Unpopular Opinions - OP Updated with Threadban List 4/5/21

Mad_maxx

Mules wrote: »

I'd say this will be a genuinely unpopular opinion. I think a bad part of Irish society is how we always play the victim. People are still bitter about the British, 100 years after independence. The catholic church is now another example. Some people in Ireland were terribly treated by the British government and the catholic church. But plenty of Irish people were complicit in both and most just didn't care about the people who were badly treated. In the case of the church, these same people now act shocked by everything.

The British establishment treated their own working class like crap as well, we weren't alone in that. British people were shipped off to the west indies as indentured servants too but there's a false narrative that Irish people were slaves.

We always act like we are helpless victims and it's encouraged by the media. We blame every ill in our society on things that others have done to us in the past, rather than take responsibility for them. Ireland is no different than other countries, every people has had bad things happen throughout history. We aren't any more persecuted than anyone else. I think it's a real failing.

its far from unique to this country and im not saying i even believe we play the " victim " too often

the british oppression is not that long ago

Mules

Mad_maxx wrote: »

its far from unique to this country and im not saying i even believe we play the " victim " too often

the british oppression is not that long ago

Excluding northern Ireland, we won the ability to rule ourselves nearly 100 years ago. In that time we have developed a better standard of living than many UK cities and many other positives. Many former colony countries fall apart into prolonged civil war, corruption, poverty and dictatorship. We should have the self confidence to forget about the British and be pleased with what we've made for ourselves.

Another one is where people say we'd be poverty stricken without the eu. The government in the 1960's opened the economy and started to attract foreign investment. We opened duty frees as tax free zones. This was all before eu membership. We made our own lives better. But we still give both credit and blame to outsiders. It's something that annoys me.

storker

Mad_maxx wrote: »

its far from unique to this country and im not saying i even believe we play the " victim " too often

the british oppression is not that long ago

Disregarding the six counties, who even remembers them being here?

Mules

storker wrote: »

Disregarding the six counties, who even remembers them being here?

No one, it's that long ago so there's no need to still be blaming them for stuff.

Iscreamkone

Mules wrote: »

No one, it's that long ago so there's no need to still be blaming them for stuff.

What exactly are we blaming them for these days?

jelem

Mules wrote: »

I'd say this will be a genuinely unpopular opinion. I think a bad part of Irish society is how we always play the victim. People are still bitter about the British, 100 years after independence. The catholic church is now another example. Some people in Ireland were terribly treated by the British government and the catholic church. But plenty of Irish people were complicit in both and most just didn't care about the people who were badly treated. In the case of the church, these same people now act shocked by everything.

The British establishment treated their own working class like crap as well, we weren't alone in that. British people were shipped off to the west indies as indentured servants too but there's a false narrative that Irish people were slaves.

We always act like we are helpless victims and it's encouraged by the media. We blame every ill in our society on things that others have done to us in the past, rather than take responsibility for them. Ireland is no different than other countries, every people has had bad things happen throughout history. We aren't any more persecuted than anyone else. I think it's a real failing.

there is the failing of clinging on to the FG and FF parties whom
have their own brand of "jackboot" on the citizens.
whilst recent elections show citizens now moving vote and refuse thoise two
a majority IT is not enough and need New party with wider political views which
may encompass far right\left etc, with citizens First not politicians protection.

Eric Cartman

Landlords in general are nice people providing a valuable service and its generally the insane tax rates on small landlords plus the inability to just tell a tenant ‘I dont take HAP’ which keeps rents high. We need small landlords and at the expense of whats currently happening where companies like kennedy wilson are being huge commercial landlords and lining foreign pockets, we should drastically cut taxes on small landlords and allow them to decline HAP

Mules

Iscreamkone wrote: »

What exactly are we blaming them for these days?

Back in the recession, during the bank bailout, I remember people saying the reason we accepted such onerous terms rather than negotiate was because of our history of being cowed by the British. Basically, us not acting in our own interest was their fault becase they colonised Ireland, which resulted in a passive mentality.

Mules

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Landlords in general are nice people providing a valuable service and its generally the insane tax rates on small landlords plus the inability to just tell a tenant ‘I dont take HAP’ which keeps rents high. We need small landlords and at the expense of whats currently happening where companies like kennedy wilson are being huge commercial landlords and lining foreign pockets, we should drastically cut taxes on small landlords and allow them to decline HAP

It's true that they are running a business not a charity. We need a bigger supply of affordable housing. I think the focus on landlords has helped the governments avoid some of the heat.

Iscreamkone

Mules wrote: »

Back in the recession, during the bank bailout, I remember people saying the reason we accepted such onerous terms rather than negotiate was because of our history of being cowed by the British. Basically, us not acting in our own interest was their fault becase they colonised Ireland, which resulted in a passive mentality.

Never heard that - maybe I was out that day.

jelem

Mules wrote: »

It's true that they are running a business not a charity. We need a bigger supply of affordable housing. I think the focus on landlords has helped the governments avoid some of the heat.

A lot of "government" are landlords and enjoy "tax issues".
All income of all citizens including "company's gained rights through courts to being
treated as an individual (human) to gain rights to their benefit) should be taxed
at equal rate. i not religious but Tithe system is needed.
All pay 10% with removal of fake R&D etc tax breaks along with
"we supply jobs" excuse. which is proven that if you dont do it someone else will.
Pure politicians "pocket liners" in force and hence high costs.

Mules

jelem wrote: »

A lot of "government" are landlords and enjoy "tax issues".
All income of all citizens including "company's gained rights through courts to being
treated as an individual (human) to gain rights to their benefit) should be taxed
at equal rate. i not religious but Tithe system is needed.
All pay 10% with removal of fake R&D etc tax breaks along with
"we supply jobs" excuse. which is proven that if you dont do it someone else will.
Pure politicians "pocket liners" in force and hence high costs.

It's very true about the dail being full of landlords. I had forgotten about that.

Eleven Benevolent Elephants

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Landlords in general are nice people providing a valuable service and its generally the insane tax rates on small landlords plus the inability to just tell a tenant ‘I dont take HAP’ which keeps rents high. We need small landlords and at the expense of whats currently happening where companies like kennedy wilson are being huge commercial landlords and lining foreign pockets, we should drastically cut taxes on small landlords and allow them to decline HAP

I agree with most of what you've said.

How do you define a "small landlord"?

Where will HAP tenants go?

jelem

Eleven Benevolent Elephants wrote: »

I agree with most of what you've said.

How do you define a "small landlord"?

Where will HAP tenants go?

statement of income and "intel" - people will know if you operating
- must be compliant for insurance\payments,bank or other\health and safety etc.etc..

freshpopcorn

I know some people are lonely but it's fantastic knowing that we're going to have a visitor free bank holiday weekend. There's no pressure regarding having food in, tidying up, etc for them.

jelem

freshpopcorn wrote: »

I know some people are lonely but it's fantastic knowing that we're going to have a visitor free bank holiday weekend. There's no pressure regarding having food in, tidying up, etc for them.

in jimjams till 2 greaaaaaaat

Eric Cartman

Eleven Benevolent Elephants wrote: »

I agree with most of what you've said.

How do you define a "small landlord"?

Where will HAP tenants go?

small landlords are ones with too few properties to wrap it up into a REIT , which is where the corporate landlords get tax benefits and can actually make money. Theres no real limit on how many properties a REIT has but it basically makes no sense unless theres atleast 2 million euro worth of assets, which could be 15 apartments in some parts of the country or 2 apartments in south Dublin.

The HAP tenants can go out to areas of rural Ireland where supply outstrips demand , or live with their aul pair or go get a job like they should do. They're all only in there till the clock runs out on their housing list application.

Antares35

My unpopular opinion is that people talk about what happened in mother and baby homes, but they never ask why the man who got the girl pregnant wasn't accountable, or why her father put her into the home.

Mad_maxx

Mules wrote: »

Excluding northern Ireland, we won the ability to rule ourselves nearly 100 years ago. In that time we have developed a better standard of living than many UK cities and many other positives. Many former colony countries fall apart into prolonged civil war, corruption, poverty and dictatorship. We should have the self confidence to forget about the British and be pleased with what we've made for ourselves.

Another one is where people say we'd be poverty stricken without the eu. The government in the 1960's opened the economy and started to attract foreign investment. We opened duty frees as tax free zones. This was all before eu membership. We made our own lives better. But we still give both credit and blame to outsiders. It's something that annoys me.

the EU was hugely important , beit for farmers or what american multinationals saw as a gateway to the EU market

we did take advantage of EU membership and for that we should be pleased with our achievements

Witcher

Antares35 wrote: »

My unpopular opinion is that people talk about what happened in mother and baby homes, but they never ask why the man who got the girl pregnant wasn't accountable, or why her father put her into the home.

Was always the girl's father was it?

Justin Credible Darts

Mules wrote: »

Excluding northern Ireland, we won the ability to rule ourselves nearly 100 years ago. .

aye after 800 years of british rule.


and what have we done ? give it away again to europe this time

Firstly let me preface this by saying I fully support equality in pay for women and men doing the same job and getting the same opportunities.

That said, I think the calls from the women’s football team for equal pay with the men’s team is a bit delusional tbh. In terms of ability and revenue they bring they just aren’t on the same level.

The USA women’s team, the world champions who are incredibly dominant, played an under 15s boys team from Dallas in their last World Cup preparations and were beaten 5-2.
So that’s by far the best women’s team in the WORLD taking a relatively heavy loss from boys who were 14-15 years old in a city where soccer is a total non entity, in a country where men’s soccer is a non entity and still they won. Against the most dominant women’s team of all time.

Top level men’s football is insanely competitive, these are the top 0.000001% of literally millions of players the world over in an absolutely massive industry and their pay reflects that. It is just so so so much more difficult to reach that top level. Women’s football is neither as competitive (relatively) nor near the men’s commercially.

I just honestly don’t see how you can argue in good faith that they deserve equal pay, they’re not doing the same job. Likewise the top earning models in the world are all female - is that sexist? No. They are just much more successful and valuable from a commercial standpoint.

One could argue with regards to international matches there should be equal pay as it’s all funded by the taxpayer but then with that in mind why should the footballers get paid more than the badminton players? If they’re all international sports people representing Ireland do they not all deserve the same? No, of course not - again it all comes down to viewing figures, jersey sales, promotional opportunities etc etc.
It’s not exactly nice but like most things in this world, money is the prime factor.

Rodney Bathgate

Antares35 wrote: »

My unpopular opinion is that people talk about what happened in mother and baby homes, but they never ask why the man who got the girl pregnant wasn't accountable, or why her father put her into the home.

Or her mother.

Justin Credible Darts

what simpleton would spend a 100 million on a woman footballer like they would a man.

Womens sports are rubbish in comparison to the men in 99% of all cases.
Tennis is possibly the only exception, and maybe gymnastics.

Womens football, golf, even the pathetic womens gaa is worthless to the average sky viewer.

If it was that good then man utd women would be getting 70,000 gates etc, but they dont because most people dont care.

Even darts where there is no physical endurance, and can be played by both sexes the women are not as good. women only events cannot survive without mens games in the same competition.

If they want to demand equal pay, they can pick a men's team with similar viewing figures and base it on that.

kowloonkev

I don't like the way the media try to force women's sport on the viewers who tuned in to enjoy men's sports programmes. there are a number of football podcasts now where they will put on a little segment for the women's game. some of the contributors do care because they were selected for that specifically, but the others are forced to feign enthusiasm. they should have a seperate show for the women's game but of course hardly anybody would download it.

same on rte website you have to be careful the way they might trick you into thinking an article is about the mens football or rugby teams just for the clicks. I'd say 99% of people close the tab when they realise their mistake.

nothing against women's sport at all. just like any business it should stand on its own two feet and understand its place. there's a reason Man United resisted having a womens team for so long because it is just throwing money at something that will never be profitable. they were shamed into putting a team together. that is the only way women's sport can survive seemingly by attaching itself to the mens game and leeching off of it.

partyguinness

Justin Credible Darts wrote: »

what simpleton would spend a 100 million on a woman footballer like they would a man.

Womens sports are rubbish in comparison to the men in 99% of all cases.
Tennis is possibly the only exception, and maybe gymnastics.

Womens football, golf, even the pathetic womens gaa is worthless to the average sky viewer.
.

I was at an All Ireland ladies club final years ago (my sister was playing). The standard was so atrocious it was actually really entertaining. It was comical.

cms88

kowloonkev wrote: »

I don't like the way the media try to force women's sport on the viewers who tuned in to enjoy men's sports programmes. there are a number of football podcasts now where they will put on a little segment for the women's game. some of the contributors do care because they were selected for that specifically, but the others are forced to feign enthusiasm. they should have a seperate show for the women's game but of course hardly anybody would download it.

same on rte website you have to be careful the way they might trick you into thinking an article is about the mens football or rugby teams just for the clicks. I'd say 99% of people close the tab when they realise their mistake.

nothing against women's sport at all. just like any business it should stand on its own two feet and understand its place. there's a reason Man United resisted having a womens team for so long because it is just throwing money at something that will never be profitable. they were shamed into putting a team together. that is the only way women's sport can survive seemingly by attaching itself to the mens game and leeching off of it.

My gripe is how we're always fed the ''It's just as good as the mens game'' line. No no it's not. If it was they wouldn't have to keep telling us it is.

Every year there's some dispute between ladies football and camogie around fixtures. Every year we hear, mostly from women, about how this wouldn't happen to th men or the GAA have to do something about it. All the while ignoring the fact it actually has nothing to do with the GAA. Both ladies football and camogie associations are both mainly run by women and if men were running them a poorly a they do there would be countless investigations around it etc

Greyfox

kowloonkev wrote: »

that is the only way women's sport can survive seemingly by attaching itself to the mens game and leeching off of it.

It makes perfect marketing sense to do this though.

astrofool

Greyfox wrote: »

It makes perfect marketing sense to do this though.

What's hypocritical is that they're chasing men's viewership and expecting equal engagement, women don't watch other women play sports in large numbers, that's what they should be going after.

If they could, the athletes would be richer than the Kardashians, young women are worth more in advertising $ than men, everything possible is targeted at them. All the influencer cr*p is financed this way.