.

.....if those leaders were truly interested in social justice, they'd tell people "don't pay, now let's go help some people....."

This is the first time in a long time that people have united against a particular agenda. If this movement works, then the people will have faith in themselves once more and think 'what's next to solve'. They'll feel confident that they have the means to change it. But it starts from a single step. And from that step, we generate a feeling of power. And then we can solve more. And we most certainly will.

And you miss the point on the LHGs - the organisational structure is not the problem, it's the lack of accountability. Maybe if people were interested in resolving the problems with the health services, they'd understand the extent of the accountability deficit therein

I think it's definitely an issue of accountability but I also think it's to do with the structure itself. Can you deny that the current structure really benefits a select few only? In my opinion, that is not a non-problematic structure.

waking dreams · 13-12-2014 7:46pm

Dean0088 wrote: »

If the world is ever faced with a big race ending problem, we'll turn to the scientists to fix it and compensate them greatly. In fact, we're doing that already.

I don't think people would chose an iPhone over a human life in an actual life or death moment. Nobody pulls an iPad from a burning building. That wasn't what I was saying and that's not the issue in the modern economy.

However, we're more than happy to buy and iPhone once we don't have to look at the poor little Chinese kid who makes it. The real question is whether we want to sacrifice our modern lifestyles for that kid. And we won't.

The only people who buy sweatshop free clothes from American Apparel and the few other brands that make them are young white hipsters with their parents money. It's literally a fashion statement to buy "eco" products or "sweatshop free" products and then tweet about it from an iPhone manufactured by Foxxcon whose workers literally kill themselves on the factory floor the conditions are so terrible.

That might sound like an argument AGAINST capitalism but actually I'm just pointing out how absurd humans can be. Give people (even the most raging, rebellious socialist) a choice between their iPhone and existing in a "local" economy in all its 1850's glory and I think you'll know what (selfish but reasonable) decision he'll make.

Thank you for your posts, I must say that I am getting a good insight into the world through your view and I like it. I couldnt bring myself to looking into the goings on in those sweatshops at the moment as I know it will depress me. And that ties perfectly into what you said about yuppy type people tweeting crap about the crap they bought using a device that has cost lives to make. It is so incredibly crazy. I still differ though with regards to human behavior.

It took the horrific death of someone very close to me to actually start questioning life and its events as I see them. I went on a quest for information. I am a geek for ted talks and I am fascinated and want to know what conscience is and how much of it is related to our actual brains. My mind fascinates me. Through this journey of understanding I now have a completely different outlook on life and I have never been happier.

I believe that we are all equal regardless of skin color, gender, nationality etc. I do not believe in the current governing system that rules the western world. Every current issue world wide is solvable. We cannot excel with technology under this current world system, you may think we can but we cant. I work in Analytics. 90% of world's data has been generated over last 3 years. The tools that are on the current market to gather such information are increasing in capability.

From example I have developed a patent pending process that successfully enforces a worldwide law that is completely out the current authorities hands. I have given them the solution. The Government in Ireland, UK and US are not willing to proceed any further with the process. Given the nature of patents I cannot expose what that law is.

I am an actual example of how technology to assist with human evolution is dismissed by the current western world system. There are many people like me who have developed fascinating tools, such as generating electricity without using the combustion of atoms, Numerous cancer cures, Tools that would mean we never have to burn coal, gas or oil. The list of amazing technology goes on and on.

You can read about all this stuff online if you look for it. It;s a crazy world but I do believe that with the likes of GMO getting recognition as a 'really bad idea', which it is, that people the world around will realise that Patents are very dangerous and actually stop the evolution of technology.

So take it from someone who has gone through the patent process. I have no agenda here with regards to how people perceive their daily worlds. But I can sure as hell say it is a disgusting system that works against possibilities and human evolution. They are now going to start patenting seeds. Something that was impossible before GMO arrived. Once our food source is patented we are screwed. That is a fact.

Letree · 13-12-2014 7:52pm

MightyMandarin wrote: »

Meh, he's a smart businessman and I don't begrudge him for what he's done; I'd probably have done the same stuff he's done if I knew it would make me ridiculously rich.

If everyone was like you we truly would live in a banana republic.

Karl Stein · 13-12-2014 7:57pm

Dean0088 wrote: »

Every idea and notion you have about the economy and collectivism is the antithesis to this and ultimately people won't go for it because it'll put a stop to advancement of the human race.

You are utterly clueless and/or you've swallowed the propaganda hook, line, sinker, rod and boat. Consider the modern smartphone. It simply wouldn't exist as it is without government driven research and development. Just about every component and capability of a modern smartphone was developed or rapidly advanced by way of public money being used in institutions like CERN and NASA.

The capacitive touch screen was developed for CERN. The digital camera has its heritage in NASA. The development of electric hand tools for NASA astronauts advanced battery technology. GPS is wholly attributable to government driven communication satellite technology.

Consider MIT in the US, 75% of its funding comes from US government sources:

The telephone, electromagnets, radars, high-speed photography, office photocopiers, cancer treatments, pocket calculators, computers, the internet, the decoding of the human genome, lasers, space travel . . . the list of innovations that involved essential contributions from MIT and its faculty goes on and on.

theguardian.com

Fukuyama · 13-12-2014 7:58pm

Autonomous Cowherd wrote: »

no, no you misunderstand me..I dont think EVERYTHING is a conspiracy..just because some things ARE. I know it was marketing and i know the age of interruption marketing is over and I know on mobile digital devices the marketers are at their wits end because NOTHING works...

But no, it is still easier to do business if you are wealthy in the first place. That is why there has been a verifiably HUGE transfer of wealth from the middle and lower classes to the richest people on earth since the bank collapse in 2008

And...i do not want to live on Mars. I like it here

Who do you think owns Mac Donalds? Some guy in a tower laughing manically while fondling his McNuggets?

The big joke is that there's a good chance your pension (as opposed to that ****ty state one socialism would give you) is tacked onto big corporate stocks like Apple, Exxon but hopefully not Tesco.

If you want you can buy a little bit of MacDonalds tomorrow instead of buying a Big Mac, and every year you'll get a dividend and maybe you can sell your shares for more than you bought them for. You'll even get to vote on how the company is run. It's mad actually. Corporations are little money orientated democracies where everyone votes in their own self interests.

People get rich by making themselves rich or coming from a wealthy family. To begrudge either might make us feel better about ourselves but it isn't going to do any good.

There was no "transfer of wealth" to the 1%. People panicked, sold their assets to "get out". Some people from individuals right up to corporation went around buying all these assets whether they be houses in Dublin or Junk Bonds knowing that in five years a rebound would come. And here we are.

As for digital marketing - funnily enough the only marketing tactics which seem to work are genuine attempts to engage, create and sell. Corporations haven't a clue how to operate online (bar a few) and KickStarters have propelled technology like the Oculus Rift and 3D printing into our homes. Crowdfunding is like the origins of debt markets (1920s) playing out on the internet in an oh-so capitalistic way that allows the average person to buy in or make something themselves (and if they're smart, they'll incorporate). It's a drop in the ocean but in five years it wont be.

waking dreams · 13-12-2014 8:03pm

Jawgap wrote: »

And you miss the point on the LHGs - the organisational structure is not the problem, it's the lack of accountability. Maybe if people were interested in resolving the problems with the health services, they'd understand the extent of the accountability deficit therein

You are looking at a system on a lower level than which it truly operates. So basing your opinions from there will never solve the actual issues. I am not saying that I am sitting on top of the HSE however why do we have a Health Service?

We need one as a nation to look after the sick and injured. How do we do that? We need a building so sick people can come and meet with other people who have expertise in the medical arena. Who pays those nurses and doctors? The people of the country do through a taxation system. Great. Who pays for the medicine that the sick people need? The people of the country do through a taxation system. Who makes the medicine? Medicine companies do. How do they make the medicine? using forward thinking and technology ? Who does the forward thinking and creates the technology? Scientists and other professionals in that arena do, How does that technology and medicine get to my local hospital?

Your local hospital buy from pharmaceutical companies that patent their technology and sell it to hospitals to treat sick people. But a lot of this medicine is not working and has scary side effects why? Because once a patent is involved nobody can infringe on that medicine, so no body can make and develop a better cure otherwise they will get sued.

Has cancer been cured? yes many times over, but it is in the interest of the pharmaceutical industry to not market such technology as it would dissolve the money generated on the current market that continues to pay the wages of the industry.

That is reality.

Pocoyo · 13-12-2014 8:06pm

Jawgap wrote: »

I'm not supporting the man, I'm just against whacked-out conspiracy theories!!

And people don't have to buy from him.

Just because you are too ignorant and lazy to read the truth in the fact based links provided doesnt mean they are conspiracy theories :rolleyes:

Fukuyama · 13-12-2014 8:07pm

Karl Stein wrote: »

You are utterly clueless and/or you've swallowed the propaganda hook, line, sinker, rod and boat. Consider the modern smartphone. It simply wouldn't exist as it is without government driven research and development. Just about every component and capability of a modern smartphone was developed or rapidly advanced by way of public money being used in institutions like CERN and NASA.

The capacitive touch screen was developed for CERN. The digital camera has its heritage in NASA. The development of electric hand tools for NASA astronauts advanced battery technology. GPS is wholly attributable to government driven communication satellite technology.

Consider MIT in the US, 75% of its funding comes from US government sources:

Government funded, not driven.

Most technological advancements in the 20th century came during WW2, but not from government. From private firms who developed technologies and sold them to the Allies (and Axis).

Siemens are a great example seeing as we're on the subject of water meters. They won many Nazi contracts and made incredible advances thanks to Third Reich tenders.

Google Glass comes from private technology military companies who target Western militaries with infantry born fighting systems/devices. Not from a US Army lab or some such.

Also - you are aware that NASA don't actually MAKE anything, aren't you? They didn't build the shuttle or Apollo despite what the newreel says. They're a government branch that tenders contracts to Boeing Aerospace, Lockheed etc.... Don't know about CERN. I imagine it's a similar setup.

Your version of events would better fit the Soviet model of government run labs and departments. And what did they make? A fairly robust assault rifle and **** missile systems. The operating systems in their computers were clones of western Atari, IBM and Apple PCs for gods sake.

This is also a fairy good discussion so far. There's no need to jump in head first calling me clueless or some kind of propaganda guzzler. Everyone's being fairly pleasant which is a change for AH.

Jawgap · 13-12-2014 8:13pm

Wurly wrote: »

So why is the model in such a mess?
Who do congress report to? Who are congress?
What institution? Where do they file their returns to?

I'm not trying to be pedantic or square up to you or anything. I'm asking these questions to see if anyone actually knows the answers to these questions. It seems to me that we hear the word 'congress' or 'returns' and we go "oh, okay then". I've certainly been guilty of this in the past. How do we know we can trust these 'returns' or 'congress'? If we can, why all the secrecy? Why all the mess? Why all the corruption and scandal?

Seriously? You've never heard of the US Congress.......

Wurly wrote: »

What sources for and against have you read that stood out for you? I'm genuinely interested because I really want to learn as much as I can. if you could link me to a few bits, that would be great.

Again, seriously? Google, Google Scholar and JSTOR are your friend.......

Wurly wrote: »

I asked for more information on it because you mentioned it in your post. I thought there was more to the story. My mistake.

Do you think the protesters should question the interest of the anti water charge leaders? Why?

because as citizens we are always honour-bound to question our leaders, especially the ones who appoint themselves to that position....

Wurly wrote: »

As a protester, i'd like to know how I am being manipulated. Can you be more specific? And how are our priorities screwed up? I ask because I think the movement could do with some tweaking and i'm trying to figure out a way to make it better.

Once again, seriously.......take a trip to your local A&E tonight and see what you can see on the way there and back and then see if you agree that popular opinion and those leading the water protests have their priorities right.......and that's before you even get to the grossly unfair and regressive USC.......

Wurly wrote: »

This is the first time in a long time that people have united against a particular agenda. If this movement works, then the people will have faith in themselves once more and think 'what's next to solve'. They'll feel confident that they have the means to change it. But it starts from a single step. And from that step, we generate a feeling of power. And then we can solve more. And we most certainly will.

I think it's definitely an issue of accountability but I also think it's to do with the structure itself. Can you deny that the current structure really benefits a select few only? In my opinion, that is not a non-problematic structure.

Except they won't - 2011 was the highwater mark of Irish democracy.

It's like the PAYE marches of the 1980s, which I participated in, during the era of 'fiscal rectitude' - Irish people will protest when it hurts financially, but they won't for their fellow citizens in the same numbers.

Karl Stein · 13-12-2014 8:15pm

Dean0088 wrote: »

Corporations are little money orientated democracies where everyone votes in their own self interests.

Corporations are creations of government and are nothing like democracies.

Corporate law, moreover, requires that directors owe their loyalty to the corporation itself, and does not permit them to represent the specific interests of shareholders the way constituents are represented in a democracy.

www.aei.org

People get rich by making themselves rich

This is meaningless. What is it you're trying to say exactly?

Jawgap · 13-12-2014 8:15pm

Pocoyo wrote: »

Just because you are too ignorant and lazy to read the truth in the fact based links provided doesnt mean they are conspiracy theories :rolleyes:

post up some of those links and we'll have a laugh read......

Wurly · 13-12-2014 8:17pm

Jawgap wrote: »

post up some of those links and we'll have a laugh read......

And equally, if you post up some stories from Denis O'Brien controlled media, we can have a counter good laugh.

I've asked you to provide your sources of information but you seem unwilling to do so. Considering truth is subjective and surely none of us can claim to know everything, how can you dismiss the other side of the coin as a laughing matter with no substance?

Wurly · 13-12-2014 8:20pm

Jawgap wrote: »

Seriously? You've never heard of the US Congress.......
Again, seriously? Google, Google Scholar and JSTOR are your friend.......

Sorry, you appear to have missed my point. WHO are congress? Names please. Does anyone know??

Once again, seriously.......take a trip to your local A&E tonight and see what you can see on the way there and back and then see if you agree that popular opinion and those leading the water protests have their priorities right.......and that's before you even get to the grossly unfair and regressive USC.......

Okay, i'll see you there. I'm presuming you'll be protesting outside?

Except they won't - 2011 was the highwater mark of Irish democracy.

It's like the PAYE marches of the 1980s, which I participated in, during the era of 'fiscal rectitude' - Irish people will protest when it hurts financially, but they won't for their fellow citizens in the same numbers.

I would. So would my friends. So please speak for certain members of society and not for all.

Jawgap · 13-12-2014 8:23pm

Wurly wrote: »

And equally, if you post up some stories from Denis O'Brien controlled media, we can have a counter good laugh.

I've asked you to provide your sources of information but you seem unwilling to do so. Considering truth is subjective and surely none of us can claim to know everything, how can you dismiss the other side of the coin as a laughing matter with no substance?

Well to be honest I don't read d'Indo - because it's become a comic.........Newstalk is tabloid radio......and Today FM don't really do objective news......

Well I did point to Google Scholar and JSTOR - but if you want me to dig out my stuff from uni, well sorry - I'm not climbing into the attic to dig out that stuff.

But if you want a source for the Fed - Meltzer's "A History of the Federal Reserve" would be a good start.......

Pocoyo · 13-12-2014 8:23pm

Jawgap wrote: »

post up some of those links and we'll have a laugh read......

Wait what do you believe the conspiracy is exactly?

Im so dumbfounded by your lack of knowledge im assuming its going to be way off the mark.

in your head what is the conspiracy is it that uncle denis is an alien or controller of the NWO??

Fukuyama · 13-12-2014 8:24pm

Karl Stein wrote: »

Corporations are creations of government and are nothing like democracies.

The Corporation is the creation of people, though government via legislation. There's no big conspiracy. If we got rid of corporation every limited company in this country with debt would become the debt of investors - ordinary people whose pensions are derived from stocks or direct investors.

And yes, directors owe their allegiance to the corporation (under law! gasp!).

Every first year business student is taught why this is: A director (who are usually shareholders) cannot act in the interest of a shareholder (ie. themselves or another) because they have been entrusted to run the corporation for the shareholders who invest in it and want a return. They are open to election or impeachment by their shareholders at the AGM or an EGM if necessary.

Companies are bound under the same laws as people with regard to legal conduct and directors found to be breaking laws themselves (even through a corporation) can be prosecuted. It happens all the time.

I've answered your post re technological development and you came back at me with some hilarious half truth that "the government make corporation" which is only true if we dim the lights A LOT.

I can make Dean0088 Ltd tomorrow if I want. There's no big conspiracy here.

Wurly · 13-12-2014 8:26pm

Jawgap wrote: »

Well to be honest I don't read d'Indo - because it's become a comic.........Newstalk is tabloid radio......and Today FM don't really do objective news......

Agreed.

Well I did point to Google Scholar and JSTOR - but if you want me to dig out my stuff from uni, well sorry - I'm not climbing into the attic to dig out that stuff.

Well, I was asking for specific info that helped you form your belief. I'm doing that so that I can understand your opinion better. I wouldn't climb into the attic either. I just thought you might have some interesting articles for me to read.

But if you want a source for the Fed - Meltzer's "A History of the Federal Reserve" would be a good start.......

That's more like it.

Thanks, i'll have a read of that now.

Fukuyama · 13-12-2014 8:27pm

Wurly wrote: »

Sorry, you appear to have missed my point. WHO are congress? Names please. Does anyone know??

Where are you running with this?

Who are congress? Effectively, they're the US version of the Oireachtas. I'm sure you could find a list of names fairly handy online...

foxtrot101 · 13-12-2014 8:34pm

Phoebas wrote: »

The normal standard of a verdict of a court of law.

The Criminal Assets Bureau investigated the tribunal findings. They presented a report outlining the suspected or potential criminality they had identified to the Garda Commissioner late 2011. Apparently the DPP is still deliberating on whether there are grounds to launch a full investigation 3 years on.:rolleyes:

Denis O'Brien Irelands Sinister Fringe.

Comments