Irexit party yay or nay?

Zubeneschamali

Gravelly wrote: »

I didn't claim that at all though.

Ok, bye!

Nelson Van Alden

It makes no sense for Ireland to leave Europe, our economy is completely reliant on free trade with Europe. We would lose out on any funding from Europe which has helped modernise this country and put an end to Ireland being 'the sick man of Europe'. The idea that we can be a more prosperous country on our own is ridiculous.

Tabnabs

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Nobody here has said otherwise.

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

I think we shouldn't give platforms or validity to people who talk absolute nonsense and admit with pride that they don't really have a clue what the consequences of their proposed actions would be, but that they want to just shake things up. That's anarchy.

It doesn't get much clearer than that.

Wheety

How do you pronounce Irexit? Brexit just works as a portmanteau but Irexit?

Is it Ire (as in the start of Ireland) and then zit?
Ire Exit? (Doesn't sound right)
I rexit?

ancapailldorcha

Tabnabs wrote: »

It doesn't get much clearer than that.

Not the same thing. People have a right to free speech but individuals and organisations are under no obligation whatsoever to provide a platform for said free speech.

Tabnabs

Laughable, you are attempting to move the posts and trying to introduce subtle changes to support your view. The viewpoint has clearly been made that this dissenting opinion should not be given "platforms or validity".

Arthur Daley

The 'Stockholm syndrome' is strong when it comes to our relationship with the ECB and EU. The EC is seriously anti democratic. 35% of the British electorate recognised the flaws during the 1975 referendum on the EEC. So this has been out there a long time now. You don't have to follow Farage to espouse that. Tony Benn said it all his life, Corbyn has been anti EC all his career.

A Eurosceptic party in Ireland can be a broad church. That it is attacked and vilified by FG/FF and their media agents is utterly predictable. They don't like losing their sense of control.

pleas advice

Wheety wrote: »

How do you pronounce Irexit? Brexit just works as a portmanteau but Irexit?

Is it Ire (as in the start of Ireland) and then zit?
Ire Exit? (Doesn't sound right)
I rexit?

I wrecks it

ancapailldorcha

pleas advice wrote: »

I wrecks it

Serious posts only please.

ancapailldorcha

Tabnabs wrote: »

Laughable, you are attempting to move the posts and trying to introduce subtle changes to support your view. The viewpoint has clearly been made that this dissenting opinion should not be given "platforms or validity".

Nope. If you want to willingly and incorrectly conflate not being given a platform with censorship then that's your prerogative.

Tabnabs

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Nope. If you want to willingly and incorrectly conflate not being given a platform with censorship then that's your prerogative.

Remarkable that you continue to try to deflect the clear correlation. It speaks volumes.

Idbatterim

Given that we have proved incapable of properly governing ourselves. Thank god the eu is over our shoulder and also now vetting our budgets!

Gravelly

Tabnabs wrote: »

Laughable, you are attempting to move the posts and trying to introduce subtle changes to support your view. The viewpoint has clearly been made that this dissenting opinion should not be given "platforms or validity".

It's a recent trend with certain political leanings to pretend that preventing someone from having a platform to speak is not an attack on free speech (as long it is done by their side obviously). We saw this with George Hook, Kevin Myers, etc. It is part of a bigger trend where the use of masked and armed "antifa" thugs to attack dissenting speakers is brushed off (or even encouraged), and those who speak out on social media are hounded from their jobs or have their families threatened. The astonishing thing about it is that the people who support these actions pretend that they are the good guys. There's a spat going on at the moment, where "liberals" are boasting that they have reported an American student to immigration officials because she has expressed conservative opinions on the "Ireland" Twitter account - many these same people are open borders supporters who would be violently opposed to the deportation of immigrants!

weisses

Arthur Daley wrote: »

The 'Stockholm syndrome' is strong when it comes to our relationship with the ECB and EU. The EC is seriously anti democratic. 35% of the British electorate recognised the flaws during the 1975 referendum on the EEC. So this has been out there a long time now. You don't have to follow Farage to espouse that. Tony Benn said it all his life, Corbyn has been anti EC all his career.

A Eurosceptic party in Ireland can be a broad church. That it is attacked and vilified by FG/FF and their media agents is utterly predictable. They don't like losing their sense of control.

Problem with eurosceptic parties is that they are full off hollow rhetoric and fear mongering and offer no real solutions as to how countries will fare better without the EU ... I do agree the EU has its issues as well but at the end of the day I look at quality of life and that is pretty good even compared to a global perspective

Soo if there is a party/person that can make the case that we all will be better off without the EU and provide sound evidence why ....I'm all ears

Gravelly

weisses wrote: »

Problem with eurosceptic parties is that they are full off hollow rhetoric and fear mongering and offer no real solutions as to how countries will fare better without the EU ... I do agree the EU has its issues as well but at the end of the day I look at quality of life and that is pretty good even compared to a global perspective

Soo if there is a party/person that can make the case that we all will be better off without the EU and provide sound evidence why ....I'm all ears

And this is exactly why we shouldn't be afraid of dissenting voices - chances are there won't be any sound evidence, but if there is, why shouldn't we hear and listen to it? Intelligent adults should never fear challenging opinions.

Quin_Dub

The issue is not the dissenting voices , it's the "burn it down" solution they are proposing.

Farage et al have a viewpoint that is extremely simplistic - "We hate the EU so we should leave" without any concern for the implications , a classic case of cutting of ones nose to spite your face"

Whilst leaving might indeed ultimately end up being better for the UK , the method by which they left likely means that they will do significant damage to their economy and society for quite some time before they come out the other side (if they actually do)

I'm open to having debate about the Pros & Cons of the EU and how it could be made better for us , but I'm absolutely against even engaging with anyone who's starting point is "Let's leave , we can sort the details out later"

That approach IS madness and should be treated as such.

By all means let's document the issues and debate each one and work for a negotiated improvement but simply leaving in a huff , which is essentially what the UK have done should simply not be entertained.

As an aside , I don't think that Ireland are ever likely to show any real interest in a UKIP style party (or a Trump one either ) for a whole host of reasons , not least of which is that we don't have a golden age to hark back to - We don't have a rose tinted historical view of "1950's America" or "The Empire" etc..

Ireland , pretty much at any time prior to joining the EU in 1973 was a pretty dreary place with massive unemployment and emigration. not a time anyone would likely wish to go back to.

Wanderer78

Idbatterim wrote:

Given that we have proved incapable of properly governing ourselves. Thank god the eu is over our shoulder and also now vetting our budgets!

By helping to impose policies such as 'expansionery fiscal contraction'!

FreudianSlippers

Gravelly wrote: »

And this is exactly why we shouldn't be afraid of dissenting voices - chances are there won't be any sound evidence, but if there is, why shouldn't we hear and listen to it? Intelligent adults should never fear challenging opinions.

There is no challenging opinion. No evidence whatsoever of how Ireland would be better off outside the EU, no discussion in the slightest of how it would work and no forethought whatsoever of the economic and political implications.

Irexit is a ridiculous idea, people who support the idea based on some kind of underlying proof that we're worse off in the EU or would be better off outside the EU are wrong, but at least they have some kind of basis for their "challenging opinion" as opposed to whatever is going on in this thread; 67 posts in an not a single post as to how/what/why and the consequences.

But god forbid someone doesn't let you voice your empty opinion!

weisses

Gravelly wrote: »

And this is exactly why we shouldn't be afraid of dissenting voices - chances are there won't be any sound evidence, but if there is, why shouldn't we hear and listen to it? Intelligent adults should never fear challenging opinions.

I never fear a different opinion .. .I might chuckle though

But if you want to discuss a country leaving the EU and according to the dissenting voices we will all be better off if we do, I would like to see some evidence as to why its better in this day and age, you can then have an adult discussion about it

parading a touring car through the UK with incorrect information displayed on the side where a lot of people based their decision to leave the EU on is not the way forward ... You want to be treated as an intelligent adult then acting like one is the first step with adulthood comes a certain level of responsibility as well

FreudianSlippers

Wanderer78 wrote: »

By helping to impose policies such as 'expansionery fiscal contraction'!

I believe that was an IMF requirement IIRC (edit: I mean during the recent recession... we followed this 'theory' in the 70s/80s as well and it worked), but the policy (now ended) does seem to have had the intended consequences vis-a-vis private spending and economic expansion.

Zubeneschamali

Gravelly wrote: »

And this is exactly why we shouldn't be afraid of dissenting voices - chances are there won't be any sound evidence, but if there is, why shouldn't we hear and listen to it?

The Leave campaign was a farrago of lies and bigotry - sure what harm can come from giving them a platform and listening to it?

Brexit, that's what. The greatest act of self-harm by a European nation since WWII.

Gravelly

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

There is no challenging opinion. No evidence whatsoever of how Ireland would be better off outside the EU, no discussion in the slightest of how it would work and no forethought whatsoever of the economic and political implications.

Irexit is a ridiculous idea, people who support the idea based on some kind of underlying proof that we're worse off in the EU or would be better off outside the EU are wrong, but at least they have some kind of basis for their "challenging opinion" as opposed to whatever is going on in this thread; 67 posts in an not a single post as to how/what/why and the consequences.

But god forbid someone doesn't let you voice your empty opinion!

You keep harping on about how "insane" "mad" and "ridiculous" any opinion that doesn't correlate exactly with your own is, yet you are still afraid of those opinions.

Gravelly

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

The Leave campaign was a farrago of lies and bigotry - sure what harm can come from giving them a platform and listening to it?

Brexit, that's what. The greatest act of self-harm by a European nation since WWII.

Yeah, bloody democracy, they should have gotten rid of it years ago, imagine allowing people with incorrect opinions vote? Madness, all of it.

FreudianSlippers

Gravelly wrote: »

You keep harping on about how "insane" "mad" and "ridiculous" any opinion that doesn't correlate exactly with your own is, yet you are still afraid of those opinions.

I'm not afraid of them. They have no merit, they have no basis in reality or in evidence. They're plucked out of thin air and don't merit the discussion we're having on this thread tbh.

Gravelly

weisses wrote: »

I never fear a different opinion .. .I might chuckle though

But if you want to discuss a country leaving the EU and according to the dissenting voices we will all be better off if we do, I would like to see some evidence as to why its better in this day and age, you can then have an adult discussion about it

parading a touring car through the UK with incorrect information displayed on the side where a lot of people based their decision to leave the EU on is not the way forward ... You want to be treated as an intelligent adult then acting like one is the first step with adulthood comes a certain level of responsibility as well

I've no problem with the above. Laugh away, discuss, debate, all that good stuff.

Gravelly

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

I'm not afraid of them. They have no merit, they have no basis in reality or in evidence. They're plucked out of thin air and don't merit the discussion we're having on this thread tbh.

Then either don't listen to them, or challenge them. Simples. No need to get all upset that the "mad" or "insane" are allowed to speak.

FreudianSlippers

Gravelly wrote: »

Then either don't listen to them, or challenge them. Simples. No need to get all upset that the "mad" or "insane" are allowed to speak.

You're actually the only one continuing to use those words... repeatedly now.


I don't need to challenge your opinion - there is nothing in your opinion to challenge, because it's totally devoid of any merit to challenge. As I've now repeatedly said, you have no evidence, no facts, no plan, no thought. You're simply saying "shake it up" and that's ridiculous.

Arthur Daley

weisses wrote: »

Soo if there is a party/person that can make the case that we all will be better off without the EU and provide sound evidence why ....I'm all ears

Well it's fairly complex for a few straplines. But we could start with getting debt free, stop ramping housing out of the reach of working people, and genuinely printing your own currency. Not just a carbon copy of Sterling that goes from crisis to crisis. As STG did post war.

People go on about how bad things were pre 1973. You could say that about many places around the world. Look how much debt this country has now under the ECB/EU regime. €200bn euro, 4 times the tax take. That 'prosperity' can't be discounted either.

Zubeneschamali

Gravelly wrote: »

Yeah, bloody democracy, they should have gotten rid of it years ago, imagine allowing people with incorrect opinions vote?

Consider Nice or Lisbon. When a vote failed, we analysed why, addressed the issues and then had another vote. If the UK had done the same (for example by addressing immigration of non-EU nationals), maybe no Brexit at all.

Consider hanging - there has been a clear majority in UK polls for most of my life to bring back hanging, but no major party will touch it with a bargepole.

Yes/No referendums are blunt instruments, its why we have a representative democracy instead of a plebiscite on every issue.

ancapailldorcha

Arthur Daley wrote: »

Well it's fairly complex for a few straplines. But we could start with getting debt free, stop ramping housing out of the reach of working people, and genuinely printing your own currency. Not just a carbon copy of Sterling that goes from crisis to crisis. As STG did post war.

People go on about how bad things were pre 1973. You could say that about many places around the world. Look how much debt this country has now under the ECB/EU regime. €200bn euro, 4 times the tax take. That 'prosperity' can't be discounted either.

How is that going to work out when employers and people start emigrating en masse if Ireland withdraws from the single market? Losing a sizeable portion of the tax take isn't going to get the house in order at all.

Seth Brundle

Arthur Daley wrote: »

Well it's fairly complex for a few straplines. But we could start with getting debt free, stop ramping housing out of the reach of working people, and genuinely printing your own currency. Not just a carbon copy of Sterling that goes from crisis to crisis. As STG did post war.

How would we get debt free without affecting our ability to borrow to keep us with the standards we have come to expect?
How will leaving the EU bring down house prices? How is a planning matter even an EU related matter?
As for printing our own currency, how will the affect our exports?

Arthur Daley wrote: »

People go on about how bad things were pre 1973. You could say that about many places around the world. Look how much debt this country has now under the ECB/EU regime. €200bn euro, 4 times the tax take. That 'prosperity' can't be discounted either.

You really think we were in a better position before the seventies? :eek:

smokingman

This is just farrage trying to get Ireland to share his misery and become part of Brittan...
Pretty easy to see that tbh

Seth Brundle

smokingman wrote: »

This is just farrage trying to get Ireland to share his misery and become part of Brittan...
Pretty easy to see that tbh

I don't think Farage is miserable.
He is earning a nice salary from Europe (necessary deductions aside) and presumably making a killing from public appearances.

smokingman

kbannon wrote: »

I don't think Farage is miserable.
He is earning a nice salary from Europe (necessary deductions aside) and presumably making a killing from public appearances.

Ah I was just conflating misery with being brittish really. We'd have little choice but to rejoin the commonwealth if we left the eu.

Gravelly

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

You're actually the only one continuing to use those words... repeatedly now.


I don't need to challenge your opinion - there is nothing in your opinion to challenge, because it's totally devoid of any merit to challenge. As I've now repeatedly said, you have no evidence, no facts, no plan, no thought. You're simply saying "shake it up" and that's ridiculous.

I don't need "evidence, facts, or a plan" to support the right of people to hold a dissenting opinion. If I did we would need to outlaw religion, much early-stage scientific experimentation, any new businesses, and much else. In your blind rage against dissent, you are equating the support of free speech with an attempt to force an opinion on you (a bit like you are attempting to do). There are lots of people across the western world celebrating the suffragette movement this week - if we followed your desire to stifle dissent, there wouldn't have been such a movement.

FreudianSlippers

Gravelly wrote: »

I don't need "evidence, facts, or a plan" to support the right of people to hold a dissenting opinion. If I did we would need to outlaw religion, much early-stage scientific experimentation, any new businesses, and much else. In your blind rage against dissent, you are equating the support of free speech with an attempt to force an opinion on you (a bit like you are attempting to do). There are lots of people across the western world celebrating the suffragette movement this week - if we followed your desire to stifle dissent, there wouldn't have been such a movement.

The only blind rage I see here is yours, and you continue to attempt to argue a tangential point as opposed to the actual question. So, it's an argument you're losing here by undermining your point that opinions are as valid as evidence.

FreudianSlippers

smokingman wrote: »

Ah I was just conflating misery with being brittish really. We'd have little choice but to rejoin the commonwealth if we left the eu.

I think we'd have little choice but to re-join the UK if we left the EU. I'm not sure what being a Commonwealth member would do for us outside of the EU.

Arthur Daley

kbannon wrote: »

You really think we were in a better position before the seventies? :eek:

I didn't say that. But being more prosperous than you were 50 years ago is not confined to those countries in the EU. There is this sense in this country that we can't work anything out for ourselves. E.g. affordable housing on an island with a very low population density. These issues are huge and need multi facted solutions at local and national level that cannot be worked through on a bulletin board. But the idea that only the EU knows the way here, should be challenged.

seamus

Arthur Daley wrote: »

The 'Stockholm syndrome' is strong when it comes to our relationship with the ECB and EU. The EC is seriously anti democratic.

How is it "anti" democratic?

Realistically it's one of the most democratic institutions there is, basically nobody in the decision-making units is unelected.

Many national parliaments compare poorly, the house of lords and the Seanad being two such examples where decision-making is carried out by people with no democratic mandate to do so.

There are some issues on a technical level with how voting is weighed within the decision-making structures, but these are minor technicalities for the most part.

Some restructuring is possible and no doubt necessary, but one cannot declare the EU to be "anti-democratic" or undemocratic, while also believing one's national parliament to be perfectly so.

ArmaniJeanss

Gravelly wrote: »

I don't need "evidence, facts, or a plan" to support the right of people to hold a dissenting opinion. If I did we would need to outlaw religion, much early-stage scientific experimentation, any new businesses, and much else. In your blind rage against dissent, you are equating the support of free speech with an attempt to force an opinion on you (a bit like you are attempting to do). There are lots of people across the western world celebrating the suffragette movement this week - if we followed your desire to stifle dissent, there wouldn't have been such a movement.

What do you want the Irexit movement to have?
Theres already a few Irexit TDs who don't get shouted down, they have full rights to campaign via posters and newspaper ads to get more TDs, get a majority in the Dail and then can call a referendum.
They really aren't being treated like Emily Pankhurst.

Gravelly

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

The only blind rage I see here is yours, and you continue to attempt to argue a tangential point as opposed to the actual question. So, it's an argument you're losing here by undermining your point that opinions are as valid as evidence.

You're seeing things then! I'm not arguing any tangential point - I made the point that people have the right to dissenting opinions, you disagreed (or at least claimed that anyone with dissenting opinions is mentally unwell) and I have continued to outline why you are wrong. Just because you don't like that, doesn't make it wrong. Your, frankly ludicrous, deflection attempt over the past few posts, that evidence is required that people should be allowed to hold opinions, doesn't reflect any better on you than your constant mental illness references, and doesn't make for a viable argument.

FreudianSlippers

Arthur Daley wrote: »

But we could start with getting debt free, stop ramping housing out of the reach of working people, and genuinely printing your own currency. Not just a carbon copy of Sterling that goes from crisis to crisis. As STG did post war.

Let's just extrapolate this a bit then.

1) What currency do we peg Punt Nua to? We obviously can't just float it on the markets.

2) Are we printing off our own currency to clear the debt? I'm a bit confused here.

3) How does leaving the EU impact housing prices directly?

Gravelly

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

What do you want the Irexit movement to have?
Theres already a few Irexit TDs who don't get shouted down, they have full rights to campaign via posters and newspaper ads to get more TDs, get a majority in the Dail and then can call a referendum.
They really aren't being treated like Emily Pankhurst.

Are you sure - ok, they haven't been jailed or force fed (yet!) but the mockery, and accusations of insanity are remarkably similar.

Arthur Daley

The commision decides anything of any importance. The commision is not elected. Do we really belive our MEPs hold the power there.

ancapailldorcha

Yes. The Commission only proposes legislation. The Parliament votes on it.

Hotblack Desiato

Gravelly wrote: »

Then either don't listen to them, or challenge them. Simples. No need to get all upset that the "mad" or "insane" are allowed to speak.

Challenge them at their meeting where no discussion or dissent was permitted?

FreudianSlippers

Gravelly wrote: »

I'm not arguing any tangential point - I made the point that people have the right to dissenting opinions,

*checks thread title* Oh yeah, not tangential at all...

you disagreed

Some opinions are worthless.

(or at least claimed that anyone with dissenting opinions is mentally unwell)

That's a lie.

and I have continued to outline why you are wrong. Just because you don't like that, doesn't make it wrong. Your, frankly ludicrous, deflection attempt over the past few posts, that evidence is required that people should be allowed to hold opinions,

You haven't outlined anything. Like... at all.

doesn't reflect any better on you than your constant mental illness references, and doesn't make for a viable argument.

Again, that's a lie.

Arthur Daley

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Let's just extrapolate this a bit then.

1) What currency do we peg Punt Nua to? We obviously can't just float it on the markets.

2) Are we printing off our own currency to clear the debt? I'm a bit confused here.

3) How does leaving the EU impact housing prices directly?

Why could it not float.

We 'revisit' the debt the ECB forced us to take on for starters. As people thought they were voting for in the 2011 general election.

As per above solving the housing issues will take more than a few lines on here. But by withdrawing from a debt fuelled economy to the degree we have taken on in the last 20 years will reduce our liabilities and asset prices. Or maybe David McWilliams is right and we are addicted to high house prices.

Gravelly

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Challenge them at their meeting where no discussion or dissent was permitted?

I believe there was one "dissenter" at the meeting - just saw a headline, didn't read the story - perhaps he was ejected. Does it matter what they say at their meetings? They are hardly going to somehow sneak us out of the EU from their redoubt in the mansion house. Challenge them if they run for office or try to lobby for changes to legislation.

Gravelly

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

*checks thread title* Oh yeah, not tangential at all...


Some opinions are worthless.


That's a lie.


You haven't outlined anything. Like... at all.


Again, that's a lie.

I see lots of lies there - you really don't like being forced to debate, do you? No wonder you don't want to allow others to hold opinions.