Why will the Govt not hold an "Irexit" referendum?

kuntboy

Cabaal wrote: »

You sound like any other conservative snowflake who is throwing their toys out of the pram because they don't like whats happening.

Examples of similar types of hyperbole:
- Divorce will destroy the fabric of Irish society
- If "gay marriage" is made legal they'll be marrying animals next

Here you are claiming that somehow the EU will destroy Ireland and its people, in all honesty its hysterical nonsense. You are nothing more then yet another person in history who feels insecure and projects onto others your insecurity's and fears.

Ah yes the old name-calling debating technique when you've no argument. Just say "waycis", it's quicker blud. Your SJW lefty multi delusion has worked really well throughout Europe hasn't it?

ArchXStanton

seamus wrote: »

Yes, this is why sensible democracies only hold elections once every generation. Oh, wait.

2-3 years is more than enough time IMO to pass before holding a second vote on issues of large social significance or economic impact.

It shouldn't be the norm for all issues, but especially where the outcome wasn't an overwhelming majority or the issues have become clearer over time, there's nothing undemocratic about asking a second time. In fact, that's even more democratic than revisiting it once in a generation.

The notion that a question should be asked once and then left alone for years regardless of the consequences of that vote, is always espoused when it suits an agenda.

You'd have a point if it wasn't just the referendums that don't go the EU's way,its fairly dubious democracy

First Up

ArchXStanton wrote:

You'd have a point if it wasn't just the referendums that don't go the EU's way,its fairly dubious democracy

Countries decide to hold referendums, not the EU.

ArchXStanton

First Up wrote: »

Countries decide to hold referendums, not the EU.

Just like Lisbon were we came under enormous pressure? Wasn't it Sarkozy who said "the Irish must vote again" when the no vote was returned...in fact what business does a French politician have coming out with a statement like that

First Up

Lefty Bicek wrote:

... and then you ran away.

Bye.

I'll drop by from time to time to burst a bubble or two.

First Up

ArchXStanton wrote:

Just like Lisbon were we came under enormous pressure? Wasn't it Sarkozy who said "the Irish must vote again" when the no vote was returned...in fact what business does a French politician have coming out with a statement like that

(a) Sarkozy was not the EU
(b) He was out of line and was told so.
(c) We chose to hold a second referendum.

Lefty Bicek

First Up wrote: »

I'll drop by from time to time to burst a bubble or two.

Like a prick would do. Carry on.

First Up

Lefty Bicek wrote:

Like a prick would do. Carry on.

I will. Your attitude to people who deal in facts is revealing.

fash

Lefty Bicek wrote: »

fash wrote: »

Yes that is what a threat to stop serving alcohol is...

There was NO possibility that the threat could have been faced down by Ireland. They knew that.

Anyway, enough of the alcohol analogy, it's limited.

Interesting though, you think others know what 'interventions' are in the best interest of the Irish people.

"Pay your bar tab to date or no more alcohol for you" is hardly taking an overly paternalistic approach.

Lefty Bicek

fash wrote: »

"Pay your bar tab to date or no more alcohol for you" is hardly taking an overly paternalistic approach.

'It's not my bill'.



But hey, you know more than the deputy head of the IMF !

fash

Lefty Bicek wrote: »

fash wrote: »

"Pay your bar tab to date or no more alcohol for you" is hardly taking an overly paternalistic approach.

'It's not my bill'.

The Irish government was not asked to pay any other "bar tabs" other than their own- read the Trichet letter again.

Lefty Bicek wrote: »

But hey, you know more than the deputy head of the IMF !

He never disagreed or disputed anything I've said here. But perhaps you know better than he does.

Lefty Bicek

fash wrote: »

He never disagreed or disputed anything I've said here. But perhaps you know better than he does.

I know better than you do.

fash -

"Pay your bar tab to date or no more alcohol for you" is hardly taking an overly paternalistic approach.

ie An ultimatum is an acceptable approach.


Ajai Chopra -

“In my view, ultimatums are not the right way to conduct business amongst euro-area members and institutions, and we’ve seen such ultimatums were delivered in the case of Ireland,” he said.

ie An ultimatum is not acceptable approach.


What the hell do you not understand ?

Lefty Bicek

fash wrote: »

The Irish government was not asked to pay any other "bar tabs" other than their own- read the Trichet letter again.
.

Missing the point completely.

He had no right to demand fiscal actions in exchange for the money.

It was a threatening letter.


'Pay the bar tab for your own good. Or we'll break your legs. For your own good'.

Such paternalism.

First Up

Lefty Bicek wrote:

He had no right to demand fiscal actions in exchange for the money.

I could give a rat's ass if Trichet issued an ultimatum, a warning or strongly worded advice. He was dead right and Noonan was dead right to respond as he did, as our recovery demonstrates.

But there are clearly some who still admire Yanis Varoufakis and think we were wimps not to defy those nasty money men.

I guess that's what Discussion Forums are for - happily the important stuff happens elsewhere.

Lefty Bicek

First Up wrote: »

I could give a rat's ass if Trichet issued an ultimatum, a warning or strongly worded advice.

He was dead right and Noonan was dead right to respond as he did, as our recovery demonstrates.

It is a disgraceful point of view that accepts 'recovery' as an acceptable outcome of coercion by unelected and clearly unaccountable 'money men'. Clearly some people should keep their martyr tendencies in check.

The 'recovery' is worthless to the people and families who have been destroyed by unnecessary austerity. Unnecessary.

But there are clearly some who still admire Yanis Varoufakis and think we were wimps not to defy those nasty money men.

I referenced him because he has a more compelling experience than most of how your heroes treat smaller countries. Nothing to do with admiration. It's just that he has credibility, whereas... who are you ?

I guess that's what Discussion Forums are for - happily the important stuff happens elsewhere.

People on discussion boards are free to go to where the 'important stuff' happens. I for one am not benefiting from their disingenuity here anyway.


.

fash

Lefty Bicek wrote: »

fash wrote: »

He never disagreed or disputed anything I've said here. But perhaps you know better than he does.

I know better than you do.

If you honestly believe that, you are the only one.

Lefty Bicek wrote: »

fash -

"Pay your bar tab to date or no more alcohol for you" is hardly taking an overly paternalistic approach.

ie An ultimatum is an acceptable approach.


Ajai Chopra -

“In my view, ultimatums are not the right way to conduct business amongst euro-area members and institutions, and we’ve seen such ultimatums were delivered in the case of Ireland,” he said.

ie An ultimatum is not acceptable approach.


What the hell do you not understand ?

Well let us see what has been stated and what you have failed to dispute:
In Sept 2008, FF guaranteed all bank bondholders - existing and future.
They did so voluntarily, with notification to other countries or the EU, intending to steal liquidity from other countries, and protecting existing and future Irish bank cronyism - a complete FU to Europe and Ireland's partners.
As a result, they had to rely more and more on EU emergency funding - leading over 2 years to taking a very large proportion of total EU funding. The EU has expressly rights under the relevant regulations to determine whether the quality of assets provided to get the emergency funding and Furthermore has a series of obligations to ensure stability of the overall system, proper usage of the funding etc.
Now how on earth can you possibly say that the EU is responsible for Ireland's mess.
It is no more responsible than Jeff Besos - who could just as easily have provided the funding to Ireland and had just as much of an obligation (i.e. None) to do so.

So what the hell do you not understand?

Billy86

Lefty Bicek wrote: »

You're free to go to where the 'important stuff' happens. Nobody is benefiting from your disingenuity here anyway..

Man, you were caught lying on this same thread only yesterday. And you didn't even deny that you were lying, you almost seemed proud of it.

The Rape of Lucretia

Irexit lads. Remember Irexit ?

Lefty Bicek

Billy86 wrote: »

Man, you were caught lying on this same thread only yesterday. And you didn't even deny that you were lying, you almost seemed proud of it.

No that is totally misleading of you.

I was asked a question by someone else -

Give me an example of what period in our history since we became a republic that we should magnify

and I replied -

Secondly, magnifying periods of the past for present or future purposes - as you imply - is what historians call 'myth'. It is not culture, though culture is a useful tool in that process.

So we should not do that, and I didn't propose that.

Which is why, as I explained to you, it was a stupid question. It made an assumption that what I was being asked to do was either possible or useful. It was neither.

The context for the conversation you butted into was about culture, and the difference between us becoming more European in our cultural outlook, or not. It was not about assessing the performance of the independent Ireland.


You then, out of nowhere, concocted this -

If you don't want to use the point we started as an independent nation at as a starting point for how we have performed as an independent nation, when do you propose to start looking at how we have performed as an independent nation, and why?

Totally a propos of nothing that went before it. Assessing 'how we have performed as an independent nation' is not even related to 'which decade would you like to magnify' ?



So, I answered the question I was asked, not the one you imagine I was asked.


.

Lefty Bicek

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Irexit lads. Remember Irexit ?

Some people here will give you ire, at least

fash

Lefty Bicek wrote: »

fash wrote: »

The Irish government was not asked to pay any other "bar tabs" other than their own- read the Trichet letter again.
.

Missing the point completely.

He had no right to demand fiscal actions in exchange for the money.

It was a threatening letter.


'Pay the bar tab for your own good. Or we'll break your legs. For your own good'.

Such paternalism.

The EU was obliged to assess the quality of the assets handed over as collateral for the emergency funding of which Ireland took an extraordinary and growing amount and to determine acceptability on that basis. The more the state debt grew, the worse the quality of the collateral. Hence the EU had an right in law to demand that Ireland take measures to ensure the the quality of the collateral should Ireland wish to access emergency funding.

Again, Ireland's actions were entirely voluntary:
In 2008, it could have let the banks fail, it could have informed Europe and asked them what to do, it could have protected future bond holders only. All those would have saved billions - and that is without talking about the previous decade of policy.

Billy86

Lefty Bicek wrote: »

What was the lie ?

I was asked a question -

and I replied -

When you claim to have answered a question that you did not, that is indeed a lie. Hence why you didn't even deny it. A wall of nonsense that is unrelated to the question is not an answer, shocking as that might sound to you.

Which had nothing to do with what was being discussed before you butted in. It wasn't what I was asked, and it wasn't what I answered. All in your mind.

And here you go again, how many posts can you even try to be honest for? Because you're really, really not as good at this as you seem to think you are.

You even have it in this very same post - you were asked by the other poster "Give me an example of what period in our history since we became a republic that we should magnify". You didn't give a period - because you were unable to - and so I asked you again in terms you couldn't weasel out of, so you resorted to lying by pretending you had already answered when you had done no such thing.

So do yourself a favour here and get off the high horse before accusing others like that fash poster of being disingenuous.

First Up

Lefty Bicek wrote:

It is a disgraceful point of view that accepts 'recovery' as an acceptable outcome of coercion by unelected and clearly unaccountable 'money men'. Clearly some people should keep their martyr tendencies in check.

Well someone deserves credit for us getting from bankruptcy to growth at almost 3 times the EU average and full employment by Q1 2019. Any nominations?

Lefty Bicek wrote:

The 'recovery' is worthless to the people and families who have been destroyed by unnecessary austerity. Unnecessary.

Of course there are casualties and some of the legacies of our (self inflicted) economic mess will take years more be cleared.

But adopting a Greek style suicide (while blaming others of course) and flouncing out of the EU won't help anyone.

Lefty Bicek

Billy86 wrote: »

When you claim to have answered a question that you did not, that is indeed a lie.

I answered it very well. Since there is no period/decade of our past that we should 'magnify', that's my answer. Take it or leave it.

You even have it in this very same post - you were asked by the other poster "Give me an example of what period in our history since we became a republic that we should magnify". You didn't give a period - because you were unable to -

- no, because there isn't one. It isn't obligatory to have one, you know ?

eagle eye

Is it just me or does it seem to others that some people are shouting down at others in this thread like there shouldn't even be a discussion on this.
Everybody is entitled to have a point of view no matter how unpopular it may be.
I think this type of behaviour by the anti-brexiteers pushed a lot of people, who mightn't have understood much about it, into voting for Brexit. They felt disrespected I think.

Lefty Bicek

First Up wrote: »

Well someone deserves credit

It was not the only possible course of action.

European institutions “focused on wider euro-area concerns even as this resulted in a higher burden for Irish taxpayers and higher Irish public debt”, he said.

“Europe’s decision to require each country to resolve their own banking problems individually worsened the crisis,” he said.

Mr Chopra also hit out at the refusal of Europe to recapitalise banks on a euro-wide basis, or to open other “low risk” schemes, such as lowering the cost of tracker mortgages, to bolster banking profits and boost lending.

“Such additional support for a country such as Ireland would have had a positive pay-off, making it an investment worth undertaking,” he said.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/ex-imf-chief-ajai-chopra-ecb-only-grudgingly-provided-support-to-irelands-banks-695231.html

The Rape of Lucretia

eagle eye wrote: »

Is it just me or does it seem to others that some people are shouting down at others in this thread like there shouldn't even be a discussion on this.
Everybody is entitled to have a point of view no matter how unpopular it may be.
I think this type of behaviour by the anti-brexiteers pushed a lot of people, who mightn't have understood much about it, into voting for Brexit. They felt disrespected I think.

Yes. Irexit needs an airing, and mature national discussion. Personally I am very against it on its own. It would be an even worse move than Brexit. But worth analysing it in a more sophisticated and rational way than the discussion that preceeded the Brexit referendum.

Similar for Breunion. If a hard or no deal Brexit goes ahead, then Breunion also need serious consideration. And in that context, Irexit would be a different situation, and it also possibly, the correct step for southern Ireland.

ArchXStanton

eagle eye wrote: »

Is it just me or does it seem to others that some people are shouting down at others in this thread like there shouldn't even be a discussion on this.
Everybody is entitled to have a point of view no matter how unpopular it may be.
I think this type of behaviour by the anti-brexiteers pushed a lot of people, who mightn't have understood much about it, into voting for Brexit. They felt disrespected I think.

Any criticism of the EU gets the majority foaming at the mouth on here...I've been on the receiving end of it for years....sure they gave us roads for Christ's sakes!!! Roads!!

Lefty Bicek

ArchXStanton wrote: »

Any criticism of the EU gets the majority foaming at the mouth on here...I've been on the receiving end of it for years....sure they gave us roads for Christ's sakes!!! Roads!!

And in return we let them think they're 'winning the thread' !

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=108034356&postcount=272

Comedy gold.

ArchXStanton

ArchXStanton wrote: »

Any criticism of the EU gets the majority foaming at the mouth on here...I've been on the receiving end of it for years....sure they gave us roads for Christ's sakes!!! Roads!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qc7HmhrgTuQ

Seth Brundle

eagle eye wrote: »

Is it just me or does it seem to others that some people are shouting down at others in this thread like there shouldn't even be a discussion on this.
Everybody is entitled to have a point of view no matter how unpopular it may be.
I think this type of behaviour by the anti-brexiteers pushed a lot of people, who mightn't have understood much about it, into voting for Brexit. They felt disrespected I think.

The problem I think most people have against the discussions on leaving the EU is the constant barrage of bull**** put forward by those who wish to leave the EU.
They can not or will not support their arguments with facts. It almost comes across as trolling tbh!

Lefty Bicek

Seth Brundle wrote: »

The problem I think most people have against the discussions on leaving the EU is the constant barrage of bull**** put forward by those who wish to leave the EU.
They can not or will not support their arguments with facts. It almost comes across as trolling tbh!

It's not that they're trolling.

It's that 'they' think about things on a more honourable level than most of the people who insult their point of view can conceive.

'They' have aspirations, 'they' aren't mindless consumers, 'they' don't have the sad impulse of the crowd-followers, and 'they' don't believe that 'charity with strings' from our partners is 'prosperity'.

See for yourself how many babies in this thread can't even accept the historical fact of the referendum vote, ('do it again', 'the people didn't know what they voted for', 'politicians lied'). That's a barrage, for sure.

How would people like that accept any facts that might require some conviction, or self-determination ? They haven't got it in them to do it.

It's somewhat like Malcolm X's speech about the house Negro and the field Negro, (with the exception that the major and minor roles are reversed)

But anyway...

'If someone came to the house Negro and said, "Let's go, let's separate," naturally that Uncle Tom would say, "Go where? What could I do without boss? Where would I live? How would I dress? Who would look out for me?" That's the house Negro. But if you went to the field Negro and said, "Let's go, let's separate," he wouldn't even ask you where or how. He'd say, "Yes, let's go."

http://ccnmtl.columbia.edu/projects/mmt/mxp/speeches/mxa17.html


So, on the one hand, are the people like Uncle Tom's.

On the other hand, the people you refer to as 'they', are like Malcolm X's 'field Negroes'.

And the whole world knows that it is the attitude of confident independence which is the more admirable of the two reactions.



.

DChancer

ArchXStanton wrote: »

Any criticism of the EU gets the majority foaming at the mouth on here...I've been on the receiving end of it for years....sure they gave us roads for Christ's sakes!!! Roads!!

They have also provided us with the platform for huge inward investment as the only English speaking member of the Euro.
Intel, IBM, Microsoft, Google, Facebook, numerous pharma and medical device companies, to name but a few. That's a lot of jobs and a lot of taxes.
Our Agri-food sector would be nest to non existent.
They also provided the platform for huge social improvements from equality legislation to ESF and other educational funding.
Yes the EU has problems, but nothing like the problems that Irexit or joining with the Tory Little Englanders would bring.

First Up

Lefty Bicek wrote:

It was not the only possible course of action.

It worked.

dan1895

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Yes. Irexit needs an airing, and mature national discussion. Personally I am very against it on its own. It would be an even worse move than Brexit. But worth analysing it in a more sophisticated and rational way than the discussion that preceeded the Brexit referendum.

Similar for Breunion. If a hard or no deal Brexit goes ahead, then Breunion also need serious consideration. And in that context, Irexit would be a different situation, and it also possibly, the correct step for southern Ireland.

Why does it need an airing and National discussion when according to polls 90% of people are in favour of remaining in the EU?
Also not one person for this on this thread or anywhere else has put forward an argument that would even have me stop and think about this for one second, its just soundbites like "unelected beuracrats" and "masters in Brussels"

Seth Brundle

Lefty Bicek wrote: »

It's not that they're trolling.

Constantly throwing ideas out there with no substantive background or logic to them isn't trolling?

Lefty Bicek wrote: »

It's that 'they' think about things on a more honourable level than most of the people who insult their point of view can conceive.

WTF?
Maybe provide an example of this please?

Lefty Bicek wrote: »

'They' have aspirations, 'they' aren't mindless consumers, 'they' don't have the sad impulse of the crowd-followers, and 'they' don't believe that 'charity with strings' from our partners is 'prosperity'.

Where is the charity with strings from our partners?

Lefty Bicek wrote: »

See for yourself how many babies in this thread can't even accept the historical fact of the referendum vote, ('do it again', 'the people didn't know what they voted for', 'politicians lied'). That's a barrage, for sure.

So you can't prove your point so revert to insting your political opponents?
Anyhow which historical fact of the referendum vote are you referring to?

Lefty Bicek wrote: »

How would people like that accept any facts that might require some conviction, or self-determination ? They haven't got it in them to do it.

It's somewhat like Malcolm X's speech about the house Negro and the field Negro, (with the exception that the major and minor roles are reversed)

FFS :rolleyes: