Fianna fail/Fianna Geal Confidence and supply deal

Godot.

No voting system is perfect but we are experiencing PR at its worst. Too much tail wagging the dog politics.

James Brown

Godot. wrote: »

No voting system is perfect but we are experiencing PR at its worst. Too much tail wagging the dog politics.

I think that's the cover story. While FF/FG suit their own any mismanagement is blamed on Kowtowing to populism. In fact it all goes back to feeding vested interests IMO. Any door prizes given out is to keep things from boiling over.
I can't see much changing. There is no point in an election currently. I just wouldn't be celebrating the continuation of this agreement. It's what we're stuck with but it most certainly is not good for the country try as they might to spin it as 'stability' being their goal. I don't think anyone seriously buys that.

charlie14

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

I'm not sure I'd give a preference to FF if I knew that they would potentially attempt to form a government with SF tbh.

Both FF and FG have ruled it out, but with politicians if it comes down to numbers I do not see that FG would be potentially any less inclined to attempt to form a government with SF than FF.

Perhaps even more so on their past record of coalition with the Democratic Left in the 1994-1997 government, and according to The Green Party, FG`s approach to them in 2007 to sound out SF on forming a coalition government of FG, SF, Labour and the Green`s.

James Brown

charlie14 wrote: »

Both FF and FG have ruled it out, but with politicians if it comes down to numbers I do not see that FG would be potentially any less inclined to attempt to form a government with SF than FF.

Perhaps even more so on their past record of coalition with the Democratic Left in the 1994-1997 government, and according to The Green Party, FG`s approach to them in 2007 to sound out SF on forming a coalition government of FG, SF, Labour and the Green`s.

This is the thing. Fine Gael will get into bed with Fianna Fail, the party that destroyed the economy, lied about it and 'practically had us eating out of bins' rather than sidle up to Sinn Fein. I don't buy the "ethics" or "moral" line, (I mean FG/FF should be banned from using those terms IMO). It seems to me to keep the market cornered, bringing in a third option is what they don't want. Making FF viable was much more preferable to making SF or any other party viable. It's old guard protectionism IMO.
FF/FG will only bring in the most junior of partners, that's why we've this agreement and not a coalition proper. They need to be seen to be different. I'd suggest when well between crashes the two get a fair share of the same voter base depending on how the land is lying come an election. This coupled with their inbred, (born into) following families has us stuck with them.

Loafing Oaf

charlie14 wrote: »

Both FF and FG have ruled it out, but with politicians if it comes down to numbers

But if FF or FG have the numbers to do a deal with SF, they're 99.9% certain to have the numbers for another arrangement of some form with each other. If the the latter is on the table I don't see why either should take the extraordinarily risky political step of approaching SF.

charlie14

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

But if FF or FG have the numbers to do a deal with SF, they're 99.9% certain to have the numbers for another arrangement of some form with each other. If the the latter is on the table I don't see why either should take the extraordinarily risky political step of approaching SF.

There has been no great change in the numbers. Nor does it look as if there will be for some time, if ever, where one party will have an overall Dail majority so I would be off the opinion that such an approach is inevitable in the not too distant future where either or both FF and FG will see it worth the risk.


If, after a GE, you are the second largest party,other than "in the national interest" there is little for you in supplying the largest with a S&C arrangement. You have no cabinet seats and no access to the trappings of power that a two party coalition with the third largest party will give you.


If you are the largest party then a S&C arrangement has you in a political limbo where the second largest party is also in opposition to you looking to bring you down at the most opportune moment. Being in a two party coalition with an agreed programme for government is a lot less risk than being in a government based on a S&C arrangement.

James Brown

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

But if FF or FG have the numbers to do a deal with SF, they're 99.9% certain to have the numbers for another arrangement of some form with each other. If the the latter is on the table I don't see why either should take the extraordinarily risky political step of approaching SF.

Normalising Fianna Fail so soon after the last crash was a despicable move IMO.

FreudianSlippers

Matt Barrett wrote: »

This is the thing. Fine Gael will get into bed with Fianna Fail, the party that destroyed the economy, lied about it and 'practically had us eating out of bins' rather than sidle up to Sinn Fein. I don't buy the "ethics" or "moral" line, (I mean FG/FF should be banned from using those terms IMO). It seems to me to keep the market cornered, bringing in a third option is what they don't want. Making FF viable was much more preferable to making SF or any other party viable. It's old guard protectionism IMO.
FF/FG will only bring in the most junior of partners, that's why we've this agreement and not a coalition proper. They need to be seen to be different. I'd suggest when well between crashes the two get a fair share of the same voter base depending on how the land is lying come an election. This coupled with their inbred, (born into) following families has us stuck with them.

Your revisionist/fantasy view of recent history never ceases to amaze me.

markodaly

Matt Barrett wrote: »

This is the thing. Fine Gael will get into bed with Fianna Fail, the party that destroyed the economy, lied about it and 'practically had us eating out of bins' rather than sidle up to Sinn Fein. I don't buy the "ethics" or "moral" line, (I mean FG/FF should be banned from using those terms IMO). It seems to me to keep the market cornered, bringing in a third option is what they don't want. Making FF viable was much more preferable to making SF or any other party viable. It's old guard protectionism IMO.
FF/FG will only bring in the most junior of partners, that's why we've this agreement and not a coalition proper. They need to be seen to be different. I'd suggest when well between crashes the two get a fair share of the same voter base depending on how the land is lying come an election. This coupled with their inbred, (born into) following families has us stuck with them.

That is a nice story and all, and I am no friend of FF.

However, after the election, SF walked off the field. They ran away from any negotiations about forming a government. It's all there on the public record, from Gerry 'I was never in the IRA' Adams.

The only two parties on the pitch were FG and FF, and FF was barely on it.

The alternative would be another election.

charlie14

markodaly wrote: »

That is a nice story and all, and I am no friend of FF.

However, after the election, SF walked off the field. They ran away from any negotiations about forming a government. It's all there on the public record, from Gerry 'I was never in the IRA' Adams.

The only two parties on the pitch were FG and FF, and FF was barely on it.

The alternative would be another election.

Last time SF had declared faik that they would not be part of a coalition government so had there not been a S&C agreement between FG and FF then their would have been no alternative other than another GE.
Next time out it could be a bit more complicated where another immediate GE could result in a plaque on your houses for both FF and FG in that this is what we gave you, now work with it.

FreudianSlippers

charlie14 wrote: »

Last time SF had declared faik that they would not be part of a coalition government so had there not been a S&C agreement between FG and FF then their would have been no alternative other than another GE.
Next time out it could be a bit more complicated where another immediate GE could result in a plaque on your houses for both FF and FG in that this is what we gave you, now work with it.

Uh... What?

Idbatterim

FF are simply waiting in the grass, probably hoping for an economic collapse or a scandal to come about and housing / health to get worse, which it will (the inevitable when the place is run by morons)...

Id agree with a bit of stability now around brexit, but there is simply no point in either of them pulling the plug at this particular time...

FreudianSlippers

FF could fix the housing crisis, but they'd do it by unsustainable economic expansion;
SF could fix the housing crisis, but they'd do it by unsustainable national debt expansion;
FG could fix the housing crisis, but they're too worried about keeping seats.

I don't believe an FF/SF coalition could ever work - they're economically chalk and cheese. I'd prefer to see an FG/FF coalition rather than confidence and supply as I believe this would have a more positive impact on the economy; we can afford to loosen the reigns a bit at the moment and having FG's economic lack of any nerve there to keep watch doesn't hurt.

Idbatterim

there is this talk of requiring masses of money to fix the housing crisis, I dont buy it. Changing density rules and the cost of apartment building and possibly the amount the government cream of from the cost of a new build, can sort it for the most part, without any extra government cash being thrown at it...

https://www.independent.ie/life/home-garden/homes/ronan-lyons-supply-of-apartments-held-back-by-costs-35564473.html

FreudianSlippers

Idbatterim wrote: »

there is this talk of requiring masses of money to fix the housing crisis, I dont buy it. Changing density rules and the cost of apartment building and possibly the amount the government cream of from the cost of a new build, can sort it for the most part, without any extra government cash being thrown at it...

https://www.independent.ie/life/home-garden/homes/ronan-lyons-supply-of-apartments-held-back-by-costs-35564473.html

Absolutely, but this is not what most of the SF-supporters and the far-left (economic) are advocating implementing. I'd actually go so far as to say that if these policies were implemented, the usual leftist posters on here would be complaining about "money to developers" etc. regardless of how successful these policies might be; these people don't actually care about the issues they bang on about, they care about disruption of the "system" ("the man") and implementation of far-left economic politics.

Idbatterim

when you say you think SF and FF are totally on different pages economically? do you really think so? I dont...

FreudianSlippers

Idbatterim wrote: »

when you say you think SF and FF are totally on different pages economically? do you really think so? I dont...

SF are, effectively, redistribution style socialists; FF are, effectively, free market libertarians; I'm not sure FG have an economic outlook.

James Brown

Idbatterim wrote: »

there is this talk of requiring masses of money to fix the housing crisis, I dont buy it. Changing density rules and the cost of apartment building and possibly the amount the government cream of from the cost of a new build, can sort it for the most part, without any extra government cash being thrown at it...

https://www.independent.ie/life/home-garden/homes/ronan-lyons-supply-of-apartments-held-back-by-costs-35564473.html

We could save a lot of money by moving away from privately profitable dependence on rental companies and subsidising private builds for private sale.
Fixing the housing crisis will cost a hell of a lot of money if we continue with the same agenda we currently follow. We need build our own social and affordable, but there's little private profit in it and therefore less happy party backers, so it'll not happen under FG/FF.

Idbatterim wrote: »

when you say you think SF and FF are totally on different pages economically? do you really think so? I dont...

One would hope. When will we realise that the economy doing well is not helping? It should be, but if you mismanage, so what? We'd Brexit used as a do nothing excuse for years now. Now we'll have any fall out as an excuse. However, it doesn't stop any inappropriate behaviour, nice broadband dinners or sweet deals for the right clientele.

If Brexit causes the economy to tank, we'll see more austerity and be told there's no money to tackle the myriad crises, and we'll go round the houses again, with the tax payer taking the hit so the right people can make a comfortable come back when the hype dies down.

I wonder what the next quango will be? I assume Denis will be in the wings.

FreudianSlippers

Matt Barrett wrote: »

We could save a lot of money by moving away from privately profitable dependence on rental companies and subsidising private builds for private sale.

Go on then... let's see the figures.

Fixing the housing crisis will cost a hell of a lot of money if we continue with the same agenda we currently follow. We need build our own social and affordable, but there's little private profit in it and therefore less happy party backers, so it'll not happen under FG/FF.

Ok - I don't think anyone disagrees that this is one of the solutions (nobody would seriously agree that this is the only solution) but where do we take the money from or where do we get this extra money? As you point out, it's going to be extremely expensive.

One would hope. When will we realise that the economy doing well is not helping?

So tank the economy to help?

It should be, but if you mismanage, so what?

I have literally no idea what this means.

We'd Brexit used as a do nothing excuse for years now.

What?

Now we'll have any fall out as an excuse.

What?

However, it doesn't stop any inappropriate behaviour, nice broadband dinners or sweet deals for the right clientele.

blanch152

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

SF are, effectively, redistribution style socialists; FF are, effectively, free market libertarians; I'm not sure FG have an economic outlook.

I would disagree slightly.

SF are indeed redistibution style socialists, but FF are free market libertarians to create the money for their redistribution style socialism.

FreudianSlippers

blanch152 wrote: »

I would disagree slightly.

SF are indeed redistibution style socialists, but FF are free market libertarians to create the money for their redistribution style socialism.

Well, that's just the way taxation works! :pac:
If the result of relaxed rules on the market is increased tax intake (i.e. Celtic Tiger) then you have the money to spend however you want. It's not really "redistribution" in the same sense as SF outline in their, admittedly vague, economic manifestos.

blanch152

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Well, that's just the way taxation works! :pac:
If the result of relaxed rules on the market is increased tax intake (i.e. Celtic Tiger) then you have the money to spend however you want. It's not really "redistribution" in the same sense as SF outline in their, admittedly vague, economic manifestos.

The two are not incompatible though. FF control how the money is collected, making sure that SF don't kill the golden goose, which is what they would do if let, while they allow SF to spend money on their favoured causes. It is how FF have run every coalition they have been in.

Good loser

Idbatterim wrote: »

there is this talk of requiring masses of money to fix the housing crisis, I dont buy it. Changing density rules and the cost of apartment building and possibly the amount the government cream of from the cost of a new build, can sort it for the most part, without any extra government cash being thrown at it...

https://www.independent.ie/life/home-garden/homes/ronan-lyons-supply-of-apartments-held-back-by-costs-35564473.html

This is totally and absolutely incorrect. House or apt building in Dublin is currently
uneconomic except at the higher end of the market.
Any house building is helpful, as those moving up free housing lower down the scale.

Reducing VAT and development levies could be helpful - that would have implications for Exch revenues. The 'new' cost of the Childrens Hospital will have consequences for all State expenditure (capital & current) not to mention the demands of the (57k a year) nurses.

Eric Cartman

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

SF are, effectively, redistribution style socialists; FF are, effectively, free market libertarians; I'm not sure FG have an economic outlook.

ahh come on, FF have their 'giveaway' moments of madness handing the hands out class a boat load of free drink tokens all the time.

James Brown

Eric Cartman wrote: »

ahh come on, FF have their 'giveaway' moments of madness handing the hands out class a boat load of free drink tokens all the time.

Vulture funds or the building industry proper?
The working taxpayers who need state aid are a creation of the economy, which is going great guns by all accounts.

Eric Cartman

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Vulture funds or the building industry proper?
The working taxpayers who need state aid are a creation of the economy, which is going great guns by all accounts.

im not talking about people who work and you know that.

markodaly

Eric Cartman wrote: »

ahh come on, FF have their 'giveaway' moments of madness handing the hands out class a boat load of free drink tokens all the time.

I would agree with that. FF are notorious for their 'one for everyone in the audience' type of giveaways.
They are the masters of buying votes.

FG do a bit of this as well, but FF are on another level. SF if they got their hands on the keys to the Dept. of Finance would imo try and outdo FF.

Zubeneschamali

blanch152 wrote: »

FF are free market libertarians to create the money for their redistribution style socialism.

Ha ha!


No. Fianna Fail are not any sort of libertarian, they are pure populists. Buy votes, inflate that bubble til it pops, someone else (Fine Gael) will always be along to clean up, like the absent parents who arrive after the party and pay to fix the gaff up again, ready for the next party.

Wanderer78

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Ha ha!


No. Fianna Fail are not any sort of libertarian, they are pure populists. Buy votes, inflate that bubble til it pops, someone else (Fine Gael) will always be along to clean up, like the absent parents who arrive after the party and pay to fix the gaff up again, ready for the next party.

fg are fixing things!:eek:

Zubeneschamali

Wanderer78 wrote: »

fg are fixing things!:eek:

Yes - try reading boards from 2008. People thought we would default, be ejected from the Euro, be under the IMF for a decade etc. etc.


But now we are back as the fastest growing economy in Europe.