Irexit party yay or nay?

4068ac1elhodqr

Rhineshark wrote: »

The Irish president is a figurehead, Ireland is a parliamentary republic, not a presidential or semi-presidential system so how he's elected isn't really relevent to the price of fruit. All the EU countries are either one of the three above or a constitutional monarchy (in practice a parliamentary system).

...The nominated president and the Council nominate the other 27 members, one per state, who are then voted on by the Parliament.

Basically, checks and balances. Works pretty well tbh. And no, I would not prefer everyone to be directly elected. As a person living in a very small country, I appreciate that we smaller populations are not just automatically drowned out by the population ten times the size. And that's just the one next door.

That's a sensible, if long-winded explanation. Hence the abstraction people feel towards wine-loving Juncker.

But how would the public in the USA feel about leaving the choice of their President up to each of their 50 state leaders to debate amongst themselves, rather than a more open collective public vote to decide their own united 50 states presidency type role.

People in low population states such as Alaska don't seem to mind.

Of course maybe this current term isn't the best example, but think back to good ole saxaphone playing Billly C, well before the under the desk happened.

prawnsambo

Vera Unsightly Bellows wrote: »

That's a sensible, if long-winded explanation. Hence the abstraction people feel towards wine-loving Juncker.

But how would the public in the USA feel about leaving the choice of their President up to each of their 50 state leaders to debate amongst themselves, rather than a more open collective public vote to decide their own united 50 states presidency type role.

People in low population states such as Alaska don't seem to mind.

Of course maybe this current term isn't the best example, but think back to good ole saxaphone playing Billly C, well before the under the desk happened.

There's no comparison between the roles and powers of the president of the USA and the president of the EU Commission. Why is this myth still perpetuated?

Rhineshark

Vera Unsightly Bellows wrote: »

That's a sensible, if long-winded explanation. Hence the abstraction people feel towards wine-loving Juncker.

But how would the public in the USA feel about leaving the choice of their President up to each of their 50 state leaders to debate amongst themselves, rather than a more open collective public vote to decide their own united 50 states presidency type role.

People in low population states such as Alaska don't seem to mind.

Of course maybe this current term isn't the best example, but think back to good ole saxaphone playing Billly C, well before the under the desk happened.

I doubt they'd appreciate it being changed on them, but they have their own customs. Again, this is for a very different role so it's apples and oranges. Even the US does not directly elect their president though. They vote for electoral college representation, which was supposed to help deal with population disparities within (cities vs rural) and between states (and prevent the people electing an absolute headbanger, go figure).

President is president in the US. Their system didn't change (bar all the gerrymandering and voter disenfranchisement since), so Clinton or Trump, doesn't matter to the point.

But yes, why are you bringing in the president of Ireland and the US? You are comparing figure/heads of state to the Commission president. The title may be the same but the role is not. You may as well be comparing Dublin CoCo to the European Council.

An Ciarraioch

Arthur Daley wrote: »

prawnsambo wrote: »

Yes, because the EU/ECB gave idiots a lot of money on easy credit terms and forced them to buy property with it. More brexiter nonsense.

Well were did it come from then? I thought we didn't have a brass farthing without Europe, so it wasn't self generated. the easy credit came from somewhere.

Ironically, the only way that the financial crises in Ireland, Spain, Greece etc, could have been prevented would have been through deeper federalism, in the form of fiscal union. The US Federal Reserve effectively acts as the bank of last resort, directly intervening in the fiscal affairs of each US state. Thus, if in 2002, the ECB had been given similar powers, it could have put the brakes on the property bubble, rather than having to leave the management of it to the Central Bank of Ireland (and Spain and Greece in those countries).

Arthur Daley

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Thus, if in 2002, the ECB had been given similar powers, it could have put the brakes on the property bubble, rather than having to leave the management of it to the Central Bank of Ireland (and Spain and Greece in those countries).

I don't really understand what powers the ecb has now that they didn't have in 2002. They issued our currency in 2002, they had report after report on the property concentration in the economy. But they claim they had inadequate powers over the bsnking system. Doesn't make sense. If they were currency issuer but had no control over the credit supply within their balliwick, then I think they were incompetant.

Anthracite

Vera Unsightly Bellows wrote: »

That's a sensible, if long-winded explanation. Hence the abstraction people feel towards wine-loving Juncker.

Sorry, this isn't intended to be a one-liner, but this is a perfect example of the propaganda put out by the Brexiteer press/Russian troll farms. A thought-terminating cliché to write off a guy not based on what he has done or has not done (which would take time to lay out and argue), but based on slinging mud about an irrelevance.

I guess the Russian troll farms/alt-right think this stuff will gain enough traction here to do damage too.

Anthracite

Arthur Daley wrote: »

I don't really understand what powers the ecb has now that they didn't have in 2002. They issued our currency in 2002, they had report after report on the property concentration in the economy. But they claim they had inadequate powers over the bsnking system. Doesn't make sense. If they were currency issuer but had no control over the credit supply within their balliwick, then I think they were incompetant.

You think the ECB should be blamed for the Irish Central Bank's, the Irish Financial Regulator's, and Fianna Fail's (and their voters') actions and inaction?

Accountability starts and ends at the ECB?

Of course if the ECB had somehow stepped in and stopped Fianna Fail from ruining us, Boards would be full of people screaming about the abrogation of our democracy, and basically the exact same Brexiteer nonsense we are reading here.

Arthur Daley

Yes. That's what currency union meant. We issued our currency until 2002. Then it was handed over to the ECB. This isn't new, this is what ever closer integration means.

I am not going to be an apologist for Fianna Fail. But that doesn't let the ECB and the EU off the hook, when the buck was meant to stop at the top.

Anthracite

Arthur Daley wrote: »

Yes. That's what currency union meant. We issued our currency until 2002. Then it was handed over to the ECB. This isn't new, this is what ever closer integration means.

I am not going to be an apologist for Fianna Fail. But that doesn't let the ECB and the EU off the hook, when the buck was meant to stop at the top.

So you feel that the ECB should determing the budgets for member states, rather than the democtatically elected governments?

An Ciarraioch

Arthur Daley wrote: »

Yes. That's what currency union meant. We issued our currency until 2002. Then it was handed over to the ECB. This isn't new, this is what ever closer integration means.

I am not going to be an apologist for Fianna Fail. But that doesn't let the ECB and the EU off the hook, when the buck was meant to stop at the top.

The ECB only had the power to issue currency and set interest rates, regulation remained the preserve of the national central banks - that's why the whole debate about Eurobonds developed during the bailouts, and then agreement was reached on quantitative easing.

Arthur Daley

The ECB set itself up as currency issuer, interest rate setter, and supreme oversight over the banking system in 1999. Principally it should be judged on it's track record in these fields.

It's governers do regularly comment and advise on fiscal policy then, as they do now.

Anthracite

Arthur Daley wrote: »

The ECB set itself up as currency issuer, interest rate setter, and supreme oversight over the banking system in 1999. Principally it should be judged on it's track record in these fields.

It's governers do regularly comment and advise on fiscal policy then, as they do now.

You seem to have missed my question above.

Arthur Daley

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

The ECB only had the power to issue currency and set interest rates, regulation remained the preserve of the national central banks - that's why the whole debate about Eurobonds developed during the bailouts, and then agreement was reached on quantitative easing.

Again it would appear to be incompetance that the currency issuer and interest rate setter claims to have no control over credit creation within it's monetary union. Whatever way we look at this, it doesn't inspire confidence in ever greater integration.

Hotblack Desiato

Arthur Daley wrote: »

Ireland is in debt to the tune of €200bn as confirmed today by the MoF.

Yes and "only" about 25-35bn of that is bank debt, which FF piled onto the state when they issued the sovereign guarantee

By far the largest part of the increase in national debt was down to deficit spending in the recession, mostly on welfare (which FF whacked up, just before FF blew up the economy. Smart guys, eh?)

prawnsambo

Arthur Daley wrote: »

Again it would appear to be incompetance that the currency issuer and interest rate setter claims to have no control over credit creation within it's monetary union. Whatever way we look at this, it doesn't inspire confidence in ever greater integration.

Well I wouldn't be looking to you for advice on the matter. You're all over the place. "It's the ECB's fault for not doing anything". "It's the ECB's fault for not being able to do anything".

Arthur Daley

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Yes and "only" about 25-35bn of that is bank debt, which FF piled onto the state when they issued the sovereign guarantee

By far the largest part of the increase in national debt was down to deficit spending in the recession, mostly on welfare (which FF whacked up, just before FF blew up the economy. Smart guys, eh?)

Indeed. That's a hell of a party when you think about it.

4068ac1elhodqr

Anthracite wrote: »

Sorry, this isn't intended to be a one-liner, but this is a perfect example of the propaganda put out by the Brexiteer press/Russian troll farms. A thought-terminating cliché to write off a guy not based on what he has done or has not done (which would take time to lay out and argue), but based on slinging mud about an irrelevance.

I guess the Russian troll farms/alt-right think this stuff will gain enough traction here to do damage too.

Not intended to be directly soley at you, but isn't this type of mud-slinging defacto knee jerk response part of the problem? Asking too many questions simply isn't allowed, as this (above) is the stereo-typical response you get.

Yes a thought-terminating reponse, as to why brexit or trump happened (many are still in denial or awaiting his removal, or that 2nd chance saloon at an aul referendum).

i.e. Blame it all on some sort of iimaginary farm occupied by rows upon rows of muddy trolls, maybe in some far flung siberian type warehouse, is this what you mean? From the TV coverage of maybe the two biggest political events, in the last 50yrs, there seemed to be very few wearing those big fur hat things, out casting votes.

Whilst Irexit is very unlikely anytime soon (5yrs might be different), the EU has to take even greater care of all it's citizen's concerns.

You only have to look across to Sweden, who next week has a substantial chance of a slightly 'Swexit' type party winning the most seats. Just as common, average, decent folks replace their 80+ cars that went up in smoke, across multiple cities all in one single night recently.

fash

Arthur Daley wrote: »

I am not going to be an apologist for Fianna Fail.

but you are an apologist for FF- if you think anyone else is responsible. The bank guarantee, the run up to it, theartificial inflation of the economy, and massive costs put on the tax payer were done by FF without any involvement or even coordination with any external parties. It was foisted on them just as much as it was foisted on us.

Arthur Daley wrote: »

But that doesn't let the ECB and the EU off the hook, when the buck was meant to stop at the top.

but the ECB and EU were not the top- the Irish state was. Based on the problem you identify, you should be arguing that more power should be taken out of Irish politicians hands and given to the EU - not the opposite.

listermint

Vera Unsightly Bellows wrote: »

Not intended to be directly soley at you, but isn't this type of mud-slinging defacto knee jerk response part of the problem? Asking too many questions simply isn't allowed, as this (above) is the stereo-typical response you get.

Yes a thought-terminating reponse, as to why brexit or trump happened (many are still in denial or awaiting his removal, or that 2nd chance saloon at an aul referendum).

i.e. Blame it all on some sort of iimaginary farm occupied by rows upon rows of muddy trolls, maybe in some far flung siberian type warehouse, is this what you mean? From the TV coverage of maybe the two biggest political events, in the last 50yrs, there seemed to be very few wearing those big fur hat things, out casting votes.

Whilst Irexit is very unlikely anytime soon (5yrs might be different), the EU has to take even greater care of all it's citizen's concerns.

You only have to look across to Sweden, who next week has a substantial chance of a slightly 'Swexit' type party winning the most seats. Just as common, average, decent folks replace their 80+ cars that went up in smoke, across multiple cities all in one single night recently.

Your the one posting daily mail style slanderous nonsense .


Tbh I'd expect more from you than using absolute nonsense about someone being an alcoholic.


Can you not even see the ridiculousness in your post. Yet you want to be taken seriously on what you think should be a serious discussion.


Head scratcher alright.

Hurrache

Vera Unsightly Bellows wrote: »

For better or worse 52% of the UK electorate made a choice,

No, only around 37% of the electorate made that choice.

prawnsambo

Vera Unsightly Bellows wrote: »

Whilst Irexit is very unlikely anytime soon (5yrs might be different), the EU has to take even greater care of all it's citizen's concerns.

Never mind five years time. Right now, Irish companies are looking to take the UK out of their supply chain. This is being helped massively by rolling price rises from UK exporters who have been passing on the cost of the fall in sterling on their imports. The choice of buying from the UK because they're closer and therefore faster, which outweighed price differentials is now no longer going to be an advantage.

In five years time, that process will be pretty much over. Much of what we buy from the UK can be bought from the rest of the EU.

seamus

Funny to see the claims that "The EU is really going to have to do something to stop other countries from jumping ship".

Brexit itself is an incredible piece of pro-EU propaganda, and the EU doesn't even have to put in any effort.

The absolute mess that the UK is making of Brexit and the mess it'll make of their economy will serve perfectly well as a good lesson about why leaving the EU is not just a simple unsigning of a treaty and getting on with your life.

prawnsambo

seamus wrote: »

Funny to see the claims that "The EU is really going to have to do something to stop other countries from jumping ship".

Brexit itself is an incredible piece of pro-EU propaganda, and the EU doesn't even have to put in any effort.

The absolute mess that the UK is making of Brexit and the mess it'll make of their economy will serve perfectly well as a good lesson about why leaving the EU is not just a simple unsigning of a treaty and getting on with your life.

Even if it weren't the mess it has become and was an orderly reset to an EEA type deal or any of the other flavours available, the reality is that no alternative has an up side. There's been a lot of talk of the trade implications, which are of course very important, but the masses of other allied and tangential agreements that affect everyone's lives would have to be duplicated or taken inside the borders at a huge cost.

oscarBravo

prawnsambo wrote: »

There's no comparison between the roles and powers of the president of the USA and the president of the EU Commission. Why is this myth still perpetuated?

Because it suits a narrative. It's not ignorance or misunderstanding; it's impossible to remain ignorant of this simple fact when it has been repeatedly corrected for you.

It's the same as the "tax consolidation" myth. When someone talks about the EU forcing us to increase our corporation tax rates after it has been repeatedly pointed out to them that that's not an EU competence, it becomes clear that it's not ignorance being spouted, but an agenda being driven.

4068ac1elhodqr

Hurrache wrote: »

No, only around 37% of the electorate made that choice.

Which is still a larger electorate, a bigger turn-out, and more votes for yes, than the referendum to join the EU back in 1975, and your point is?

Hurrache

Vera Unsightly Bellows wrote: »

Which is still a larger electorate, a bigger turn-out, and more votes for yes, than the referendum to join the EU back in 1975, and your point is?

My point is obvious, your statement was false.

seamus

Vera Unsightly Bellows wrote: »

Which is still a larger electorate, a bigger turn-out, and more votes for yes, than the referendum to join the EU back in 1975, and your point is?

To be fair, you're the one who claimed that more than half the electorate approved Brexit, which is factually incorrect.

That said, overall I dislike the argument since IMO not casting your vote is an implicit approval of the outcome, whatever that outcome is.

But you need to pick your words carefully if you're going for accuracy

4068ac1elhodqr

oscarBravo wrote: »

It's the same as the "tax consolidation" myth. When someone talks about the EU forcing us to increase our corporation tax rates after it has been repeatedly pointed out to them that that's not an EU competence, it becomes clear that it's not ignorance being spouted, but an agenda being driven.

Some would also say it's slightly ignorant to disregard this core ambition of the folks in the EC. To not prepare for such an eventuality is lazy at best, especially as the UK positions itself as a low-corp-tax country (down to 17% shortly).

Maybe they're simply afraid of scaring off multinationals, or the possibility of dredging up more €15bn type fines due to 'tax irregularities'.

Currently, yes it may not be possible to enforce tax harmonisation, but should it be ruled out entirely in the future as a factor?

The EU’s tax commissioner Pierre Moscovici previously stated that the Commission was considering using extraordinary powers to strip EU states of their veto power on tax matters to break resistance over blocked legislation (directly referencing Ireland and Hungary).

demfad

Hermann Kelly is the director of Communications of the Europe of Freedom and Direct Democracy that includes UKIP and Alternativ Fur Deutchland.
He is a top aide to Nigel Farage. NIgel is an ally of Dana Rochabacher who was mentioned in the indictment of Paul Manafort and believed to be a subject of the Mueller investigation into Donald Trump. Same story with Assange and Roger Stone.
Almost all the parties in the EFDD have connections with Russia including funding.
These parties sent reps out to Crimea to oversee the 'fair' plebiscite after the annexation of Crimea by Russia.

Here is a particularly bizarre anecdote about what and who we are dealing with:

The EFDD with the help of Russian's distributed a book to every MEPs pigeon holes attacking The Lithuanian president who was an outspoken Putin critic.
The EFDD staffer who distributed the books used to do much of his printing in the Russian Embassy in Brussels where he often returned with armfuls of Russian propaganda.

Surely Kelly as Comms director of the EFDD has some explaining to do here?

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/dec/18/nigel-farage-party-staffer-russian-embassy-smear-campaign-kremlin-critic

While the new party appears to be ridiculous it is worth noting that similar parties across Europe come with backup in Russian information influence and funding.

A Sunday Times article this week noted Russia's heightened interest in Ireland as somewhere to potentially destabilise after Brexit.

I would tend to agree and the links to Russia coupled with Irexit servicing Russian foreign policy means all the ducks are visible, walking and quacking.

jm08

Vera Unsightly Bellows wrote: »

You only have to look across to Sweden, who next week has a substantial chance of a slightly 'Swexit' type party winning the most seats. Just as common, average, decent folks replace their 80+ cars that went up in smoke, across multiple cities all in one single night recently.

I think they have a chance of winning 20% of the vote. All other parties are pledged to oppose them.