Leftists and the road to ruin.

Godge

bellda wrote: »

Anglo was popular with developers - not the general public as you seem to suggest. The bank shut down however as per capitalism the share holders and bond holders should have taken the loss (CAPITALISM). Amazingly the Irish people were lumbered with this **** sandwich. "Their day of reckoning". As you put it. F uckin spa.

With capitalism, the shareholders first, and then the bondholders and depositers together.

In Ireland the shareholders lost everything but the FF government had guaranteed the rest.

denlaw

realitykeeper wrote: »

Nationalizing the banks was a leftist policy. True capitalists would have let them fail and then imprisoned the bankers, the defaulting developers and the criminally negligent Fianna Failers. Its the principle, you see.

So we'll blame the left even though it was a right wing government in power at the time....
Right you are..

gene_slackman

realitykeeper wrote: »

Nationalizing the banks was a leftist policy. True capitalists would have let them fail and then imprisoned the bankers, the defaulting developers and the criminally negligent Fianna Failers. Its the principle, you see.

the banks were not nationalised , only the banking debt was

Farmer Pudsey

denlaw wrote: »

So we'll blame the left even though it was a right wing government in power at the time....
Right you are..

I would not describe the FF/PD government as rightwing. It raised the minimum wage to the highest in Europe. We had the highest rates of social welfare as well. Along with that we had virtually the highest tax rates in Europe with very high levels of government spend across Education and Health. all through the time of the Celtic Tiger boom the Trade Unions had a cosy seat at the table. It amazing how these unions forget that they sat there all that time and never complained . I doubt if any rightwing government would have allowed Benchmarking Mark1 not to mind Benchmarking Mark2.

FF/PD's failure to manage the economy from 2002-2008 is the main cause of the bust. The failure of the present government ( and it is a left right so called alliance) is it failure to cut welfare and government spending to balance the budget in a fair way. Instead it loaded taxes on ordinary workers as capital and wealth is too mobile.

IsaacWunder

As a socialist I am afraid of Sinn Fein because they aren't socialists, they're populists who have stolen the clothes of 1980s Fianna Fail and will if (or more likely when) they get into government bring in some absolutely bonkers policies.

It's a bit rich whinging about socialists on this thread when probably the best minister for finance we've had in the last 30 years was a socialist (Ruari Quinn) who managed to run a counter cyclical fiscal policy unlike the " if I have it I spend it" policies of closet PD McCreevy.

A socialist government during the boom years would have treated housing as a right, not as a get rich quick scheme, or a means of saving for retirement, thus moderating the housing bubble that screwed the whole country.

Farmer Pudsey

IsaacWunder wrote: »

As a socialist I am afraid of Sinn Fein because they aren't socialists, they're populists who have stolen the clothes of 1980s Fianna Fail and will if (or more likely when) they get into government bring in some absolutely bonkers policies.

It's a bit rich whinging about socialists on this thread when probably the best minister for finance we've had in the last 30 years was a socialist (Ruari Quinn) who managed to run a counter cyclical fiscal policy unlike the " if I have it I spend it" policies of closet PD McCreevy.

A socialist government during the boom years would have treated housing as a right, not as a get rich quick scheme, or a means of saving for retirement, thus moderating the housing bubble that screwed the whole country.

I would agree that the policy's followed by the 95-97 colission was quite good. However McCreevy often get the blame for the crash in the wrong. this can be laid squarely at the feet of Ahern/Cowen after McCreevy was exiled to Europe over his refusal to increase spending in 2003/4 as he was trying to turn the tap off IMO. Ahern replaced him with Cowen who followed populas policy and fueled the boom further.

IsaacWunder

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

I would agree that the policy's followed by the 95-97 colission was quite good. However McCreevy often get the blame for the crash in the wrong. this can be laid squarely at the feet of Ahern/Cowen after McCreevy was exiled to Europe over his refusal to increase spending in 2003/4 as he was trying to turn the tap off IMO. Ahern replaced him with Cowen who followed populas policy and fueled the boom further.

Fair comment, Cowen was a lot worse.

NIMAN

IsaacWunder wrote: »

Fair comment, Cowen was a lot worse.

And its good to see he is being punished for being so bad.:rolleyes:

realitykeeper

IsaacWunder wrote: »

Cowen was a lot worse.

No, I don`t believe he was. Cowen was Aherns successor of choice as well as the man bertie choose to replace Charlie McCreevy (in order to keep property prices sky rocketing). So, Ahern has earned a place on everyone's naughty list, even if some haven`t realized it. Ho, Ho, Ho.

Dannyboy83

realitykeeper wrote: »

No, I don`t believe he was. Cowen was Aherns successor of choice as well as the man bertie choose to replace Charlie McCreevy (in order to keep property prices sky rocketing). So, Ahern has earned a place on everyone's naughty list, even if some haven`t realized it. Ho, Ho, Ho.

Cowen was the worst
1. MOF
2. Taoiseach
3. And a contender for the worst Irish politician (in terms of the damage he personally did to Irish international reputation at a time of maximum vulnerability)

McCreevy followed an actual model, but most of the unsustainable budget adjustments happened under Cowen, including the property bubble & collapse




Contrary to the BIFFO tag, Cowen was widely regarded as extremely shrewdbefore becoming Taoiseach.
Only after becoming Taoiseach did people realise this 'cold, quiet, calculating shrewdness' was actually Homer Simpson level brainlessness.

The man was wilfully ignorant and strikingly gaffe prone, with a bewildering incapacity to i) communicate or ii) grasp PR - The death spiral commenced with his disgusting apathy and bone-idleness becoming publicly established by his admission of having not bothered to read The Lisbon treaty (despite privately having allegedly negotiated large tracts of it), and culminated with the corpulent mess being lampooned as a 'drunken moron' on Jay Leno, following the Garglegate sham.

No other period, good or bad, is seared in my memory or had such dramatic personal consequences for me, and withstanding nuclear war, I reckon this will be the period our descendants will ask us in wonder about, in the same way we asked our predecessors in wonder about The War of Independence & Michael Collins.

porsche boy

realitykeeper wrote: »

Leftist political parties are a lot like Anglo Irish Bank. Anglo was popular with borrowers because it lent recklessly during the good times, profits rolled in so the investors loved them also. Because Anglo were taking risks, other Banks followed (in order to compete) and they all crashed together.

Leftist political parties also appeal to the masses with populist policies and this forces main stream parties to do likewise or face electoral annihilation. It is a shame really because like the banks, the political parties will have to face their day of reckoning. When that happens, the economy will implode, social order will break down and instead of the solidarity seen during the water protests, society will turn on itself in an ugly and violent way.

Instead of complaining about austerity, people should be demanding it. Why is this not happening?

Ok, six pages in and I've finally stopped laughing at your post. How about this, vote the lefties in and see what happens. Can it be any worse than what Bertie & Enda have done?
Also I'm delighted to see you clairvoyant skills, being able to tell what will defiantly happen in the lefties get a cracking of the whip. Do us a favour and give us next week's lotto while your at it.

porsche boy

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

I would not describe the FF/PD government as rightwing.

FF/PD's failure to manage the economy from 2002-2008 is the main cause of the bust. The failure of the present government

Sorry, I'm confused here. You would describe Fianna Fail as left wing.... really???? The PD's while centre left were the minority party much like labour and I expect a similar end to Labour at the end of this government.

porsche boy

I think I should unfollow this thread before I get banned. Byeee

barneystinson

porsche boy wrote: »

Sorry, I'm confused here. You would describe Fianna Fail as left wing.... really???? The PD's while centre left were the minority party much like labour and I expect a similar end to Labour at the end of this government.

The PD's were definitely not left of centre.

Saipanne

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

Because the government cannot give to anybody, anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.

Just like banks.

flutered

Godge wrote: »

Oh, it will be a surprise, there are loads of fools out there who have bought into the rhetoric of the magic money tree of the rich paying for it all. Can't see a SF/Socialist government surviving past their first budget when the chickens come home.

contract manufacturing plus a few other bits and bobs has this years budget out of kilt, this will probably not hit until 2016, when every ones eye will be on another ball,

Farmer Pudsey

porsche boy wrote: »

Sorry, I'm confused here. You would describe Fianna Fail as left wing.... really???? The PD's while centre left were the minority party much like labour and I expect a similar end to Labour at the end of this government.

I did not describe them as left wing however there policy's in general were big spend policy, in health, Education, in PS recruitment where they increased numbers substancially, and PS pay through benchmarking. They left the PD's determine tax policy which was low tax and depended on a property market boom to fuel all this spending.

In general Conservative governments tent to try to reduce government spending. I describe them as a populous party giving everybody what ever they want to stay in power

Dannyboy83

Saipanne wrote: »

Just like banks.

Not so Fast

Saipanne

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

Not so Fast

Thank you for that outlier.

denlaw

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

I would not describe the FF/PD government as rightwing. It raised the minimum wage to the highest in Europe. We had the highest rates of social welfare as well. Along with that we had virtually the highest tax rates in Europe with very high levels of government spend across Education and Health. all through the time of the Celtic Tiger boom the Trade Unions had a cosy seat at the table. It amazing how these unions forget that they sat there all that time and never complained . I doubt if any rightwing government would have allowed Benchmarking Mark1 not to mind Benchmarking Mark2.

FF/PD's failure to manage the economy from 2002-2008 is the main cause of the bust. The failure of the present government ( and it is a left right so called alliance) is it failure to cut welfare and government spending to balance the budget in a fair way. Instead it loaded taxes on ordinary workers as capital and wealth is too mobile.

FF and the PD's are about as left wing as David Beckham !

washman3

Geuze wrote: »

As well as the worker contributing a headline rate of up to 17% of wages, yes, the employer does contribute as well, which is normal.

Except that the 'employer' in the case of the public is the Government, therefore the employers contribution is from the tax take, ie Joe the worker.
So Joe the worker pays the pension of the Public servant who in many cases can retire at 55 with a lump sum also paid for by, surprise,surprise, Joe the worker.

barneystinson

washman3 wrote: »

Except that the 'employer' in the case of the public is the Government, therefore the employers contribution is from the tax take, ie Joe the worker.
So Joe the worker pays the pension of the Public servant who in many cases can retire at 55 with a lump sum also paid for by, surprise,surprise, Joe the worker.

So what? If you work for the state you should be disadvantaged, is it? There's nearly 300,000 Joe the workers in the public sector by the way.

washman3

barneystinson wrote: »

So what? If you work for the state you should be disadvantaged, is it? There's nearly 300,000 Joe the workers in the public sector by the way.

Your second sentence says it all really.;)
300,000 in the public service, just think about it. Great little country altogether.
Nobody saying you should be disadvantaged by working for the state, but neither should a retired elite bleed the coffers dry on unsustainable gold plated pensions.
And don't come back with this crap that many ordinary retired P.S.s are barely making ends meet. I appreciate this, but we all know the elite percentage that are quite the opposite.

realitykeeper

porsche boy wrote: »

Sorry, I'm confused here. You would describe Fianna Fail as left wing.... really????

At the risk of repeating the blatantly obvious - Yes! Of course FF are left wing. They spent like mad when in government instead of being prudent, like a right wing party would have been. Also, Bertie Ahern by his own admission is a socialist.

FG are equally bad as were the PDs. A right wing government would impose austerity instead of borrowing to fund the status quo. None of the Irish political parties, past or present have what it takes to be right wing.

Mongfinder General

Right or Left Wing, the current policies will barely shift under the next government.

The IMF marched in here 4 years ago. They were given carte blanche. What zeitgeist or paradigm did this new regime create in the Irish State? Sweet fcuk all as it turns out.

Other than handing over a truck load of cash in return for a chunky interest rate and a mickey mouse programme of cosmetic cuts, the IMF did not change the way our politicians operate. Now I'm no big city lawyer but if the big bad wolf that is the IMF does not change the culture, than the plebs it's preaching to will hardly change themselves.

Any government elected in this country will muddle along with a small open economy almost completely at the mercy of external factors. A provo or part provo government will spend it's time settling old scores and making new enemies along the way. How much they'd actually change for the better or worse is a matter of perception.

Dannyboy83

realitykeeper wrote: »

At the risk of repeating the blatantly obvious - Yes! Of course FF are left wing. They spent like mad when in government instead of being prudent, like a right wing party would have been.

You probably have to distinguish between the McCreevy MOF Era and the Cowen MOF Era.

McCreevy MOF Era, they increased spending but they also cut tax, reduced debt and built up the NPRF. Elements of left and right.
There probably would have been a soft landing if we'd had the correction around that time.

The Cowen MOF era had no discernable strategy other than 'whatever it takes to retain office'.

FG are equally bad as were the PDs. A right wing government would impose austerity instead of borrowing to fund the status quo. None of the Irish political parties, past or present have what it takes to be right wing.

I can accept the argument that they were hamstrung due to the coalition, while arguing they should never entered coalition with an opposing ideology, but the fact that they reneged on reforms which would have cost nothing such as Optional Irish, leads me to believe that was their plan all along anyway. Especially considering they had enough seats to form a government with a small group of independents

mollymosfet

realitykeeper wrote: »

Leftist political parties are a lot like Anglo Irish Bank. Anglo was popular with borrowers because it lent recklessly during the good times, profits rolled in so the investors loved them also. Because Anglo were taking risks, other Banks followed (in order to compete) and they all crashed together.

Leftist political parties also appeal to the masses with populist policies and this forces main stream parties to do likewise or face electoral annihilation. It is a shame really because like the banks, the political parties will have to face their day of reckoning. When that happens, the economy will implode, social order will break down and instead of the solidarity seen during the water protests, society will turn on itself in an ugly and violent way.

Instead of complaining about austerity, people should be demanding it. Why is this not happening?

Why does this forum have such a strong right wing bent? As does Politics.ie. Why does "Politics" seem to go hand in hand with "Right wing, completely and utterly out of touch with reality?"

The fact is that opinions like this are easy to hold for reasonable well off Irish people, usually male, usually not disabled, usually heterosexual, and various other little privileges they take for granted. They're far away from the reality of people who are forced to beg on the streets, and often make sure to demonise people like that so their side isn't heard.

Once, Ireland suffered at the hands of colonialism and in some ways still does. But somehow we've adopted a fully colonialist mentality where rich, conservative white men are at the top of everything.

People aren't demanding more austerity because they can't take it. The fact that you can even say this is just so utterly privileged and out of touch with the thousands of struggling families and individuals in this country. And no doubt when you press an Austerity Advocate on this it just falls back on "Well suck it." Tough **** for that person who isn't them.

It's an obnoxious Randian selfishness that's ruined most of the world economically. Fiscal charlatans acting educated when they have such a narrow window onto the world.

Iwasfrozen

mollymosfet wrote: »

Why does this forum have such a strong right wing bent? As does Politics.ie. Why does "Politics" seem to go hand in hand with "Right wing, completely and utterly out of touch with reality?"

The fact is that opinions like this are easy to hold for reasonable well off Irish people, usually male, usually not disabled, usually heterosexual, and various other little privileges they take for granted. They're far away from the reality of people who are forced to beg on the streets, and often make sure to demonise people like that so their side isn't heard.

Once, Ireland suffered at the hands of colonialism and in some ways still does. But somehow we've adopted a fully colonialist mentality where rich, conservative white men are at the top of everything.

People aren't demanding more austerity because they can't take it. The fact that you can even say this is just so utterly privileged and out of touch with the thousands of struggling families and individuals in this country. And no doubt when you press an Austerity Advocate on this it just falls back on "Well suck it." Tough **** for that person who isn't them.

It's an obnoxious Randian selfishness that's ruined most of the world economically. Fiscal charlatans acting educated when they have such a narrow window onto the world.

Have you even thought maybe instead of boards and politics.ie being right wing the forums are actually quite centrist and they only seem right wing to you because you're massively to the left?

Iwasfrozen

mollymosfet wrote: »

Why does this forum have such a strong right wing bent? As does Politics.ie. Why does "Politics" seem to go hand in hand with "Right wing, completely and utterly out of touch with reality?"

The fact is that opinions like this are easy to hold for reasonable well off Irish people, usually male, usually not disabled, usually heterosexual, and various other little privileges they take for granted. They're far away from the reality of people who are forced to beg on the streets, and often make sure to demonise people like that so their side isn't heard.

Once, Ireland suffered at the hands of colonialism and in some ways still does. But somehow we've adopted a fully colonialist mentality where rich, conservative white men are at the top of everything.

People aren't demanding more austerity because they can't take it. The fact that you can even say this is just so utterly privileged and out of touch with the thousands of struggling families and individuals in this country. And no doubt when you press an Austerity Advocate on this it just falls back on "Well suck it." Tough **** for that person who isn't them.

It's an obnoxious Randian selfishness that's ruined most of the world economically. Fiscal charlatans acting educated when they have such a narrow window onto the world.

Have you even thought maybe instead of boards and politics.ie being right wing the forums are actually quite centrist and they only seem right wing to you because you're massively to the left?

marienbad

mollymosfet wrote: »

Why does this forum have such a strong right wing bent? As does Politics.ie. Why does "Politics" seem to go hand in hand with "Right wing, completely and utterly out of touch with reality?"

The fact is that opinions like this are easy to hold for reasonable well off Irish people, usually male, usually not disabled, usually heterosexual, and various other little privileges they take for granted. They're far away from the reality of people who are forced to beg on the streets, and often make sure to demonise people like that so their side isn't heard.

Once, Ireland suffered at the hands of colonialism and in some ways still does. But somehow we've adopted a fully colonialist mentality where rich, conservative white men are at the top of everything.

People aren't demanding more austerity because they can't take it. The fact that you can even say this is just so utterly privileged and out of touch with the thousands of struggling families and individuals in this country. And no doubt when you press an Austerity Advocate on this it just falls back on "Well suck it." Tough **** for that person who isn't them.

It's an obnoxious Randian selfishness that's ruined most of the world economically. Fiscal charlatans acting educated when they have such a narrow window onto the world.

It is not so much austerity is the problem as how it has been applied , here we are coming to the end of the best opportunity this state will ever have for genuine root and branch reform , but the bastions of white male privilege that you speak of have just about weathered the storm , the legal profession the top end of the health service and public service, the political class itself etc. Even old age pensioners have done exceptionally well through this recession.

So much extra could have and should have been done in a fairer way but t the opportunity is lost.

But that all being said ,the narrow tax base is a fundamental issue and has to be corrected - everybody ( or nearly) must pay something no matter how little

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

kalych

mollymosfet wrote: »

Why does this forum have such a strong right wing bent? As does Politics.ie. Why does "Politics" seem to go hand in hand with "Right wing, completely and utterly out of touch with reality?"

The fact is that opinions like this are easy to hold for reasonable well off Irish people, usually male, usually not disabled, usually heterosexual, and various other little privileges they take for granted. They're far away from the reality of people who are forced to beg on the streets, and often make sure to demonise people like that so their side isn't heard.

Once, Ireland suffered at the hands of colonialism and in some ways still does. But somehow we've adopted a fully colonialist mentality where rich, conservative white men are at the top of everything.

People aren't demanding more austerity because they can't take it. The fact that you can even say this is just so utterly privileged and out of touch with the thousands of struggling families and individuals in this country. And no doubt when you press an Austerity Advocate on this it just falls back on "Well suck it." Tough **** for that person who isn't them.

It's an obnoxious Randian selfishness that's ruined most of the world economically. Fiscal charlatans acting educated when they have such a narrow window onto the world.

I'm really at a loss why centre-right economic agenda somehow runs against homosexuals or non-caucasians. Unless you are somehow implying that economic conservatism (and I use this term lightly, as almost no non-fringe party in Europe is really conservative) has anything to do with social conservatism. Last time I checked the current government is bringing up a referendum on gay marriage and there is some talk on revisiting abortion at some stage in the future, which has all to do with women rights.

My apologies if my post sounds in any way attacking your point of view as I'm just trying to understand your usage of the term 'conservative', which I believe is misused a lot on this forum.

Regards,

Mongfinder General

mollymosfet wrote: »

The fact is that opinions like this are easy to hold for reasonable well off Irish people, usually male, usually not disabled, usually heterosexual, and various other little privileges they take for granted. They're far away from the reality of people who are forced to beg on the streets, and often make sure to demonise people like that so their side isn't heard.

Once, Ireland suffered at the hands of colonialism and in some ways still does. But somehow we've adopted a fully colonialist mentality where rich, conservative white men are at the top of everything.

People aren't demanding more austerity because they can't take it. The fact that you can even say this is just so utterly privileged and out of touch with the thousands of struggling families and individuals in this country. And no doubt when you press an Austerity Advocate on this it just falls back on "Well suck it." Tough **** for that person who isn't them.

It's an obnoxious Randian selfishness that's ruined most of the world economically. Fiscal charlatans acting educated when they have such a narrow window onto the world.

I am an employed white male in this country. Why do I feel like I'm paying for everybody else?
Do I get rent rent supplement? Fuel allowance? Free public transport?
Do I fcuk.

antoobrien

mollymosfet wrote: »

People aren't demanding more austerity because they can't take it. The fact that you can even say this is just so utterly privileged and out of touch with the thousands of struggling families and individuals in this country. And no doubt when you press an Austerity Advocate on this it just falls back on "Well suck it." Tough **** for that person who isn't them.

It's an obnoxious Randian selfishness that's ruined most of the world economically. Fiscal charlatans acting educated when they have such a narrow window onto the world.

This is a good summary of where the real problems lie: the abuse of the word Austerity by charlatans.

Christ almighty I'd hate to see what some of the "struggling" families would have done in the 80s - that was real austerity (though it probably wasn't called that) not the trimming around the edges of the past few years.

No the real problem is that society has been "educated" to expect a certain standard of living - doesn't matter what happens, somebody else will pay for it - that has really left is in the mess we are in.

If austerity was applied here, social welfare would have been cut. It wasn't, so we had to raise taxes so that they keep their standard of living. That's not austerity.

A host of taxes were raised, resulting in working people being told that they were being taxed to the gills. But does this stand up to scrutiny.

To a point, on a like for like basis, I pay more tax than I did in 2008. But if I look at the tax rates from the 90s, you'll see that I'm far form being taxed to the gills. In 1993-4 the tax rates were 27% on the first IR£7,675, 48% above that. That's 27% on the first €9,750 - equivalent to about €15,500 inflation adjusted - a person earning this would not actually pay PAYE.

Farmer Pudsey

mollymosfet wrote: »

Why does this forum have such a strong right wing bent? As does Politics.ie. Why does "Politics" seem to go hand in hand with "Right wing, completely and utterly out of touch with reality?"

The fact is that opinions like this are easy to hold for reasonable well off Irish people, usually male, usually not disabled, usually heterosexual, and various other little privileges they take for granted. They're far away from the reality of people who are forced to beg on the streets, and often make sure to demonise people like that so their side isn't heard.

Once, Ireland suffered at the hands of colonialism and in some ways still does. But somehow we've adopted a fully colonialist mentality where rich, conservative white men are at the top of everything.

People aren't demanding more austerity because they can't take it. The fact that you can even say this is just so utterly privileged and out of touch with the thousands of struggling families and individuals in this country. And no doubt when you press an Austerity Advocate on this it just falls back on "Well suck it." Tough **** for that person who isn't them.

It's an obnoxious Randian selfishness that's ruined most of the world economically. Fiscal charlatans acting educated when they have such a narrow window onto the world.

Biggest issue is the inability of people to save for rainy day. There is a total spend syndrome by a quite large section of the population. They then use expensive methods to balance day to day spending. an example of this is expensive health policy's thatcover partial doctor bills. It the same with electronic goods insurance.

A large section of the population seem to have the inability to manage money. There inability to cope with what are fairly forceeable bills ( TV licience, ESB, household charge). There seem to be an inability to manage these. To those who think that our tax rate are low they forget the amount of annual bills that are tax related or have tax's levys attached to them.

On the annual tax related bills, Household charge, water chage, car tax, TV licience, then all forms of insurane have taxes and levy's added. The councils have stopped rubbish managment which is another levy.Then you have normal montly/bimonthly bills such as ESB, telephone/mobile TV/broadband gas/oil/heating.

So along with tax workers have to cope with these bills. Then there is the push to forcing employyees becoming self employed. There is a section that consider the answer is to add take extra tax from those working and that no cost should be striped out of the system.

I was recently involved in a discussion regard self employed workers. Nobody relised that strictly speaking any self employed person that earns over 35K needs to register for VAT. If we allow him about 8-10K of work expenses as he is half way through the 20% tax bracket he is hit with anotherv 13% tax on top of USC, PRSI etc. However the killer is that he must pay it on the money below 35K as well. This means that those that are lone self employed workers use all means possible to keep total earning below 35K. The reason is that every euro the earn above that about 75% of it goes in tax.

So from thiis we can really see that we are a low tax economy.

Geuze

mollymosfet wrote: »

Why does this forum have such a strong right wing bent? As does Politics.ie. Why does "Politics" seem to go hand in hand with "Right wing, completely and utterly out of touch with reality?"

The fact is that opinions like this are easy to hold for reasonable well off Irish people, usually male, usually not disabled, usually heterosexual, and various other little privileges they take for granted. They're far away from the reality of people who are forced to beg on the streets, and often make sure to demonise people like that so their side isn't heard.

Once, Ireland suffered at the hands of colonialism and in some ways still does. But somehow we've adopted a fully colonialist mentality where rich, conservative white men are at the top of everything.

People aren't demanding more austerity because they can't take it. The fact that you can even say this is just so utterly privileged and out of touch with the thousands of struggling families and individuals in this country. And no doubt when you press an Austerity Advocate on this it just falls back on "Well suck it." Tough **** for that person who isn't them.

It's an obnoxious Randian selfishness that's ruined most of the world economically. Fiscal charlatans acting educated when they have such a narrow window onto the world.

Right, left or centre - public borrowing can't continue, it's as simple as that.

So the deficit must fall. If that's "austerity", then it must continue.

Now what we can debate is how we reduce the deficit, and how the pain of adjustment is spread.

Kermit.de.frog

Mongfinder General wrote: »

The IMF marched in here 4 years ago. They were given carte blanche.

The IMF were invited in here to stop economic collapse. They didn't come here of their own accord. The government had no choice - the alternative was no money to pay for anything, all personal savings confiscated and a failed state.

antoobrien

Geuze wrote: »

Right, left or centre - public borrowing can't continue, it's as simple as that.

So the deficit must fall. If that's "austerity", then it must continue.

Now what we can debate is how we reduce the deficit, and how the pain of adjustment is spread.

Perversely we can borrow to somewhat reduce the deficit, since 90% of our deficit is interest payments and those payments are mostly in the range 4.4%-5.9% of the debt value (our last few issued bonds have been lower than this).

It seems to have escaped notice, but the NTMA paid off about 9bn of the IMF debt before Christmas, this alone should remove about 300m from the interest bill for 2015.

Godge

antoobrien wrote: »

Perversely we can borrow to somewhat reduce the deficit, since 90% of our deficit is interest payments and those payments are mostly in the range 4.4%-5.9% of the debt value (our last few issued bonds have been lower than this).

It seems to have escaped notice, but the NTMA paid off about 9bn of the IMF debt before Christmas, this alone should remove about 300m from the interest bill for 2015.

Few around here understand about the need to refinance debt and the benefits of the lower interest rates.

2015 is likely to be a year in which we return to a primary surplus, again this will not be understood.

Geuze

antoobrien wrote: »

Perversely we can borrow to somewhat reduce the deficit, since 90% of our deficit is interest payments and those payments are mostly in the range 4.4%-5.9% of the debt value (our last few issued bonds have been lower than this).

It seems to have escaped notice, but the NTMA paid off about 9bn of the IMF debt before Christmas, this alone should remove about 300m from the interest bill for 2015.

What you are saying is that by issuing new debt at low rates, we can repay old debt, and so make interest savings, and that itself will reduce the fiscal deficit.

Yes, all true.

However, in the face of 200bn gross debt, even if we re-finance 20bn a year (that's a lot), and save 2% interest, that's just a 200m interest saving.

mollymosfet

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Have you even thought maybe instead of boards and politics.ie being right wing the forums are actually quite centrist and they only seem right wing to you because you're massively to the left?

Or that maybe there's something about these forums that attracts pretentious, amoral sociopaths thinking they know what's best for people who's shoes they'll never walk in?

Geuze

Geuze wrote: »

What you are saying is that by issuing new debt at low rates, we can repay old debt, and so make interest savings, and that itself will reduce the fiscal deficit.

Yes, all true.

However, in the face of 200bn gross debt, even if we re-finance 20bn a year (that's a lot), and save 2% interest, that's just a 200m interest saving.

EDIT - a 400m saving.

mollymosfet

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

Biggest issue is the inability of people to save for rainy day. There is a total spend syndrome by a quite large section of the population. They then use expensive methods to balance day to day spending. an example of this is expensive health policy's thatcover partial doctor bills. It the same with electronic goods insurance.

A large section of the population seem to have the inability to manage money. There inability to cope with what are fairly forceeable bills ( TV licience, ESB, household charge). There seem to be an inability to manage these. To those who think that our tax rate are low they forget the amount of annual bills that are tax related or have tax's levys attached to them.

On the annual tax related bills, Household charge, water chage, car tax, TV licience, then all forms of insurane have taxes and levy's added. The councils have stopped rubbish managment which is another levy.Then you have normal montly/bimonthly bills such as ESB, telephone/mobile TV/broadband gas/oil/heating.

So along with tax workers have to cope with these bills. Then there is the push to forcing employyees becoming self employed. There is a section that consider the answer is to add take extra tax from those working and that no cost should be striped out of the system.

I was recently involved in a discussion regard self employed workers. Nobody relised that strictly speaking any self employed person that earns over 35K needs to register for VAT. If we allow him about 8-10K of work expenses as he is half way through the 20% tax bracket he is hit with anotherv 13% tax on top of USC, PRSI etc. However the killer is that he must pay it on the money below 35K as well. This means that those that are lone self employed workers use all means possible to keep total earning below 35K. The reason is that every euro the earn above that about 75% of it goes in tax.

So from thiis we can really see that we are a low tax economy.

um the recession hit as soon as I left college pretty much, so this is completely meaningless to me. the problem isn't with the people - it's with the banks and global economy and a flawed economic model(which probably includes the lack of oversights in the implementation of the single currency).

Bootros Bootros

antoobrien wrote: »

This is a good summary of where the real problems lie: the abuse of the word Austerity by charlatans.

Christ almighty I'd hate to see what some of the "struggling" families would have done in the 80s - that was real austerity (though it probably wasn't called that) not the trimming around the edges of the past few years.

No the real problem is that society has been "educated" to expect a certain standard of living - doesn't matter what happens, somebody else will pay for it - that has really left is in the mess we are in.

If austerity was applied here, social welfare would have been cut. It wasn't, so we had to raise taxes so that they keep their standard of living. That's not austerity.

A host of taxes were raised, resulting in working people being told that they were being taxed to the gills. But does this stand up to scrutiny.

To a point, on a like for like basis, I pay more tax than I did in 2008. But if I look at the tax rates from the 90s, you'll see that I'm far form being taxed to the gills. In 1993-4 the tax rates were 27% on the first IR£7,675, 48% above that. That's 27% on the first €9,750 - equivalent to about €15,500 inflation adjusted - a person earning this would not actually pay PAYE.

Where did you get the inflation indexing from?

mollymosfet

antoobrien wrote: »

This is a good summary of where the real problems lie: the abuse of the word Austerity by charlatans.

Christ almighty I'd hate to see what some of the "struggling" families would have done in the 80s - that was real austerity (though it probably wasn't called that) not the trimming around the edges of the past few years.

No the real problem is that society has been "educated" to expect a certain standard of living - doesn't matter what happens, somebody else will pay for it - that has really left is in the mess we are in.

If austerity was applied here, social welfare would have been cut. It wasn't, so we had to raise taxes so that they keep their standard of living. That's not austerity.

A host of taxes were raised, resulting in working people being told that they were being taxed to the gills. But does this stand up to scrutiny.

To a point, on a like for like basis, I pay more tax than I did in 2008. But if I look at the tax rates from the 90s, you'll see that I'm far form being taxed to the gills. In 1993-4 the tax rates were 27% on the first IR£7,675, 48% above that. That's 27% on the first €9,750 - equivalent to about €15,500 inflation adjusted - a person earning this would not actually pay PAYE.

There are many people struggling on social welfare as-is. Saying "well they'd have had it worse in the 80s" isn't an excuse plus there may be a lot of additional costs now that didn't exist then. Our social welfare also isn't as high relative to the rest of EU as people think when you figure in cost of living, and our actual spending on social protection is quite low.

Welfare helps drives the economy. When people can't afford to go down to the local or shop local etc. places start closing down. While there hasn't been a cut to the base rate in some time, allowances have been greatly cut. It should also be pointed out that only a small percentage of people actually work on minimum wage in the country(though it's still important to keep it high to guarantee a standard of living), so the argument that those on welfare have it cushier than those on minimum wage doesn't hold much water when in all likelihood those working will have an opportunity to be on a higher wage(and mostly likely will find themselves there within a couple of years), whereas those on welfare are often trapped there, especially if they're disabled like myself. It's not as easy living on welfare as you think.

Really, unless you're currently living on social welfare I don't think you have much of a right to comment. People who have little perspective on that matter and little social empathy are not the people we should be listening to.

mollymosfet

kalych wrote: »

I'm really at a loss why centre-right economic agenda somehow runs against homosexuals or non-caucasians. Unless you are somehow implying that economic conservatism (and I use this term lightly, as almost no non-fringe party in Europe is really conservative) has anything to do with social conservatism. Last time I checked the current government is bringing up a referendum on gay marriage and there is some talk on revisiting abortion at some stage in the future, which has all to do with women rights.

My apologies if my post sounds in any way attacking your point of view as I'm just trying to understand your usage of the term 'conservative', which I believe is misused a lot on this forum.

Regards,

Unfortunately you cannot separate the economic and social as some believe.

I am transgender and mentally ill. It is very difficult for me to get a job, due to both discrimination and years of trauma making me emotionally unstable. I am also autistic. I'm not mentally wired to be able to do regular repetitive 9 to 5 work without breaking down(yes, I've tried.) There is a strong lack of services available for people like me, largely due to cutbacks that came about via austerity(and a poisonous cultural mentality). My options are inherently more limited than those on the upper echelons of privilege - generally the heteronormative, white, able bodied/minded men who tend to run most of our government and industry(and the few women we do have are expected to follow their example). I have friends who are Roma. They beg, because they have to. "Totally not racist" legislation makes it difficult for them to claim welfare or work permits. Even if they did look for work - who is going to hire a Roma person? But yet people will get angry if I point out that as a culture - we are racist. Two of the nicest people I Know are Roma women and I have to sit through pages of abuse from ignorant, hateful gob****es. They are bad people, and get to have their lot in life. Meanwhile there are many young mothers out in the cold, on the streets, begging, largely because of the same institutionalised racism and economic inequality.

Though right libertarians and objectivists claim to be "Individualists", in reality the system they want to bring about is hyper-conformist. Because of the immense degree of competitiveness inherent to that system, there's more and more of a race to become an ideal Randian superman, or just generally conform to the image of what's seen as a "Good worker". This is already a problem in our current society. It is, again, individuality for those of privilege. In the case of the Roma, many of them emigrate to the US but are forced to hide their heritage, often pretending to be white, italian, spanish etc. in order to have any change at success. Capitalism, white supremacy and forced conformity go hand in hand.

it reminds me of my younger days when I used to be more focused on the concept of image based discrimination. Personally, I think it's ridiculous that we judge on appearances so much and the fact that you have a hair colour not deemed appropriate makes it harder for you to get a job. The answer is always something along the lines of "Work your way up to the top, then you can do whatever you like for yourself." But hold on, what about those who are already at the top? What about those who never reach it? What about those people who don't care how they get to present? Why is there such disparity here, why do we demand some work so much harder than others with little promise of success, statistically? I'm not sure what they are in Ireland, but in the UK & US Social Mobility rates lie at a paltry 10%. That means only 10% of people will ever end up in a different class to what they're born into. That single statistic destroys so much right wing economic theory, yet they never listen, or just assure us the mythical "Invisible hand" will sort it out.

Thus the popular joke of responding to arguments pointing out the flaws in neoliberalism with "Free Market will Fix it." Because we know it won't. It focuses entirely on those at the top and just assures us that maybe probably things will trickle down and work for us too. But there's no evidence of that.

People of colour, queer people and the disabled tend to lie at the bottom of society economically. Women are also generally disadvantaged in terms of social mobility. Part of the reason I keep bringing up SWMs is because that is the dominating force here - it's a boy's club. And when society's most vulnerable are kept out of the conversation it's very easy to hold views that are basically patting other sheltered men on the back.

It is simple a reality that economic models that do not address the reality of privilege are racist, classist, sexist, hetero/cisnormative, whatever. I doubt any of the smug "Centre right" or libertarian types will ever truly address this - which is why they dehumanise people like me and mock me. They are perfectly happy to see people like me die on the street because human life is worth less to them than their "hard knock life" ideology. You can see it in those who clamour for the deportation of asylum seekers surely knowing full well that death awaits a great many of them. You can see it in those who consider a lack of services of support for the mentally ill to be an acceptable consequence of austerity, and people should ask for more of it.

People like this are not good people, nor are they clever. They're simply far removed from the reality many of us face and care more about economic theory that makes them feel more mature to spout, yet most of them experience little to none of the consequences.

The thing that frustrates me most about right wingers - both social conservatives and those towards the economic rights - is that they have an obsession with painting themselves as more mature and world weary than those dumb college liberal types. When in reality the precise opposite is true in many cases - they are sheltered children with the run of the world, compared to people like me(and I have it relatively well off compared to the average trans person of colour in the likes of the US).

The gay marriage argument doesn't mean all that much to me. It's a common criticism that people focus on gay marriage as if being granted it mean equality has been won, when nothing is furthest from the truth. Those who focus on gay marriage as the primary issue are well off(you guessed it) white gay men, not for example vulnerable transwomen or colour or impoverished, homeless queer youth. Economic and social equality for LGBTQ people is vastly more important than the right to marry.

Also the idea that Abortion rights maybe might be revisited sometime isn't good enough. Our laws have killed a woman and demand women be used as incubators. The recession has also provenly disproportionately affected women but if I even point that out I'll be using the "sexist" card.

You can't win against people who's entire tactic is to shut down and drown out of the voices of those affected by their ideology. Not on a forum like this, anyway.

marienbad

mollymosfet wrote: »

There are many people struggling on social welfare as-is. Saying "well they'd have had it worse in the 80s" isn't an excuse plus there may be a lot of additional costs now that didn't exist then. Our social welfare also isn't as high relative to the rest of EU as people think when you figure in cost of living, and our actual spending on social protection is quite low.

Welfare helps drives the economy. When people can't afford to go down to the local or shop local etc. places start closing down. While there hasn't been a cut to the base rate in some time, allowances have been greatly cut. It should also be pointed out that only a small percentage of people actually work on minimum wage in the country(though it's still important to keep it high to guarantee a standard of living), so the argument that those on welfare have it cushier than those on minimum wage doesn't hold much water when in all likelihood those working will have an opportunity to be on a higher wage(and mostly likely will find themselves there within a couple of years), whereas those on welfare are often trapped there, especially if they're disabled like myself. It's not as easy living on welfare as you think.

Really, unless you're currently living on social welfare I don't think you have much of a right to comment. People who have little perspective on that matter and little social empathy are not the people we should be listening to.

Why not bring even a modicum of means testing ? Is it right that someone on 20k should subsidise the childrens allowance or old age pension for those that has an income greater than they have .

We had blue murder when they tried to reform medical cards .

LordNorbury

realitykeeper wrote: »

Leftist political parties are a lot like Anglo Irish Bank. Anglo was popular with borrowers because it lent recklessly during the good times, profits rolled in so the investors loved them also. Because Anglo were taking risks, other Banks followed (in order to compete) and they all crashed together.

Leftist political parties also appeal to the masses with populist policies and this forces main stream parties to do likewise or face electoral annihilation. It is a shame really because like the banks, the political parties will have to face their day of reckoning. When that happens, the economy will implode, social order will break down and instead of the solidarity seen during the water protests, society will turn on itself in an ugly and violent way.

Instead of complaining about austerity, people should be demanding it. Why is this not happening?

The Irish left don't know that they are actually on the extreme right. Burning bondholders, letting failed businesses fail regardless of their size, this is actually what capitalism is all about! When you apply proper capitalism in its properly understood form, success gets rewarded and failure gets punished.

What we have now in this country, and what all those on the left right now are advocating that we continue with, is a very funny sort of selective capitalism, that provides for a very large proportion of the country being completely hung out to dry in a downturn, mainly in the private sector, where the majority of people work, those running and working for small businesses, those who worked in the building industry, these people have been crucified and absolutely hung out to dry.

However the left in Ireland believe that those people should be experiencing what they have experienced, or if they have any issue with it, it is merely mentioning a few platitudes to ease the suffering of these people, but sure hey, that's capitalism isn't it?!? Then you have a small minority of people in this country who the left will die to protect, the insiders, the civil servants, the teachers, the Gardai, those who work in the semi states, who have been protected from austerity really, even if the likes of Richard Boyd Barrett and Mick Wallace seem to think that a retired teacher on a 70K a year pension with their mortgage paid, is not well off.

The left I do not believe will make the inroads that people think they are making, because at the end of the day paddy isn't thick and he will not be looking back at 7 years of poverty, with an improvement in the economy in front of him, and handing the future to people with no credibility, people like Clare Daly who hates employers be they big or small, Mick Wallace a VAT avoiding tax dodger who was paying himself 250K a year in salary from his own company while deliberately undeclaring VAT, Richard Boyd Barrett, don't even get me started on that utterly obnoxious waste of space, but the point remains, Irish people might like to kick the cat every now and again but there is no way they will vote in a government of independents who want to bring us back to communism.

Iwasfrozen

mollymosfet wrote: »

Or that maybe there's something about these forums that attracts pretentious, amoral sociopaths thinking they know what's best for people who's shoes they'll never walk in?

You don't know what I've been through in my life, I didn't come from an advantaged background but no matter what cards life dealt me I never let it crush me, it seems to have crushed you I'm getting a lot of anger from your post.

mollymosfet

Even if you're coming from a bad background, I am still pretty close to the bottom and work with those at the bottom. I have more perspective on this. Your ideology, regardless, comes from self serving oligarchs, not people who are in touch with the world.

The Irish left don't know that they are actually on the extreme right. Burning bondholders, letting failed businesses fail regardless of their size, this is actually what capitalism is all about! When you apply proper capitalism in its properly understood form, success gets rewarded and failure gets punished.

The problem here is with corporate welfare, socialism only for the wealthy. Both far left & right agree this a nonsense, except in the odd case where an industry needs to be propped up to keep jobs. That doesn't mean that actual far right economics theory would serve people at the bottom. Some at the top would be affected, which is why right wing libertarianism isn't as popular as the status quo. But it's still popular - so obviously a lot have something to gain from it.