Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Leo is the new king of Ireland.
Comments
-
That really begs the question then as to why FG didn't suffer a similiar fate[proportionally, that is, they lost a good number of seats] to Labour.
They did suffer. They came in after FF, in 2011. But still needed a hand. Then they got hammered in the following election. They really need to look at how on earth, in such a short amount of time they went from getting in by slagging off FF and making promises to change the way we do business, to putting their hand out to FF and continuing the way we always did business.
For some reason, there's a 'boys will be boys' attitude to FG and FF. We hold other parties to a higher standard.
Labour and the Greens got punished for allowing FF/FG be FF/FG.0 -
That really begs the question then as to why FG didn't suffer a similiar fate[proportionally, that is, they lost a good number of seats] to Labour.
The Fg voters dont really have anywhere to go in their minds. The left leaning Labour have independents, SF, FF. Also its a matter of perception, people wont change their minds, but if Labour were voted in, to "curb FG excesses" LOL to that, but anyway. They did a bloody good job for those that voted for them, in my opinion!0 -
But the flipside of that is that they emerged from the 2016 election as the largest party, after years of austerity. They also formed a government that resulted in Enda Kenny being the longest serving FG Taoiseach in the history of the state.Matt Barrett wrote: »That really begs the question then as to why FG didn't suffer a similiar fate[proportionally, that is, they lost a good number of seats] to Labour.
They did suffer. They came in after FF, in 2011. But still needed a hand. Then they got hammered in the following election. They really need to look at how on earth, in such a short amount of time they went from getting in by slagging off FF and making promises to change the way we do business, to putting their hand out to FF and continuing the way we always did business.
For some reason, there's a 'boys will be boys' attitude to FG and FF. We hold other parties to a higher standard.
Matt, would you have expected FG to get a majority in 2010, or even to have been reelected in 2016 without losing a significant number of seats? There hasn't been a single party government in the ROI in my lifetime, and it's generally accepted that an incumbent government loses seats when seeking reelection.
FG's electoral performance is very much within those parameters[their gains, in opinion polls, since the 2016 election are surprising tbf].0 -
Johnny Dogs wrote: »You can describe FG with many different descriptions, but rump is a new one for me
I'm on a short break here out on the field with work and on mobile, so I'm certainly not going to trawl through every FF budget speech Enda ever made, but here's an extract from an article in the Times.
Relevant parts are bolded.
Dud someone say something about always possible to screw things up worse?
If but and maybe.
I didn't mention Enda's speeches so I don't know why you referred to them. I gave Richard Bruton's speeches as an example.
http://www.politics.ie/forum/fine-gael/81108-richard-brutons-budget-speeches.html#post1817559
This old post from a rival forum sets it out very very clearly. To take just one example, on 6th December 2006:
"The Government has doubled its dependence on the construction sector to support its revenue. A total of 25% of every tax euro spent by the Government comes from the construction sector. We are not in a strong position; we are, in fact, in a vulnerable position.
The real question is whether the Government has done enough to build the capability of the economy to withstand the real pressures under which it is about to come. Those pressures do not merely revolve around the possible slowdown in the housing market; they relate to the relentless march of competition that is coming our way. Our competitiveness has declined in each of the past five years. In the same period, our share of export markets and the level of manufacturing employment have fallen. Some 50% of the jobs that existed in IDA Ireland and Enterprise Ireland industries five years ago have disappeared"
If ever a man saw it coming, it was him. It is there in black and white.0 -
But the flipside of that is that they emerged from the 2016 election as the largest party, after years of austerity. They also formed a government that resulted in Enda Kenny being the longest serving FG Taoiseach in the history of the state.
Matt, would you have expected FG to get a majority in 2010, or even to have been reelected in 2016 without losing a significant number of seats? There hasn't been a single party government in the ROI in my lifetime, and it's generally accepted that an incumbent government loses seats when seeking reelection.
FG's electoral performance is very much within those parameters[their gains, in opinion polls, since the 2016 election are surprising tbf].
I think, if they had have done a reasonable job, they would have waltzed in in 2016. People were not happy with them or their one sided austerity. How they've the brass neck to go cap in hand to FF is for them to ask themselves.
As regards emerging as the largest party, look at the alphabet soup the government is and not to mention the unofficial partnership with FF. It looks to me that they put being in above all else. Again, something for FG to look at themselves about.
I expect they'll likely get in again despite the worsening crises, but if they do it'll be by another alphabet soup mish mash. People are still untrusting of FF, despite great PR from FG. And the others are too small. The one hope we have of breaking the civil war monopoly is SF, like it or not, but FG won't put SF on their dance card because the troubles or some other faux moralistic nonsense. In truth FF and FG have each others back, SF or whomever might not.0 -
Advertisement
-
Idbatterim wrote: »blanch152 I will respond to a few of your points. First Dublin is not a large European city. Secondy, the high rise issue is a joke, the height should be approproate to the area, this would address a large part of the issue. I live out near Rathcoole, do you know how much greenfield I pass to get out here on the N7? It is 5 minutes to get here from the M50, N7 junction.
Next point, you cant leave the private sector to fix this. Their sole motive is profit (which is fine, all of ours is), I think that I can safely say that housing, is way too vital , to leave to "the market"...
This is entirely government fault.
My folks have a place in Athlone and Dublin, I live in Dublin. My mates would give their right arm, just to have their own space, even if just a compact, modern studio! This bull**** of "we all want a 4 bed semi D" yes, that is the aspiration for many AT SOME POINT! Myself and my mates are living in the here and now! As you say, there is such demand for this well located, 4 bed semi, it will be out of reach for the vast majority, that I understand!
The lack of apartments and studios going up, the density and the cost to construct them, is a total and utter joke! And if you leave it to the private sector, they will go for the highest price they can achieve, obviously, the government has to get involved here! Or are you ok with two people living next door to each other in an apartment, one breaking their necks to pay a fortune on rent or mortgage, while the other nextdoor, has it handed to him or her on a plate? Evidently!
I am the first to commend the Central bank on not changing the goal posts, I have said this over a year ago on boards, leave the lending criteria as is, it will eventually force the government to act! When prices cant just climb relentlessly!
You think the issues have not been apparent for years? This is Ireland all over, talk talk talk for years, debate, dialogue, its great if youre one of the "I'm alright jack brigade" There are bedrooms going on daft in Dublin for 1,000 a month, are you paying that kind of money Blanch?
I came across the below video yesterday, I dont agree with the part about Nimbyism, but this hits the nail on the head, over why nothing is being done! Please take a look at it and you can give me your thoughts on it. I actually have another more detailed one, that I will find a link to shortly... Funny with NAMA and the bailout, how they could move mountains in hours...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dcbjWGj3jBk&app=desktop
I really don't like watching videos on youtube, they are generally a waste of time.
There is a lot on this thread that is worth replying to, some interesting stuff being said. To address one issue - the Rathcool one.
It is absolutely the wrong idea to build housing beside the N7. If we did, it wouldn't take you five minutes to reach the M50 but fifty minutes.
High-rise, high-density housing needs to be built along public transport corridors which all need to be upgraded.
A redevelopment for housing of the original Dublin Industrial Estate between Broombridge and Glasnevin is the right kind of project. So is the Newmarket Square development in the Liberties. Really interested in what the Dublin City Council will do about both of those. Block, delay, discourage, would be my expectation.
There is money available from central government to the local authorities but they are not spending it.0 -
Matt Barrett wrote: »They did suffer. They came in after FF, in 2011. But still needed a hand. Then they got hammered in the following election. They really need to look at how on earth, in such a short amount of time they went from getting in by slagging off FF and making promises to change the way we do business, to putting their hand out to FF and continuing the way we always did business.
For some reason, there's a 'boys will be boys' attitude to FG and FF. We hold other parties to a higher standard.
Labour and the Greens got punished for allowing FF/FG be FF/FG.
I fully expect FG to be the largest party again after the next election. It might be worth reflecting on why that is so. It can't be that they are constantly fooling the electorate, it must be that they are doing something right. Some posters criticise every single thing the government do and don't realise that in looking for change you may be throwing out the baby with the bathwater.
I mean, look what happened with Labour. As I showed earlier in this thread, in a detailed examination of their election promises, they actually delivered on them. Still you have people saying they were a disaster, without any serious analysis.0 -
FreudianSlippers wrote: »There is an argument that, in theory, we could have spent our way through the global economic crash - but just not on what SF and Syriza wanted to spend money on. We'd be in much more debt now and, personally, I don't buy into that theory (although I think we did spend way too little and continue to be far too prudent on capital expenditure).
If we had cut current spending (social benefits largely escaped and are the only place we could have cut more) more seriously, while increasing capital expenditure on public transport, education, water services etc., we may well have come through the depression an awful lot better, but that would have meant more short-term day-to-day hardship but a better outcome.0 -
I fully expect FG to be the largest party again after the next election. It might be worth reflecting on why that is so. It can't be that they are constantly fooling the electorate, it must be that they are doing something right.
On this, I would say many see them as a best of a bad lot and many love them, due to the rising property prices...
you say you dont want to watch the video, I challenge you to counter the claims made in it. Its only five minutes. Long story short, governments love the rising house prices and cry crocodile tears at "the hardship" it inflicts on the non homeowning element of society... there have been endless articles, including from Colm mccarthy, McWilliams and god knows how many others recently, on how this crisis will get worse and solutions to it! I wouldnt trust Murphy, to tell me the time of f**cking day! Of course I dont need them to tell me that. Like I said, FG are grand and dandy, if you are one of them "I'm alright jack brigade" a nice inheritance or two down, bought a house for a pittance years ago, etc...
This is just how off the wall it is, we hear from politicians, that there can be no "excessive" hikes in the pathetic .18% LPT. Imagine them doubling and rising by say a euro a day :rolleyes: But people on the rental market, rent being hiked E300 a month, no problem, nothing to see here... Its disgusting!
http://www.davidmcwilliams.ie/there-will-be-no-relief-for-the-squeezed-middle/0 -
Idbatterim wrote: »On this, I would say many see them as a best of a bad lot and many love them, due to the rising property prices...
you say you dont want to watch the video, I challenge you to counter the claims made in it. Its only five minutes. Long story short, governments love the rising house prices and cry crocodile tears at "the hardship" it inflicts on the non homeowning element of society... there have been endless articles, including from Colm mccarthy, McWilliams and god knows how many others recently, on how this crisis will get worse and solutions to it! I wouldnt trust Murphy, to tell me the time of f**cking day! Of course I dont need them to tell me that. Like I said, FG are grand and dandy, if you are one of them "I'm alright jack brigade" a nice inheritance or two down, bought a house for a pittance years ago, etc...
This is just how off the wall it is, we hear from politicians, that there can be no "excessive" hikes in the pathetic .18% LPT. Imagine them doubling and rising by say a euro a day :rolleyes: But people on the rental market, rent being hiked E300 a month, no problem, nothing to see here... Its disgusting!
http://www.davidmcwilliams.ie/there-will-be-no-relief-for-the-squeezed-middle/
The housing crisis means demand is high. Why would FG want to change that? If people can't afford the prices developers set they can always dip the pockets of the tax payer.0 -
Advertisement
-
High-rise, high-density housing needs to be built along public transport corridors which all need to be upgraded.
I drive everywhere from here? why? I dont fancy a tour of west dublin on the 69 route. There could be express buses running down the N7, feeding the luas and then into town...0 -
Matt Barrett wrote: »The housing crisis means demand is high. Why would FG want to change that? If people can't afford the prices developers set they can always dip the pockets of the tax payer.
Why would FG want demand to be high? I really don't understand your views on this.
You seem to have a constant position that FG only exist to line the pockets of developers. Objectively, if this is true, it has two implications
(1) Most of the Irish people are fools to keep believing FG.
(2) FG politicians personally benefit from developers getting rich.
There is no evidence to support either of these. Neither is there any evidence that FG deliberately set out to enrich developers.
I would like to produce a link to disprove you, with actual figures, but there is no way of proving something doesn't exist unless you have full and complete knowledge of everything. This is why people can produce conspiracy theories about JFK shootings and moon landings. Some person says they saw a studio mocked up as the moon and you can't disprove that. Some other person say they saw some FBI agent with a gun on a grassy knoll and you can't disprove that. Similarly, some people can say that FG politicians are deliberately enriching developers, and they are free to post that without producing a single shred of evidence, because it is impossible to disprove it.0 -
Idbatterim wrote: »I drive everywhere from here? why? I dont fancy a tour of west dublin on the 69 route. There could be express buses running down the N7, feeding the luas and then into town...
This attitude is why Dublin has the housing and commuting problem it does. Medium to large European cities cannot function if they are based on commuting by car.
Development of Dublin has to be concentrated inside the M50 ring, filling up the last greenfield site and rejuvenating all of the brownfield sites, including two I mentioned in an earlier post. Nothing else will work.
Yes, people won't like it, yes, it will require a difficult cultural change, but that is the hard solution. Bland ideas like "build more social housing" just don't cut it, once you ask how many and where?0 -
This attitude is why Dublin has the housing and commuting problem it does. Medium to large European cities cannot function if they are based on commuting by car.
Development of Dublin has to be concentrated inside the M50 ring, filling up the last greenfield site and rejuvenating all of the brownfield sites, including two I mentioned in an earlier post. Nothing else will work.
Yes, people won't like it, yes, it will require a difficult cultural change, but that is the hard solution. Bland ideas like "build more social housing" just don't cut it, once you ask how many and where?
the reason it has the car problem, is due to pathetic , crap, unreliable public transport. I wont get into that "debate" though, I have been around europe, I know just how appalling it is here...
I agree with you about developing more inside the M50 ring, rezoning many well located, run down business parks, like the one beside the last luas stop in broombridge...0 -
Why would FG want demand to be high? I really don't understand your views on this.
You seem to have a constant position that FG only exist to line the pockets of developers. Objectively, if this is true, it has two implications
(1) Most of the Irish people are fools to keep believing FG.
(2) FG politicians personally benefit from developers getting rich.
There is no evidence to support either of these. Neither is there any evidence that FG deliberately set out to enrich developers.
the electorate, those who vote, certainly for FG, are mostly homeowners, delighted with the rising prices... That is it explained in a nutshell... Ha, "evidence" I am sure FG have the "raise house prices" document, just sitting on a desk somewhere. Give me evidence, there isnt a little green man orbiting the moon in a tea cup!0 -
Stop trying to solve one problem at a time. Stop. Take a breath. Look at all the issues and try a holistic approach. It will honestly be better in the long run.
It can't be done. The average voter doesn't want a holistic approach to the country's problems; the average voter wants the government to solve their problems.
Case in point: a holistic approach would necessarily involve charging for water as a utility, not providing it as a public service. Woe betide the next government to pick up that poisoned chalice.
As I've said many times before: if we want a better government, we're going to need a better electorate.0 -
Idbatterim wrote: »the electorate, those who vote, certainly for FG, are mostly homeowners, delighted with the rising prices... That is it explained in a nutshell... Ha, "evidence" I am sure FG have the "raise house prices" document, just sitting on a desk somewhere. Give me evidence, there isnt a little green man orbiting the moon in a tea cup!
The fact that the housing crisis gets worse each year of FG Government means one of two things:
They aren't very good at managing the state, while making matters worse.
Or
They've no wish to address the problem in any other way than they are currently doing, which is by all measures, making the problem worse.
I do know the 1 in 4 TD's who are landlords are making money directly from the crisis, but I'm sure that's merely happenstance.
I recall Kenny's government asking the developers what they thought should be done about the crisis back in the day.0 -
Matt Barrett wrote: »The fact that the housing crisis gets worse each year of FG Government means one of two things:
I remind you again of this morning's headline. Not the fluff one, the other one.
40% less people sleeping rough.Matt Barrett wrote: »I do know the 1 in 4 TD's who are landlords are making money directly from the crisis, but I'm sure that's merely happenstance.
This tired old trope. Again.
25% of TDs are landlord's. That's across both sides of the benches remember.
78% of TDs are men. Can we trust any legislation which inordinately benefits males?
What if 90% of TDs owned cars or 95% have children? Maybe we should hand the ministries of transport and children over to genderless, sterile, robots who lack the ability to hold a driver's licence. Just in case.Matt Barrett wrote: »I recall Kenny's government asking the developers what they thought should be done about the crisis back in the day.
What a ludicrous, bonkers, off the wall idea. Asking people with experience in the matter for their opinion!
Next you'll tell me minister Creed met with farmers for advice on the fodder crisis.
Or minister Murphy stopped Fr. McVerry on the street and offered him a penny for his thoughts.
Madness. The world's gone insane.0 -
Colonel Claptrap wrote: »I remind you again of this morning's headline. Not the fluff one, the other one.
40% less people sleeping rough.
Commented on this earlier. You read it, but here; great news. Well done all involved for getting them off the streets and out of the cold.Colonel Claptrap wrote: »This tired old trope. Again.
25% of TDs are landlord's. That's across both sides of the benches remember.
78% of TDs are men. Can we trust any legislation which inordinately benefits males?
Not sure what you are getting at. Are you suggesting any impropriety on behalf of our politicians? I was noting who profits from the crisis. Not sure the sex is relevant.Colonel Claptrap wrote: »What if 90% of TDs owned cars or 95% have children? Maybe we should hand the ministries of transport and children over to genderless, sterile, robots who lack the ability to hold a driver's licence. Just in case.
I'll leave such surmising to Fritz Lang.Colonel Claptrap wrote: »What a ludicrous, bonkers, off the wall idea. Asking people with experience in the matter for their opinion!
Next you'll tell me minister Creed met with farmers for advice on the fodder crisis.
Or minister Murphy stopped Fr. McVerry on the street and offered him a penny for his thoughts.
Madness. The world's gone insane.
Would you ask Fianna Fail who they think is best suited to run the country? Would you expect they'd say PBP?
Come off it.0 -
oscarBravo wrote: »It can't be done. The average voter doesn't want a holistic approach to the country's problems; the average voter wants the government to solve their problems.
Case in point: a holistic approach would necessarily involve charging for water as a utility, not providing it as a public service. Woe betide the next government to pick up that poisoned chalice.
As I've said many times before: if we want a better government, we're going to need a better electorate.
Even though taking a holistic approach would actually be a more efficient use of our tax euros? And could lead to tax cuts?
Successive govt approaches to the HSE, Banking, Homelessness, Housing Crisis *Insert problem of choice here* etc, so far have been Make Some Noise, Point the Finger, Announce a Headline Figure "We will reduce the numer of X to Y by date Z", then spectacularly fail to do anything. Then waste money on an enquiry into some scandal that could easily have been avoided because someone wouldn't grasp the nettle early.
Rinse and repeat.0 -
Advertisement
-
Yes, even so. And I don't know that tax cuts are necessarily needed - I'd rather see a broader tax base and better services, personally.Even though taking a holistic approach would actually be a more efficient use of our tax euros? And could lead to tax cuts?Successive govt approaches to the HSE, Banking, Homelessness, Housing Crisis *Insert problem of choice here* etc, so far have been Make Some Noise, Point the Finger, Announce a Headline Figure "We will reduce the numer of X to Y by date Z", then spectacularly fail to do anything. Then waste money on an enquiry into some scandal that could easily have been avoided because someone wouldn't grasp the nettle early.
Rinse and repeat.
Sure. I agree with you: a holistic approach is not just a good idea, it's desperately needed. But the people won't vote for it.
Again, I've cited this example before - I was in Denmark a few years ago during a general election, when one party promised to raise taxes in order to improve services - that party got elected. When was the last time a party got elected in this country on the promise of raising taxes (apart from "other people's taxes", which Irish people are only too happy to vote for)?0 -
blackwhite wrote: »And they made the situation progressively worse again.
Something that the defenders of SF and Syriza always coveniently overlook.
The refrain we consistently hear from those on here who laud SF is "they couldn't do any worse that FF or FG".
Syriza are the instant rebuttal to that argument - proof that no matter how bad things are, there's always somebody who can come in and screw it up even more.
Syriza inherited the problem from the previous center right government.
Who came in and screwed it up even further was the Troika of The European Commission, The International Monetary Fund and The European Central Bank.
Something belatedly acknowledge by The International Monetary Fund0 -
Syriza inherited the problem from the previous center right government.
Who came in and screwed it up even further was the Troika of The European Commission, The International Monetary Fund and The European Central Bank.
Something belatedly acknowledge by The International Monetary Fund
They admitted that they got growth forecasts for Greece wrong, and that the level of debt in Greece was never going to be able to be paid off.
The EU stool to its guns too stringently initially, their biggest fear of course was the collapse of the euro, that would have made the crisis worse throughout the whole EU, let alone Greece, or Ireland even for that matter.
If the euro had collapsed for instance we would have probably been bankrupted, and that would have been disastrous for the country, we wouldn't be even close to as good as our position is now even if that had happened.
Interesting though to see the defence of syriza, who totally fcuked up and would have probably caused the catastrophe to be worse than it eventually turned out if they had stuck to their guns.
They didn't, they capitulated and now its being said they inherited their problems!
So did FG and Labour, they steered us through despite the parading of their total opposites at other another party add fheis.
Yet FG and Labour are still getting mugged for doing their job better than syriza, that bits hard to figure out.
I have many problems with FG philosophy, attitudes, cronyism and arrogance, but their handling of the bailout and our subsequent exiting from it isn't one of them.0 -
They admitted that they got growth forecasts for Greece wrong, and that the level of debt in Greece was never going to be able to be paid off.
The EU stool to its guns too stringently initially, their biggest fear of course was the collapse of the euro, that would have made the crisis worse throughout the whole EU, let alone Greece, or Ireland even for that matter.
If the euro had collapsed for instance we would have probably been bankrupted, and that would have been disastrous for the country, we wouldn't be even close to as good as our position is now even if that had happened.
Interesting though to see the defence of syriza, who totally fcuked up and would have probably caused the catastrophe to be worse than it eventually turned out if they had stuck to their guns.
They didn't, they capitulated and now its being said they inherited their problems!
So did FG and Labour, they steered us through despite the parading of their total opposites at other another party add fheis.
Yet FG and Labour are still getting mugged for doing their job better than syriza, that bits hard to figure out.
I have many problems with FG philosophy, attitudes, cronyism and arrogance, but their handling of the bailout and our subsequent exiting from it isn't one of them.
They got a loan and got the economic figures growing again. Well done. 'We took one for the team' smirked Noonan.
Sadly that's the only part of the story they are interested in.
When you've a country in varying states of crises and the highest personal debt level in the EU, forgive me if I'll leave the bunting under the stairs.0 -
They admitted that they got growth forecasts for Greece wrong, and that the level of debt in Greece was never going to be able to be paid off.
The EU stool to its guns too stringently initially, their biggest fear of course was the collapse of the euro, that would have made the crisis worse throughout the whole EU, let alone Greece, or Ireland even for that matter.
If the euro had collapsed for instance we would have probably been bankrupted, and that would have been disastrous for the country, we wouldn't be even close to as good as our position is now even if that had happened.
Interesting though to see the defence of syriza, who totally fcuked up and would have probably caused the catastrophe to be worse than it eventually turned out if they had stuck to their guns.
They didn't, they capitulated and now its being said they inherited their problems!
So did FG and Labour, they steered us through despite the parading of their total opposites at other another party add fheis.
Yet FG and Labour are still getting mugged for doing their job better than syriza, that bits hard to figure out.
I have many problems with FG philosophy, attitudes, cronyism and arrogance, but their handling of the bailout and our subsequent exiting from it isn't one of them.
So the Troika got growth forecasts wrong, and imposed a level of debt on Greece that was never going to be paid off, all based on the mess created by the previous centre right government, yet Syriza were to blame for the total fcuk up in Greece.
I am not a SF supporter or a Syriza supporter, but unlike some here who do not agree with their politics I find it a bit much attempting to lay all the problems of Greece at Syriza`s door.
As far as I could see FG simply adhered to the terms of the bailout agreed by FF, but tried to tag on water charges as a requirement by the Troika.0 -
Matt Barrett wrote: »The fact that the housing crisis gets worse each year of FG Government means one of two things:
They aren't very good at managing the state, while making matters worse.
Or
They've no wish to address the problem in any other way than they are currently doing, which is by all measures, making the problem worse.
I do know the 1 in 4 TD's who are landlords are making money directly from the crisis, but I'm sure that's merely happenstance.
I recall Kenny's government asking the developers what they thought should be done about the crisis back in the day.
The numbers living rough in Dublin have dropped by 40% in the last quarter. Who gets the credit for that?0 -
Matt Barrett wrote: »They got a loan and got the economic figures growing again. Well done. 'We took one for the team' smirked Noonan.
Sadly that's the only part of the story they are interested in.
When you've a country in varying states of crises and the highest personal debt level in the EU, forgive me if I'll leave the bunting under the stairs.
Except we don't have the highest personal debt level in the EU.
https://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/irish-household-debt-falls-but-still-among-highest-in-europe-1.3216828
Fourth most according to the Irish Times.0 -
So the Troika got growth forecasts wrong, and imposed a level of debt on Greece that was never going to be paid off, all based on the mess created by the previous centre right government, yet Syriza were to blame for the total fcuk up in Greece.
I am not a SF supporter or a Syriza supporter, but unlike some here who do not agree with their politics I find it a bit much attempting to lay all the problems of Greece at Syriza`s door.
As far as I could see FG simply adhered to the terms of the bailout agreed by FF, but tried to tag on water charges as a requirement by the Troika.
But that's the point, syriza didn't, look what happened!0 -
But that's the point, syriza didn't, look what happened!
What happened was the Troika got their economic forecast wrong and imposed a debt level on Greece they knew would never be repaid.
The result of both was to cause unneccessary suffering to the Greek population for no discernible purpose.
And people wonder why there has been an increase in the number of people all over the EU having doubts about the whole EU set up.0 -
Advertisement
-
What happened was the Troika got their economic forecast wrong and imposed a debt level on Greece they knew would never be repaid.
The result of both was to cause unneccessary suffering to the Greek population for no discernible purpose.
And people wonder why there has been an increase in the number of people all over the EU having doubts about the whole EU set up.
We've done alright with the EU I'd say, maybe you think differently?0
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement