If the Green Party got into government are they mad

GreeBo

_blaaz wrote: »

The altenator (which deosnt drain when car running due to altenator able to up its output when theres a draw)



This is like 1st day of fas again :pac:

EVs have regenerative power which vastly outweighs the consumption from wipers.

The alternator isn't a magic source of free power. Its either slowing the car or you are using fuel.

GreeBo

maccored wrote: »

i would expect public transport to transport the public - yes. the clue is in those two words - public and transport. You win though. if it stops me having to explain the concept of public transport to you, i'll say anything

To what degree though?
You seem to expect that everyone in the country should have access to public transport for their commute.
And you think that this will be paid for out of
a) your 40% taxes
b) 10M spent on Trump.

about right?

maccored

GreeBo wrote: »

To what degree though?
You seem to expect that everyone in the country should have access to public transport for their commute.
And you think that this will be paid for out of
a) your 40% taxes
b) 10M spent on Trump.

about right?

as usual, nope. We need public transport as a carrot rather using taxes as a stick. I have no idea how you cant understand that. sticking you on ignore now, as nothing you've said so far has been of any use.

GreeBo

maccored wrote: »

as usual, nope. We need public transport as a carrot rather using taxes as a stick. I have no idea how you cant understand that. sticking you on ignore now, as nothing you've said so far has been of any use.

No one is saying we don't need public transport.
But you seem to expect that it will cater for *your* specific needs.

You are not "public", you are a single person.

Public transport is designed for the masses.

I'll ask again, how many people would you be sharing your public transport with every morning & evening?

_blaaz

GreeBo wrote: »

No one is saying we don't need public transport.
But you seem to expect that it will cater for *your* specific needs.

You are not "public", you are a single person.

Public transport is designed for the masses.

I'll ask again, how many people would you be sharing your public transport with every morning & evening?

Hardly much of an endorsement for public transport if you cant justify connecting two towns 40 miles apart with it??

blanch152

maccored wrote: »

as usual, nope. We need public transport as a carrot rather using taxes as a stick. I have no idea how you cant understand that. sticking you on ignore now, as nothing you've said so far has been of any use.

Public transport will not solve the problems of the last 50 years of spatial development.

Ireland is way behind other countries in terms of urbanisation, which makes it way behind in terms of solving the carbon issue with public transport. The only way we will meet our carbon targets is to effectively abandon one-off housing and many small villages and towns over the next 30 years. It is going to be a difficult time for many as a result, but it is happening anyway, as we have seen with banks, post offices, supermarkets etc. Next to go are petrol stations, and their convenience stores won't survive on their own in many cases.

Because successive governments, and even more so, local authorities, in particular Fianna Fail-led ones, indulged the mania for one-off housing and the idea that every village could be a full-service town, we have had a lost opportunity to create towns and cities of sufficient size to counter-balance Dublin and look after themselves. However, blaming Fianna Fail isn't the answer, it is the Irish people who have ignored this reality.

GreeBo

_blaaz wrote: »

Hardly much of an endorsement for public transport if you cant justify connecting two towns 40 miles apart with it??

The point is that its not "public" if its just you using it.
Unless of course you are willing to pay the €4,000 ticket price/day?

If so, I'm all for it.

You justify public transport by determining a public need. Again, 1 bloke going 40 miles between two rural towns every day isnt "public".

blanch152

_blaaz wrote: »

Mate dublin cant handle the population is in it....the government cant be aresd facing down nimbys to upgrade the public transport network to anything approaching necesscary standred


Surely the answer is to develop the econmy outside dublin??(but again this seems outside capacity of the government aswel?)....


telling lads to keep moving to dublin etc which are over crowded and congested to a ridcolus state for its size (easikly has worst quality of life for city its size i ever lived in)seems questionable advice??

Yes, the answer is to develop the economy outside Dublin, but not in Gweedore or Achill, only in cities such as Limerick, Galway, Cork and Waterford.

There will also be a place for large towns - Sligo, Carlow, Kilkenny, Tralee, Athlone etc., but for large parts of the country, hard choices will have to be made.

Can a county like Mayo support any development outside Ballina, Westport and Castlebar? Probably not.

ancapailldorcha

Mod: Can we get back to the Green Party please? A general discussion of transport would be better in the infrastructure/transport forum.

GreeBo

For the foreseeable future the greens will always be a monitority in any government they form, so I would expect their policy making abilities to be low enough.

We might see a few things like plastic bag levy, but I cant see them being able to perform large scale overhaul, unless the main party is also onboard, and I only see that happening if its to avoid massive fines.

Shefwedfan

From a FG point of view it is a win win

They should have done something, even if small, last budget but they chickened out of it at the last min. Standard FG and can't make a decision.

Now they have seen the Green party voted in and even thought they have no power they are pointing to it, once the taxes hit then everyone will say it is because the green party are back in and FG will walk away with no bad rep

People need to wake up, first FG should have done this years ago, announcing another plan 6 months away from CO2 fines is stupid and pointless. Also what is the plan? no details at all....just another press release like so many others.....not a bit of action

James Brown

Shefwedfan wrote: »

From a FG point of view it is a win win

They should have done something, even if small, last budget but they chickened out of it at the last min. Standard FG and can't make a decision.

Now they have seen the Green party voted in and even thought they have no power they are pointing to it, once the taxes hit then everyone will say it is because the green party are back in and FG will walk away with no bad rep

People need to wake up, first FG should have done this years ago, announcing another plan 6 months away from CO2 fines is stupid and pointless. Also what is the plan? no details at all....just another press release like so many others.....not a bit of action

Likely you're right who ever of the two the Greens might go in with.
FG need to devise a quango. They're happy to bring in charges and the like if they can cream off the top by way of a sweet deal for someone, IMO.

tayto lover

The Greens will disappear in the same way they did last time if their policies inflict financial hardship on those who cannot afford it.
Whichever party backs them or uses their ideas to do like wise will disappear into obscurity just like FF did last time too.

The voters tend not to forget such actions.

Shefwedfan

tayto lover wrote: »

The Greens will disappear in the same way they did last time if their policies inflict financial hardship on those who cannot afford it.
Whichever party backs them or uses their ideas to do like wise will disappear into obscurity just like FF did last time too.

The voters tend not to forget such actions.

How exactly are the Green policies going to inflict financial hardship?

They have little to no power. If FG or FF turn around and say no to anything they put forward that is the end of it.


I am not Green party fan or supporter. But why people think the Green Party are in control is beyond me.

James Brown

Shefwedfan wrote: »

How exactly are the Green policies going to inflict financial hardship?

They have little to no power. If FG or FF turn around and say no to anything they put forward that is the end of it.


I am not Green party fan or supporter. But why people think the Green Party are in control is beyond me.

It's the perception. The Green party, as is will never be in the majority. They may come in and out as junior partner from time to time but they are seen as a one trick pony. What they need to do is show the electorate that green issues touch everything we do, housing, roads, industry not merely be seen as the schoolmasters cracking the stick to teach us what we must do. People will just tune out.

Shefwedfan

Matt Barrett wrote: »

It's the perception. The Green party, as is will never be in the majority. They may come in and out as junior partner from time to time but they are seen as a one trick pony. What they need to do is show the electorate that green issues touch everything we do, housing, roads, industry not merely be seen as the schoolmasters cracking the stick to teach us what we must do. People will just tune out.

But my point is people blame the Greens for "inflict financial hardship"


In reality if the Greens had power they would have been making small changes for the last 3-4 years. This did not happen as we had a shower of idiots at the wheel. Now we will have a big bang approach

What the Greens need to do is a PR campaign pointing at the clowns who have made this mess for the last few years and they are not the ones pushing out these taxes....


Put it this way, if the Greens won no seats in local elections, FG would of had to come out and some stage and admit they made a pigs ear out of it and are going to tax us

James Brown

Shefwedfan wrote: »

But my point is people blame the Greens for "inflict financial hardship"


In reality if the Greens had power they would have been making small changes for the last 3-4 years. This did not happen as we had a shower of idiots at the wheel. Now we will have a big bang approach

What the Greens need to do is a PR campaign pointing at the clowns who have made this mess for the last few years and they are not the ones pushing out these taxes....


Put it this way, if the Greens won no seats in local elections, FG would of had to come out and some stage and admit they made a pigs ear out of it and are going to tax us

Carbon tax and affiliated environmental charges. The Greens would get the blame due to the perception that they represent charging everyone taxes for the environment and that's all they do. They need fight that with some positives IMO. Telling people we're in trouble and need to pay up is what comes across rightly or wrongly.
The time will come when we are forced to move towards green energy but by then we'll be in a worse situation.
Yes, I don't know how much longer this ponzi scheme of an economy can last. I think it's make hay while you can and if in power too long the wheels begin to come off.

Chips Lovell

The Greens didn't get wiped out in 2011 because of their environmental policies and taxes.

They and their coalition partners were voted out because they'd been in charge during the financial crisis and banking collapse. Proportionally, Fianna Fail almost lost as many votes as the Greens.

And voters do tend to forgive and forget. Both parties have since bounced back.

blanch152

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Carbon tax and affiliated environmental charges. The Greens would get the blame due to the perception that they represent charging everyone taxes for the environment and that's all they do. They need fight that with some positives IMO. Telling people we're in trouble and need to pay up is what comes across rightly or wrongly.
The time will come when we are forced to move towards green energy but by then we'll be in a worse situation.
Yes, I don't know how much longer this ponzi scheme of an economy can last. I think it's make hay while you can and if in power too long the wheels begin to come off.

The thing is, I am giving the Greens credit for carbon tax and affiliated environmental charges because those are measures that this country absolutely needs.

There are many like me.

James Brown

blanch152 wrote: »

The thing is, I am giving the Greens credit for carbon tax and affiliated environmental charges because those are measures that this country absolutely needs.

There are many like me.

They need show the benefits though, otherwise it's perceived as just another tax to throw money down some ill conceived hole.

GreeBo

Matt Barrett wrote: »

They need show the benefits though, otherwise it's perceived as just another tax to throw money down some ill conceived hole.

Are the benefits not obvious though?

James Brown

GreeBo wrote: »

Are the benefits not obvious though?

I don't think so. If you listen to people complain about the Greens it doesn't go beyond there being another or higher taxes.

eagle eye

blanch152 wrote:

The thing is, I am giving the Greens credit for carbon tax and affiliated environmental charges because those are measures that this country absolutely needs.

There are many like me.

When we hear them talk about grounding all planes and stopping the production of mobile phones, tablets and shutting data centres then we will take them seriously.
The ordinary man isn't living a bountiful life in this country. We can't afford to go green and punishing us with more taxes is only going to slow things down. Shut down or heavily tax airlines and tech producers and it'll improve things for everybody.

blanch152

eagle eye wrote: »

When we hear them talk about grounding all planes and stopping the production of mobile phones, tablets and shutting data centres then we will take them seriously.
The ordinary man isn't living a bountiful life in this country. We can't afford to go green and punishing us with more taxes is only going to slow things down. Shut down or heavily tax airlines and tech producers and it'll improve things for everybody.

By the standards of this planet, the ordinary man is living a bountiful life in this country. That is part of the problem. Now that will take much longer to sort, but we need to start taking steps like carbon taxes to do that.

GreeBo

Matt Barrett wrote: »

I don't think so. If you listen to people complain about the Greens it doesn't go beyond there being another or higher taxes.

I think people just (lazily) complain about taxes.

eagle eye

blanch152 wrote:

By the standards of this planet, the ordinary man is living a bountiful life in this country. That is part of the problem. Now that will take much longer to sort, but we need to start taking steps like carbon taxes to do that.

We need to start a punishing airlines and those producing mobile phones, tablets and those operating data centres which is doing much more damage to the environment than regular people are.

blanch152

eagle eye wrote: »

We need to start a punishing airlines and those producing mobile phones, tablets and those operating data centres which is doing much more damage to the environment than regular people are.

Ordinary people want those things too.

There are lots of people (particularly those under 20) who would swap their rural house for an urban apartment to keep their mobile phones and tablets.

facehugger99

eagle eye wrote: »

When we hear them talk about grounding all planes and stopping the production of mobile phones, tablets and shutting data centres then we will take them seriously.
The ordinary man isn't living a bountiful life in this country. We can't afford to go green and punishing us with more taxes is only going to slow things down. Shut down or heavily tax airlines and tech producers and it'll improve things for everybody.

Sounds very much like a 'tax someone else' argument.

The country is full of people who passionately believe that something should be done, right up to the point that it may negatively impact on themselves.

eagle eye

Yes but our government just gave Exxon the go ahead to drill off the coast of Kerry. This all happened quietly while people were giving out about a potentially fraudulent claim in a pub or hotel involving a politician.

eagle eye

facehugger99 wrote:

The country is full of people who passionately believe that something should be done, right up to the point that it may negatively impact on themselves.
Sounds very much like a 'tax someone else' argument.

If you tax the big companies first then people realise it's very serious and will get their act together very quickly.
If you tax the ordinary man then he will give out that you are not taxing the big companies and demand that the tax be removed.