Why do people consider FG right wing

Yer Da sells Avon

Silentcorner wrote: »

You don't sound like a person who has any idea what fiscally responsible is...or what law and order problems are for that matter.

You sound like a ideologue who lacks the wit to understand that your rigid idea of fiscal responsibility would impact negatively upon law and order.

James Brown

Eric Cartman wrote: »

I dont know how people consider FG right wing , they havent lowered taxes or helped the middle class one iota. For welfare recipients theyve given them the christmas bonus, HAP increases and now this, 12 months on the dole without being hastled if you claim to be an artist. FG are doing more for welfare leeches and welfare dependent migrants than for any business owner or middle class professional. On social issues theyre left of centre and increasingly presenting left wing economic policies.

The top tier do very well at a loss to the tax payer that's why. Their being right wing creates a need for more state aid. Record breaking numbers of children homeless would be another reason. We need more HAP and hotels because they refuse to tackle the housing crisis in any way that does not profit developers and vulture funds to the maximum. There are so few 'welfare leeches' you shouldn't even bother mentioning them IMO. Do you genuinely think if we cut all welfare tomorrow they wouldn't just waste it in lining pals pockets elsewhere? It's like this if they cut welfare they need buy more homes to house more homeless or rent more hotels.
Wastes of tax payer monies on overly grandiose projects. Bad deals for the tax payer that enrich those close to the party.

Everything you list is a symptom of their right wing policies IMO.

The_Brood

Most people in society are not rich and are not on welfare.

So why is there no party that cares for regular workers, for the common man, but only exploits us in favour of the former two? I don't get it.

James Brown

The_Brood wrote: »

Most people in society are not rich and are not on welfare.

So why is there no party that cares for regular workers, for the common man, but only exploits us in favour of the former two? I don't get it.

They cream off for the top tier, this makes things tougher for the rest of us, those at the bottom grow in number and need, so to maintain they need expand on welfare. That's it IMO.

Cryptopagan

Why do people consider a party to be right wing when their only vision for the future of Ireland’s economy is keep attracting FDA by undercutting our EU partners’ rates of corporation tax?

Cryptopagan

Eric Cartman wrote: »

I dont know how people consider FG right wing , they havent lowered taxes or helped the middle class one iota.

They did lower tax though, by increasing the band for the higher tax rate, albeit slightly.

Silentcorner

Yer Da sells Avon wrote: »

You sound like a ideologue who lacks the wit to understand that your rigid idea of fiscal responsibility would impact negatively upon law and order.

WE are the most indebted nation in the OECD, we have the highest number of jobless households in the OECD, we have a looming pension crisis no one wants to talk about, we have a decrepit health system, a decrepit transport system, dysfunctional cities, our schools are a shambles, we only came out of an IMF program a few short years ago...our police force is extremely dysfunctional....we lose a generation of young people every two decades...we have chronic issues with gangland crime, and now rural crime...we are a recession away from deep problems...and you call me an ideologue who lacks understanding!

Yer Da sells Avon

Silentcorner wrote: »

WE are the most indebted nation in the OECD, we have the highest number of jobless households in the OECD, we have a looming pension crisis no one wants to talk about, we have a decrepit health system, a decrepit transport system, dysfunctional cities, our schools are a shambles, we only came out of an IMF program a few short years ago...our police force is extremely dysfunctional....we lose a generation of young people every two decades...we have chronic issues with gangland crime, and now rural crime...we are a recession away from deep problems...and you call me an ideologue who lacks understanding!

And what hard-right magic bullet, Mr Angry, would you propose to solve it all?

Silentcorner

Yer Da sells Avon wrote: »

And what hard-right magic bullet, Mr Angry, would you propose to solve it all?

A political party that is fiscally responsible with a strong policy platform on law and order....and we can either vote for them or not, we do not currently have any political party that can legitimately claim to be either!

I do not give a flying f##k what you think is right wing or far right or hard right or whatever buzzword you are you embracing today, people who identify as either right wing or left wing are more often than not, idiots...you haven't challenged one issue I raised which indicates you know they are serious issues that need to be addressed...because if they aren't dealt with, we will all suffer and all the "progressive" causes, that have only been served to placate those idiots who identify as "progressive" won't pay for the badly needed health service, education system, transport system, pension deficit, effective police force...do you understand?

Yer Da sells Avon

Silentcorner wrote: »

A political party that is fiscally responsible with a strong policy platform on law and order....and we can either vote for them or not, we do not currently have any political party that can legitimately claim to be either!

I do not give a flying f##k what you think is right wing or far right or hard right or whatever buzzword you are you embracing today, people who identify as either right wing or left wing are more often than not, idiots...you haven't challenged one issue I raised which indicates you know they are serious issues that need to be addressed...because if they aren't dealt with, we will all suffer and all the "progressive" causes, that have only been served to placate those idiots who identify as "progressive" won't pay for the badly needed health service, education system, transport system, pension deficit, effective police force...do you understand?

I think you need to calm down a little.

What exactly would you want that 'fiscally responsible' party to do? You can't challenge someone when they're being really unspecific.

Eric Cartman

Yer Da sells Avon wrote: »

I think you need to calm down a little.

What exactly would you want that 'fiscally responsible' party to do? You can't challenge someone when they're being really unspecific.

Well a prty that would cut foreign aid and welfare spending , increase the higher tax band threshold to 100k and reduce the iverall number of taxes would be class.

Loafing Oaf

Silentcorner wrote: »

A political party that is fiscally responsible with a strong policy platform on law and order....and we can either vote for them or not, we do not currently have any political party that can legitimately claim to be either!

Well then you need to getting involved in establishing such a party yourself. That's how democracies work you know!

klaaaz

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Well a prty that would cut foreign aid and welfare spending , increase the higher tax band threshold to 100k and reduce the iverall number of taxes would be class.

Starve public services like cutting funding for policing, healthcare, fire brigade, education and infrastructure so the well off can get wealthier and the rest of us suffer for individual greed.

Silentcorner

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Well then you need to getting involved in establishing such a party yourself. That's how democracies work you know!

What an utterly banal statement!

Always Tired

Jake5991 wrote: »

Here is my take on this debate . Fine gael are not right wing . Look at the gob****e in charge of FG he is gay and of mixed race that doea not seem like right wing to me.

We have other right wing parties that are very small but maybe you dont know of them like identity Ireland and the National party with Justin Barrett.

In terms of economic policies, being gay and mixed race would not really influence you.

But being a posh boy from a well off family certainly would and we all know lucky Leo got his house down payment from the bank of Mum and Dad as he admitted.

Still waiting for Cartman to admit he actually hasn't gotten less of a rise in his pay than the dolies now that it's been established the dole is currently lower than it has been over a decade ago.

Yer Da sells Avon

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Well a prty that would cut foreign aid and welfare spending , increase the higher tax band threshold to 100k and reduce the iverall number of taxes would be class.

While I'm sure you'd get off on seeing poorer people suffer, do you not think such cuts might result in unintended consequences? Rather than cutting welfare spending, maybe it needs to be refocused on actually helping people who are unemployed to find sustainable employment, rather than throwing a mere €200 at them every week to keep them quiet. That's an area where the current government has fallen massively short.

James Brown

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Well a prty that would cut foreign aid and welfare spending , increase the higher tax band threshold to 100k and reduce the iverall number of taxes would be class.

What about a party that lessens the need for welfare? I mean unemployment is so low it's obvious people using it need it and count many working tax payers in their number.

Loafing Oaf

Silentcorner wrote: »

What an utterly banal statement!

Banal in the sense of "so obviously true as to be barely worth saying"?

Eric Cartman

Matt Barrett wrote: »

What about a party that lessens the need for welfare? I mean unemployment is so low it's obvious people using it need it and count many working tax payers in their number.

I would argue that because we're at full employment, those using it are abusing it. With the exception of those living in really isolated communities that could use a relocation grant , I think theres little excuse at the moment to be unemployed as an able bodied person.

James Brown

Eric Cartman wrote: »

I would argue that because we're at full employment, those using it are abusing it. With the exception of those living in really isolated communities that could use a relocation grant , I think theres little excuse at the moment to be unemployed as an able bodied person.

Well let's say you're 100% correct, we should be policing it better. Why penalise those in genuine need by cutting back?

With the housing crisis alone some workers need state aid. We shouldn't forget tax payers get some aid too. It's impossible to be all lifers gaming the system because employment is so high.

So a government that helps ease the need for welfare and ensures anyone on it needs it.
Ironically the real left policies of social/affordable housing would be saving the tax payer money that the fiscally conservative FG are merrily spending on hotels and HAP so others can profit, IMO.

Wanderer78

Eric Cartman wrote:

I would argue that because we're at full employment, those using it are abusing it. With the exception of those living in really isolated communities that could use a relocation grant , I think theres little excuse at the moment to be unemployed as an able bodied person.

And I'd say, you re largely wrong

Nermal

klaaaz wrote: »

Starve public services like cutting funding for policing, healthcare, fire brigade, education and infrastructure so the well off can get wealthier and the rest of us suffer for individual greed.

Cut policing? No, we'll need them when you see what we do to the welfare budget.

Healthcare? Yes. We already spend a fortune on it despite having the youngest age profile in the continent.

Fire brigade? Not much room for savings there. Let's hit the more expensive services first.

Education? Yes, privatise it.

Infrastructure? Depends. Build the metro, but if you want broadband in your hovel pay for it yourself please.

Conveniently, you left out welfare. Plenty of room for cuts there too.

Tasfasdf

Nermal wrote: »

Cut policing? No, we'll need them when you see what we do to the welfare budget.

Healthcare? Yes. We already spend a fortune on it despite having the youngest age profile in the continent.

Fire brigade? Not much room for savings there. Let's hit the more expensive services first.

Education? Yes, privatise it.

Infrastructure? Depends. Build the metro, but if you want broadband in your hovel pay for it yourself please.

Conveniently, you left out welfare. Plenty of room for cuts there too.

And get rid of RTE

klaaaz

Nermal wrote: »

Cut policing? No, we'll need them when you see what we do to the welfare budget.

Healthcare? Yes. We already spend a fortune on it despite having the youngest age profile in the continent.

Fire brigade? Not much room for savings there. Let's hit the more expensive services first.

Education? Yes, privatise it.

Infrastructure? Depends. Build the metro, but if you want broadband in your hovel pay for it yourself please.

Conveniently, you left out welfare. Plenty of room for cuts there too.

At least you're honest to have those services only available to the wealthy. Pity the pensioners and disabled in your slashing tactics. Who is this "we" you speak of to remove state services, a breakaway political party divorced from FG?

sameoldname

I've never understood this low-tax, privitise everything, send all the lay-abouts to jail argument coming from anyone who's lived outside the States.

By nearly every meaningful measure, the most successful countries on earth to balance both economic matters and quality of life for all citizens are those that follow the Scandinavian model. High taxes, generous social safety nets, competitive business environment, criminals rehabilitated if possible etc.
The US model is fine if you're upper-middle class or above, you can have the best of everything because you've got the money. But for anyone below that threshold (which is over 80% of the population) you're in a category where at best you're getting no wealthier or at worst you're amongst the poorest group of people in any developed nation and getting poorer.

I don't see how people can argue that the US model is something that anyone would want to emulate? It baffles me.

James Brown

sameoldname wrote: »

I've never understood this low-tax, privitise everything, send all the lay-abouts to jail argument coming from anyone who's lived outside the States.

By nearly every meaningful measure, the most successful countries on earth to balance both economic matters and quality of life for all citizens are those that follow the Scandinavian model. High taxes, generous social safety nets, competitive business environment, criminals rehabilitated if possible etc.
The US model is fine if you're upper-middle class or above, you can have the best of everything because you've got the money. But for anyone below that threshold (which is over 80% of the population) you're in a category where at best you're getting no wealthier or at worst you're amongst the poorest group of people in any developed nation and getting poorer.

I don't see how people can argue that the US model is something that anyone would want to emulate? It baffles me.

The fact that people in need of state aid grows year on year while we celebrate the economy and low unemployment pretty much spells it out, the way we do business is flawed.