All's not well in FG.

Idbatterim

Tefral wrote: »

Well actually, i am involved in house building. Theres a shortage of labour alright but not massively so. The problem is the margins are too tight on the sale price of the houses. Honestly, its not worth it.

they can start off taxing the houses less then! Forget giving people the ability to borrow more and drown themselves in debt, while wasters are given luxury apartments in dundrum for free!

Tefral

Jinglejangle69 wrote: »

There is a massive shortage.

Ask anyone trying to get a plumber or electrician to a job.

It’s impossible.

Thats only because lads dont want to be dealing with Missus housewife whinging about the sockets being a little crooked or the white colour of her handbasin being not white enough.

Fellas wont go to the smaller jobs anymore because they are being hammered on price by the householder thinking they could do a better job themselves.

Anyway, thats an arguement for another thread.

The real problem is the fact that fees, landprices, vat etc are pushing up the house prices beyond what the banks are willing to lend to people so the margins are too tight.

Im involved in 3 housing estates where the full compliment of the houses wont be built because the developer is not seeing the return.

woohoo!!!

Tefral wrote: »

Thats only because lads dont want to be dealing with Missus housewife whinging about the sockets being a little crooked or the white colour of her handbasin being not white enough.

Fellas wont go to the smaller jobs anymore because they are being hammered on price by the householder thinking they could do a better job themselves.

Anyway, thats an arguement for another thread.

The real problem is the fact that fees, landprices, vat etc are pushing up the house prices beyond what the banks are willing to lend to people so the margins are too tight.

Im involved in 3 housing estates where the full compliment of the houses wont be built because the developer is not seeing the return.

This. Couldn't agree more.

Jinglejangle69

Tefral wrote: »

Thats only because lads dont want to be dealing with Missus housewife whinging about the sockets being a little crooked or the white colour of her handbasin being not white enough.

Fellas wont go to the smaller jobs anymore because they are being hammered on price by the householder thinking they could do a better job themselves.

Anyway, thats an arguement for another thread.

The real problem is the fact that fees, landprices, vat etc are pushing up the house prices beyond what the banks are willing to lend to people so the margins are too tight.

Im involved in 3 housing estates where the full compliment of the houses wont be built because the developer is not seeing the return.

Why are we constantly told that FG are keeping prices high to benefit the banks and builders if no one can afford to build or buy the bloody houses!!??

Just shows the nonsense theories the opposition and the left come out with.

woohoo!!!

Jinglejangle69 wrote: »

Why are we constantly told that FG are keeping prices high to benefit the banks and builders if no one can afford to build or buy the bloody houses!!??

Just shows the nonsense theories the opposition and the left come out with.

What have FG done to tackle high land prices, high interest rates charged by banks, high indirect taxes and high fees charged by some professionals? All leading to high house prices.

Then ask yourself why haven't they, and who benefits from the status quo?

Idbatterim

woohoo!!! wrote: »

What have FG done to tackle high land prices, high interest rates charged by banks, high indirect taxes and high fees charged by some professionals? All leading to high house prices.

Then ask yourself why haven't they, and who benefits from the status quo?

thats the thing, its so simple knowing what to do, if they were bothered its so simple to take action, but they dont? why not? Maybe, just maybe, they want to maintain the status quo!

Phoebas

Idbatterim wrote: »

thats the thing, its so simple knowing what to do, if they were bothered its so simple to take action, but they dont? why not? Maybe, just maybe, they want to maintain the status quo!

Everyones' an expert.

Jinglejangle69

woohoo!!! wrote: »

What have FG done to tackle high land prices, high interest rates charged by banks, high indirect taxes and high fees charged by some professionals? All leading to high house prices.

Then ask yourself why haven't they, and who benefits from the status quo?

Since when can governments decide banks interest rates??

James Brown

markodaly wrote: »

When was the last time a government party won a bye election?
Its a rare thing. Too much read into this election imo.

BUT that is not to say FG shouldnt be worried.

FG have done some good things:

Economy is good
Good relationship with Europe
Did very good work with Brexit
Debt paid down

Housing and Health are the obvious issues for most people, but when has health never been in crisis and in fairness, housing seems to be turning a bit as well. There are lots to blame for both. The government are not the Chinese Communist party and cannot issue dictats to get things done. This is Ireland, decisions about policy takes years and years, never mind their implementation.

I am dissapointed about public transport and infrastructure. They need to be more forthright about high density housing, the metro, bus connects things like that in my opinion. But again, this is Ireland..

You're codding nobody. You push this baloney that FG would have done this or that but for external issues.
Housing is ticking along just as FG want it. Otherwise they'd even suggest something new, they are not even suggesting change while the crises worsen so get up the yard.

markodaly wrote: »

As to the next GE, as I mentioned the next government will either be a coalition or a minority government, so the same issues will still be there.
Someone mentioned a donkey in a field would be better than FG, I think this shows you the stupidity, ignorance and lack of any understanding on how policy is formed, discussed and implimented.

This is who FG are trying to 'please'. Of course, they offer no solutions or alternatives themselves, but regale us time and time again on how 'bad FG' are...

You're talking sh*te. FG are pushing FG poilcy and we see the result.

FG make their crises worse so no FG means improvement.
Build social housing. You are a complete liar on this MarkO. We've discussed at great length the alternatives. Build instead of lease or buy. That simple. Everybody on boards knows alternatives are discussed whether they agree with them or not. 'no alternatives'? you chancer :rolleyes:
No point in pretending to discuss if you constantly erase and repeat your shyte.

Wanderer78

Jinglejangle69 wrote:

Why are we constantly told that FG are keeping prices high to benefit the banks and builders if no one can afford to build or buy the bloody houses!!??

Ever rising house prices greatly benefits the banking system, it's an astonishingly disturbing system, creates the money that's used to purchase the asset in the first place in the form of credit, the debtor obviously must pay this back in full, plus interest, potentially could lose that asset if this fails, and the asset falls back into the hands of the creditor. Then of course there's all the speculative activities with that debt within the financial system, it really is a win win for the banking system

woohoo!!!

Jinglejangle69 wrote: »

Since when can governments decide banks interest rates??

Leaving aside their major share holding in banks, they're in charge of policy setting. And the policy of inflating the value of land, assets, property and so on, has served to see the return of crazy price town, most notably in rent. Now, who exactly voted for that?

James Brown

This is why we have a housing crisis:

FG want business to do well, above all else.
Vulture funds pay low taxes.
LA's/State provide business for vulture funds.
This keeps prices high as they buy to rent or lease.
Tax payers can't afford rent or to buy.
They need state aid...so LA's/state buy/lease off vulture funds.
Everybody is quids in, the economy looks good.
This leaves the tax payer subsidising lower income tax payers, while Noonan, his vulture fund chums and TD landlords get minted.

Why on earth would dirt like Fine Gael want to 'tackle' housing in any other way? They've even got lackies giving out about low income people being the problem.

Idbatterim

Jesus the few of us constantly repeating what is obvious and public knowledge is soul destroying. There needs to be a sticky on the housing racket in my opinion and keep all talk of it there ...

James Brown

Idbatterim wrote: »

Jesus the few of us constantly repeating what is obvious and public knowledge is soul destroying. There needs to be a sticky on the housing racket in my opinion and keep all talk of it there ...

It's tiring. You hash it out and agree or not it's there for all to read then a few weeks later the same shams come out with the same spin and at this stage lies.

blanch152

woohoo!!! wrote: »

What have FG done to tackle high land prices, high interest rates charged by banks, high indirect taxes and high fees charged by some professionals? All leading to high house prices.

Then ask yourself why haven't they, and who benefits from the status quo?

The answer to that lies in the Dail arithmetic and the grip of factless politics on the public debate.

High interest rates charged by the banks can be easily tackled. You just have to make it really easy for banks to repossess properties of borrowers in default. The risk of default to banks is lower, therefore they can lower interest rates. The repossessions have a secondary effect of lowering house prices, as supply is increased.

Moving from indirect taxation to direct taxation is also simple. You just bring income tax levels into line with the rest of the EU. That would mean increasing the tax burden on those who earn less than the average wage.

High land prices are also fixable. You could propose a constitutional amendment meaning that all land should be valued as its agricultural use. Not a single farmer across the country would ever sell a house for a site again (which is a really good idea in my opinion).

There you go, there is your solution and your political platform:

(1) Make it easier for banks to repossess family homes.
(2) Increase the income tax burden on those with less than average earnings.
(3) Require all land to be sold at agricultural prices via a constitutional amendment.

After you have run in the election, please let us know how you get on.

blanch152

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Build social housing. You are a complete liar on this MarkO. We've discussed at great length the alternatives. Build instead of lease or buy. That simple. Everybody on boards knows alternatives are discussed whether they agree with them or not. 'no alternatives'? you chancer :rolleyes:
No point in pretending to discuss if you constantly erase and repeat your shyte.

Not this again. Over and over, your simple solution of just build social housing has been shown to be full of flaws. You have never explained how it can be done, you have never explained why a builder would build houses for the state for less profit than they would build them for themselves. You have never explained how the EU procurement laws would be adhered to. You have never explained how the local authorities would be able to carry this work out at zero cost.

Without those detailed explanations, it is in the realm of Walter Mitty. If you could only produce some kind of CSO statistic or independent report to back up your ideas, they might have some credibility, but without that, they're not worth discussing.

Larbre34

woohoo!!! wrote: »

What have FG done to tackle high land prices, high interest rates charged by banks, high indirect taxes and high fees charged by some professionals? All leading to high house prices.

Then ask yourself why haven't they, and who benefits from the status quo?

Thats such an overly simplistic and conflated statement as to be baseless.

Yes, the situation is unsustainable and arguably immoral in many respects, but there are so many factors at play other than political clientitilism; the Constitution, common law precedent, the law of the land, EU banking and financial regulation, and the inability generally to have laws applied retrospectively.

The biggest and best thing FG and any Govt or party can do to encourage a healthy and flexible housing market is to get the Eff out of the way!!

James Brown

Larbre34 wrote: »

Thats such an overly simplistic and conflated statement as to be baseless.

Yes, the situation is unsustainable and arguably immoral in many respects, but there are so many factors at play other than political clientitilism; the Constitution, common law precedent, the law of the land, EU banking and financial regulation, and the inability generally to have laws applied retrospectively.

The biggest and best thing FG and any Govt or party can do to encourage a healthy and flexible housing market is to get the Eff out of the way!!

Based on their record and the best people they have in their member I expect that baldy Noonan and friends are making money off the crises.
Do we think they don't see their policies on one hand and record breaking ongoing crises on the other? It's not credible.

They should get out of the way after they begin repairs on the damage they caused.

woohoo!!!

blanch152 wrote: »

The answer to that lies in the Dail arithmetic and the grip of factless politics on the public debate.

High interest rates charged by the banks can be easily tackled. You just have to make it really easy for banks to repossess properties of borrowers in default. The risk of default to banks is lower, therefore they can lower interest rates. The repossessions have a secondary effect of lowering house prices, as supply is increased.

Moving from indirect taxation to direct taxation is also simple. You just bring income tax levels into line with the rest of the EU. That would mean increasing the tax burden on those who earn less than the average wage.

High land prices are also fixable. You could propose a constitutional amendment meaning that all land should be valued as its agricultural use. Not a single farmer across the country would ever sell a house for a site again (which is a really good idea in my opinion).

There you go, there is your solution and your political platform:

(1) Make it easier for banks to repossess family homes.
(2) Increase the income tax burden on those with less than average earnings.
(3) Require all land to be sold at agricultural prices via a constitutional amendment.

After you have run in the election, please let us know how you get on.

A creative and entertaining reply, fair dues.
1) use it or lose it clause on site planning permissions, an incremental sepeculative tax on each time a site is flipped and provide courts with additional resources to speed up decision times and tackle the 'no rent/mortgage paid whilst holding the show up for years in courts. Not quite the same as your turf folk out of the family home simplified line.
2) on every policy, plan, legislation etcproduced by the state or state authorities, must include a 'reduce the cost of living analysis' to address same.
3) see 1 above, but update and streamline CPO powers, derelict site powers, vacant site powers and no exemptions for state bodies.

woohoo!!!

Larbre34 wrote: »

Thats such an overly simplistic and conflated statement as to be baseless.

Yes, the situation is unsustainable and arguably immoral in many respects, but there are so many factors at play other than political clientitilism; the Constitution, common law precedent, the law of the land, EU banking and financial regulation, and the inability generally to have laws applied retrospectively.

The biggest and best thing FG and any Govt or party can do to encourage a healthy and flexible housing market is to get the Eff out of the way!!

So asking a question or question on the issue is baseless? I'm in no doubt that the answer in full is extremely complex and beyond the ability of pretty much anyone on boards to answer.

But it is baseless to shoot down the question, which you clearly haven't read properly. Nor have evidently FG come up with a coherent response to adequately address either, after nigh on 9 years.

Tefral

Jinglejangle69 wrote: »

Why are we constantly told that FG are keeping prices high to benefit the banks and builders if no one can afford to build or buy the bloody houses!!??

Just shows the nonsense theories the opposition and the left come out with.

There is some element of truth to that and its based around the fact that the REITS can claw back quite alot of the taxes outlaid. (or at least they could until legislation recently tightened the rules a bit around it)

In terms of housing the density is too small for developers.

Take for example Cherrywood in Dublin. That's funded by Hines the pension fund, but they are putting in colossal sized blocks to offset the cost of the land. They are also looking at it over longer term. They are building shops, creches, paid play centres etc. They are building an entire ecosystem so the money they are putting into the actual capital cost is being re-clawed in rent but also in the creches, fees for shops etc etc.

So you can see why housing estates are not really taking off and the likes of cherrywood is...

blanch152

woohoo!!! wrote: »

A creative and entertaining reply, fair dues.
1) use it or lose it clause on site planning permissions, an incremental sepeculative tax on each time a site is flipped and provide courts with additional resources to speed up decision times and tackle the 'no rent/mortgage paid whilst holding the show up for years in courts. Not quite the same as your turf folk out of the family home simplified line.
2) on every policy, plan, legislation etcproduced by the state or state authorities, must include a 'reduce the cost of living analysis' to address same.
3) see 1 above, but update and streamline CPO powers, derelict site powers, vacant site powers and no exemptions for state bodies.

1) Your incremental speculative tax would be unconstitutional unless it also applied to farmers selling sites to children who then flipped the houses onwards, as happens a lot. Providing the courts with additional resources won't help things, it is the endless adjournments allowed by courts for families in line with legislation that delay things.
2) Won't have any effect, because they have those included already
3) Again, some minor effects at best but huge constitutional implications.

All in all, your proposals would have some minor effects at the margins, but won't really address the core problems. They are typical of the type of things that we will see suggested in election manifestos such as FF's in an effort to look like things will be done differently, but really won't make that much difference.

If you really want to free up the housing market, you have to take on board the type of radical suggestions I put forward. No politician or political party will do so.

woohoo!!!

blanch152 wrote: »

1) Your incremental speculative tax would be unconstitutional unless it also applied to farmers selling sites to children who then flipped the houses onwards, as happens a lot. Providing the courts with additional resources won't help things, it is the endless adjournments allowed by courts for families in line with legislation that delay things.
2) Won't have any effect, because they have those included already
3) Again, some minor effects at best but huge constitutional implications.

All in all, your proposals would have some minor effects at the margins, but won't really address the core problems. They are typical of the type of things that we will see suggested in election manifestos such as FF's in an effort to look like things will be done differently, but really won't make that much difference.

If you really want to free up the housing market, you have to take on board the type of radical suggestions I put forward. No politician or political party will do so.

I largely agree with your sentiment and there's no simple quick fix. There's a cost benefit analysis required for legislation which is good but it's aimed at value for money for state spend. My suggestion is specifically to deal with the wider cost of living with proposals.

Whether a constitutional amendment is required is quite possible, but whatever the measure taken, has got to deal with rampant speculation and profiteering that has caused and continues to cause high prices and rents.

I absolutely take your point about constant adjourments and delays which covers the entire legal system, and one which even managed to resist the troika. But if I could sum up, it's really measures to tackle vested interests and cosy cartels.

blanch152

woohoo!!! wrote: »

I largely agree with your sentiment and there's no simple quick fix. There's a cost benefit analysis required for legislation which is good but it's aimed at value for money for state spend. My suggestion is specifically to deal with the wider cost of living with proposals.

Whether a constitutional amendment is required is quite possible, but whatever the measure taken, has got to deal with rampant speculation and profiteering that has caused and continues to cause high prices and rents.

I absolutely take your point about constant adjourments and delays which covers the entire legal system, and one which even managed to resist the troika. But if I could sum up, it's really measures to tackle vested interests and cosy cartels.

I agree with all of your suggestions (with the possible exception of the constitutional amendment, because it won't pass, not because it's not good), but the real issue is that they aren't enough to force more change. Arguably, they won't do as much as the measures that Murphy has already brought in, which are beginning to see change and progress.

I think one of the reasons FG are hanging on, is because the numbers of house being built is increasing, it went over 5,000 a quarter last quarter, if it is getting close to 6,000 a quarter by the time of the election, FG will be able to say that the figures show they are making progress.

Idbatterim

blanch152 wrote: »

I agree with all of your suggestions (with the possible exception of the constitutional amendment, because it won't pass, not because it's not good), but the real issue is that they aren't enough to force more change. Arguably, they won't do as much as the measures that Murphy has already brought in, which are beginning to see change and progress.

I think one of the reasons FG are hanging on, is because the numbers of house being built is increasing, it went over 5,000 a quarter last quarter, if it is getting close to 6,000 a quarter by the time of the election, FG will be able to say that the figures show they are making progress.

the anger is about more than just the housing crisis and I think people are totally out of patience. I reckon they are done one way or another. Its too little, too late. Their arrogance, swing gate, Varadkar being a failure there , I am obviously missing out a ton of bad things. They have made their own grave. Its just a constant inability to act or act with any conviction or sense of urgency...

Idbatterim

Idbatterim wrote: »

the anger is about more than just the housing crisis and I think people are totally out of patience. I reckon they are done one way or another. Its too little, too late. Their arrogance, swing gate, Varadkar being a failure there , I am obviously missing out a ton of bad things. They have made their own grave. Its just a constant inability to act or act with any conviction or sense of urgency...

What anger? Yours? There’s always some unhappy with da gubberment, no matter who is in power.

_Kaiser_

Deleted User wrote: »

What anger? Yours? There’s always some unhappy with da gubberment, no matter who is in power.

And it's this dismissive attitude, coupled with the inference that anyone unhappy with FG must be one of "those" (Shinners/rent-a-mobs/dolers/wasters - delete as applicable) that has been a big part of FG's undoing in recent times.

That and things like dodgy compo claims, playing the system to grab an extra 50k in expenses, the party itself being exposed for tax evasion over NINE YEARS ... and oh yes, the inconvenient reality that core problems have gotten signficantly worse under their tenure (let's skip the "but, but... full employment!" notion shall we? That's down to a global recovery and private investment - if anything FG are trying their best to stifle that growth through their mismanagement of the housing crisis)

FG should change the party slogan to reflect what it REALLY represents - "Making Fianna Fail electable again for generations"

Jinglejangle69

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

And it's this dismissive attitude, coupled with the inference that anyone unhappy with FG must be one of "those" (Shinners/rent-a-mobs/dolers/wasters - delete as applicable) that has been a big part of FG's undoing in recent times.

That and things like dodgy compo claims, playing the system to grab an extra 50k in expenses, the party itself being exposed for tax evasion over NINE YEARS ... and oh yes, the inconvenient reality that core problems have gotten signficantly worse under their tenure (let's skip the "but, but... full employment!" notion shall we? That's down to a global recovery and private investment - if anything FG are trying their best to stifle that growth through their mismanagement of the housing crisis)

FG should change the party slogan to reflect what it REALLY represents - "Making Fianna Fail electable again for generations"

This article is from 2010 showing how FIANNA FAIL wasted 10 billion of tax payers money.

More than €1bn of taxpayers' money has been wasted every year since Fianna Fail came to power 10 years ago, a Sunday Independent investigation reveals.

We can show that since Fianna Failtook office a decade ago, more than €1bn of taxpayers' money has been wasted annually.

A list of failed projects, delayed works, bloated bureaucracy and poor management have all led to more than €10bn being squandered in the last 10 years.

Taxpayers' money has been squandered by every Government department including €100m on the abandoned Stadium Campus Ireland project, the €471m overrun on the Luas, the €150m overspend on the Port Tunnel, as well as almost a €1bn wasted on the Government's botched de-centralisation policy.


Apart from the overspends and underestimation in the cost of the Port Tunnel and the two Luas lines that don't link up, and the chaos that is the M50, Ireland's road building projects since 1997 have collectively cost €3.2bn more than what was originally forecast, according to our figures.

Opposition parties, hospital patient groups and leading economists have said that institutional waste during a time of plenty and the failure to deliver a first world infrastructure is endangering Ireland's competitiveness internationally.

One of the key areas is the health service. Its funding has increased from €3.2bn in 1997 to almost €13bn this year. Despite this massive injection since 1997, the Health Service Executive, which employs 70,000 people and 36,000 indirectly, is now closing wards and has introduced a freeze on new employees.

The closure of a 10-bed ward in Nenagh hospital is just one of a number of high-profile ward shutdowns in recent weeks. The Irish Patients Association has said cuts and ward closures currently being enforced by the HSE are unforgivable.

Steve McMahon of the Irish Patients Association said: "It is an organisation rife with institutionalised bureaucracy. When they formed the HSE in 2005 they should have introduced a redundancy package and cleared their ranks.



Some people here saying FIANNA FÁIL don’t overspend!!!!!!!!

Jinglejangle69

FG get in, make the harsh austerity cuts needed.

People get angry, along comes FF to spoil everyone again, we’re all happy then bang, another bust and around we go.

Plumbthedepths

Jinglejangle69 wrote: »

FG get in, make the harsh austerity cuts needed.

People get angry, along comes FF to spoil everyone again, we’re all happy then bang, another bust and around we go.

Actually 2/3 of the cuts were made before FG got in. You are entitled to your own opinion just not your own facts. ;-)

Plumbthedepths

Jinglejangle69 wrote: »

This article is from 2010 showing how FIANNA FAIL wasted 10 billion of tax payers money.

More than €1bn of taxpayers' money has been wasted every year since Fianna Fail came to power 10 years ago, a Sunday Independent investigation reveals.

We can show that since Fianna Failtook office a decade ago, more than €1bn of taxpayers' money has been wasted annually.

A list of failed projects, delayed works, bloated bureaucracy and poor management have all led to more than €10bn being squandered in the last 10 years.

Taxpayers' money has been squandered by every Government department including €100m on the abandoned Stadium Campus Ireland project, the €471m overrun on the Luas, the €150m overspend on the Port Tunnel, as well as almost a €1bn wasted on the Government's botched de-centralisation policy.


Apart from the overspends and underestimation in the cost of the Port Tunnel and the two Luas lines that don't link up, and the chaos that is the M50, Ireland's road building projects since 1997 have collectively cost €3.2bn more than what was originally forecast, according to our figures.

Opposition parties, hospital patient groups and leading economists have said that institutional waste during a time of plenty and the failure to deliver a first world infrastructure is endangering Ireland's competitiveness internationally.

One of the key areas is the health service. Its funding has increased from €3.2bn in 1997 to almost €13bn this year. Despite this massive injection since 1997, the Health Service Executive, which employs 70,000 people and 36,000 indirectly, is now closing wards and has introduced a freeze on new employees.

The closure of a 10-bed ward in Nenagh hospital is just one of a number of high-profile ward shutdowns in recent weeks. The Irish Patients Association has said cuts and ward closures currently being enforced by the HSE are unforgivable.

Steve McMahon of the Irish Patients Association said: "It is an organisation rife with institutionalised bureaucracy. When they formed the HSE in 2005 they should have introduced a redundancy package and cleared their ranks.



Some people here saying FIANNA FÁIL don’t overspend!!!!!!!!

3rd time to post a 9 year old article, worried?

Jinglejangle69

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Actually 2/3 of the cuts were made before FG got in. You are entitled to your own opinion just not your own facts. ;-)

You know exactly what I mean.

Jinglejangle69

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

3rd time to post a 9 year old article, worried?

Did you read it?

Has it sunk in yet?

Plumbthedepths

Jinglejangle69 wrote: »

Did you read it?

Has it sunk in yet?

9 years ago..not relevant to the present tbh, but if you want to go down the route of waste let's start water meters, National Children's hospital National ,Broadband plan.

Plumbthedepths

Jinglejangle69 wrote: »

You know exactly what I mean.

No you are making untrue claims. Not up to me to decipher your intent.

Jinglejangle69

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

9 years ago..not relevant to the present tbh, but if you want to go down the route of waste let's start water meters, National Children's hospital National ,Broadband plan.

What’s wring with the broadband plan?

I see this posted here as if there is some conspiracy going on?

More tin foil nonsense.

It’s a sound plan that is badly needed.

But yeah let’s just give out because we dont like FG.

Jinglejangle69

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

No you are making untrue claims. Not up to me to decipher your intent.

So your absolving FG from the austerity cuts?

That’s actually refreshing, thank you, it makes a change from the narrative here that it was their fault.

Some sense finally.

Idbatterim

Jinglejangle69 wrote: »

So your absolving FG from the austerity cuts?

That’s actually refreshing, thank you, it makes a change from the narrative here that it was their fault.

Some sense finally.

Fg are incompetent arrogant chancers, you think I want a scenario, where in a democracy, there isnt a single bloody party I can say I am happy to vote for. Where its picking from unimaginable ****, to very very ****?

antimatterx

ELM327 wrote: »

I can't see him as Taoiseach. He was around Bertie's cabinet. People won't vote him back.


I will be voting FG (as I have done since 2011) as there is no other credible option.

I vote FG also, and I think MM will sell his granny to form a coalition with the left. FG willl be the biggest, but unfortunately I can see a FF, Labour and Green coalition. I can even see MM going against the grassroots and getting into bed with SF.

The man is pushing 60, this is his last chance and I don't think he cares who the junior coalition partners are.

Snow Garden

Jinglejangle69 wrote: »

But yeah let’s just give out because we dont like FG.

61 posts per day for a new account. Classy.

Plumbthedepths

Jinglejangle69 wrote: »

So your absolving FG from the austerity cuts?

That’s actually refreshing, thank you, it makes a change from the narrative here that it was their fault.

Some sense finally.

I see reading is not your forte.

Jinglejangle69

Snow Garden wrote: »

61 posts per day for a new account. Classy.

What’s that to do with the subject?

Do you have an issue with me and my number of posts?

Jinglejangle69

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

I see reading is not your forte.

Uuuuuuh good one.

Liberta Per Gli Ultra

Jinglejangle69 wrote: »

What’s wring with the broadband plan?

I see this posted here as if there is some conspiracy going on?

More tin foil nonsense.

The state is paying 3 billion euro of taxpayers money and in the end the network will be owned by an American private investment group. Public money subsidising the private sector, like welfare for the wealthy.

https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2019/1120/1092736-national-broadband-plan/

Jinglejangle69

Liberta Per Gli Ultra wrote: »

The state is paying 3 billion euro of taxpayers money and in the end the network will be owned by an American private investment group. Public money subsidising the private sector, like welfare for the wealthy.

https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2019/1120/1092736-national-broadband-plan/

So how much would it cost the state to go it alone and what would be the return?

Some figures and projections when you’re ready thanks.

Seems you’re the expert in this subject.

markodaly

10000maniacs wrote: »

No that is the opposite of what I am saying. He should have overseen, unendorsed and unapproved the decision as pure idiocy and waste.
His job is to give the Irish taxpayer good value for their hard earned money.

I do not think you understand how government works in this country.

You want Eoghan Murphy to oversee all the actions of all Local Authorities and Councils in Ireland.
May as well get rid of LA's then, and make the Dail exectutive run everything, from housing to parking meters.

Put all the power into the hands of the Cabinet, even though we already have some of the weakest local government in the EU?

You are funny.

Jinglejangle69

markodaly wrote: »

I do not think you understand how government works in this country.

You want Eoghan Murphy to oversee all the actions of all Local Authorities and Councils in Ireland.
May as well get rid of LA's then, and make the Dail exectutive run everything, from housing to parking meters.

Put all the power into the hands of the Cabinet, even though we already have some of the weakest local government in the EU?

You are funny.

These people can’t be debated with.

No understanding of basic policies.

I often wonder how they get by everyday life.

markodaly

Idbatterim wrote: »

hang on! I want you know what you think he should be doing?

he introduced fast track planning, nimby everything dont want housing in their area. The LPT is farcically low. Council tenants paying as good as no rent. I mean if you think he has been poor, fine. But I want to know, what you think he should be doing! You can get nothing done in this country without endless consensus and getting everyone on board. You know that he isnt a dictator?

You nailed it there.

We are an overly obsessed consensus based society, where we need to talk endlessly and try and get consensus on how we run our state.
Sure, why do we have so many referendums?

On the big issues like abortion there is merit to the idea. But to try and get things built, like housing, metros, bus lanes, greenways, data centres it fails badly.

This is the core issue wrong with both housing and health. We have been swimming againt the tide to try and get a consensus with all stakeholders to fix the issue. Hasnt really worked out.
It near impossible to build high rise in Dublin as an example. BusConnects is delayed for years because everyone had to be informed and notified about every tree, shurb and stone that may be affected.
Health, well can't reform that because everyone from the consultant to the porter needs to be informed about the change and they have to agree to it.

ChikiChiki

Jinglejangle69 wrote: »

What’s wring with the broadband plan?

I see this posted here as if there is some conspiracy going on?

More tin foil nonsense.

It’s a sound plan that is badly needed.

But yeah let’s just give out because we dont like FG.

This poster has to be a windup. Is it one of the 3 amigos? Join date leads me to believe.

The strategic comms unit are about as subtle as a sledgehammer. Expect more of this nonsense in the run up to GE2020.

Jinglejangle69

ChikiChiki wrote: »

This poster has to be a windup. Is it one of the 3 amigos? Join date leads me to believe.

The strategic comms unit are about as subtle as a sledgehammer. Expect more of this nonsense in the run up to GE2020.

What’s your problem?

Are people who don’t agree with varied opinions not allowed speak and have a different opinion around here?

Are FG voters not allowed have a voice here?

See your 3 amigo nonsense?

You couldn’t be more wrong, honestly.