Is it not time EVERYONE considers not voting for FF or FG in the upcoming election

Bannasidhe

SantaCruz wrote: »

No offence to your mother, but you have to question the thought process that sees a party destroy our economy, then return to voting for them because there was no money left in the kitty for the poor bastards who had to tidy up their disaster.

Oh I did question it.
Many the arguments. It was like a she had a mental block preventing her from understanding that there were alternatives to both FG and FF - and then she voted LP and put FG in government so it was back to FF.
She is, or rather was, one of the loyalists. She was from a FF family back to the days of Dev and (old) SF before that.
There are many of them - and articles are now appearing in the papers extolling the virtues of such loyalty now that SF are apparently on the rise.

My Dad's family are FG but he abandoned them in 2016 due to cuts affecting pensioners.

is_that_so

is_that_so wrote: »

How can you control EU citizens coming here or Brits for that matter? They are the vast bulk of our immigrants. As for not raising it, the Albanian and Georgian comment Varadkar made turned out to be true despite the outrage it generated.

You first need to give the political parties a mandate to bring to brussels.i think the British are about to show us a better relationship model between European countries that will work better for everyone. No free movement of course but I dont see why that needs to be the definition of what the European bloc is.

I'd be happy for them to give us a boat load of cash to improve our infrastructure and services, I mean a serious amount of money at a level that meets the demand put on our infrastructure and services.

SantaCruz

Deleted User wrote: »

You first need to give the political parties a mandate to bring to brussels.i think the British are about to show us a better relationship model between European countries that will work better for everyone. No free movement of course but I dont see why that needs to be the definition of what the European bloc is.

Just curious - do you have any experience in international trade? Do you have a sense of the advantages of an economic union over a trade deal?

(not intending to put you the spot - feel free to ignore the question!)

Bannasidhe

Idbatterim wrote: »

good post. Those vote loses, over what issues primarily?

Of my cousins : Some are nurses/soldiers - they are fed up with their working conditions. We are talking people with 20+ years service who would love to love their jobs but dread going into work.
Some have teenage children with disabilities and they are struggling to get the care they need and are terrified as to what will happen when those children will shortly be 'adults'.
All have elderly parents and are concerned about their care going forward. No-one can afford to quit their job to provide the care that may be needed and don't want to see them in Care Homes. They would like to know there is support available.
Not to mention if any of their parents need emergency treatment. My 84 year old aunt had a stoke 2 weeks ago - in all seriousness her daughter said "thank f she had it on a Monday lunchtime when we could take her to the Bons".
They all feel their children will struggle to get secure accommodation/jobs.
We are the generation that came to adulthood during the dire 80s- we worked, paid our taxes, suffered the cuts, didn't lose the run of ourselves, and now we look around and see that it is genuinely harder for our adult children.

My sister's son was a carpenter, he lost everything in the crash. Had a stress induced heart attack aged 30. Now he, his wife, and child live in Spain where they have a bar.
My sister never emigrated, she began full-time work in 1975 and stuck it out through bust after bust, paid the insane levels of tax, took the pay cuts (private sector), saw her pension plan wiped out, was never unemployed, is now 63, her only child (and grandchild) have emigrated as they saw no future in Ireland, and she is looking at her state pension getting further away not nearer.

For years I was the 'rebel' mouthy lefty who complained and complained that we needed accountable government and an end to the boom/bust FF/FG (not)merry-go-round.
Now I am the least angry in my family about the state of our society, the ones who all those years voted FF/FG feel betrayed.

SantaCruz

SantaCruz wrote: »

Just curious - do you have any experience in international trade? Do you have a sense of the advantagous of an economic union over a trade deal?

(not intending to put you the spot - feel free to ignore the question!)

An economic union only works if you have a federal government. That way money can be dispersed properly and we would be getting a proper percentage of financial aid to properly manage of infrastructure and services to meet the demands put on them by the unprecedented level of immigration we have.

Nobody wants a federal EU. So the question is do we stay stuck in the mud in this half assed broken system that we have now or do we accept that changes need to be made, primarily on free movement. Yes that comes with economic changes but as I've said I believe there can be a better system than what we have now which allows controlled movement amongst member states in areas where specific expertise are required.

The problem is that the EU is ultimately all about achieving a federal state and restricting free movement stops that goal dead in its tracks. This is why we have such a stubborn stance from Brussels.

SantaCruz

Deleted User wrote: »

An economic union only works if you have a federal government. That way money can be dispersed properly and we would be getting a proper percentage of financial aid to properly manage of infrastructure and services to meet the demands put on them by the unprecedented level of immigration we have.

Well if this were the case, we wouldn't see a red cent as one of the wealthiest countries in the world - the money would all head to the Balkans and the east.

I don't agree with your argument but I appreciate you taking the time to make the case.

Do you think the EU can lose a member state and it is ok to just plod along as normal and not take stock and recognize there is a need for change? Our absolute priority should be addressing the concerns of what is now the majority of citizens within the EU and addressing the UK's concerns in particular and seek a way of welcoming them back on board the EU project. The alternative is that a separate project will gather steam.

efanton

Deleted User wrote: »

An economic union only works if you have a federal government. That way money can be dispersed properly and we would be getting a proper percentage of financial aid to properly manage of infrastructure and services to meet the demands put on them by the unprecedented level of immigration we have.

Nobody wants a federal EU. So the question is do we stay stuck in the mud in this half assed broken system that we have now or do we accept that changes need to be made, primarily on free movement. Yes that comes with economic changes but as I've said I believe there can be a better system than what we have now which allows controlled movement amongst member states in areas where specific expertise are required.

The problem is that the EU is ultimately all about achieving a federal state and restricting free movement stops that goal dead in its tracks. This is why we have such a stubborn stance from Brussels.

We had that exact system that you are looking for, before this country gave it all away in the Nice, Maastricht, and Lisbon treaties. Before the the EU was a club of countries where nothing happened until ALL agreed, Ireland had a veto.
Now all voting in the European parliament is partly but largely based on population.

Ireland now has effectively only 13 votes out of a total of 750.
German has 96
France has 79
Italy has 96
Spain has 59

Those four countries alone (with a total of 330 votes) have almost enough between them to push through what ever legislation they want. All they need is one or two of the smaller countries to support them. Effectively you have a situation where 5 or 6 countries cant determine a vote that is supposed to represent 27 different countries.

You also have the totally crazy situation where the Czech Republic which has absolutely no coastline whatsoever and no territorial waters having twice the votes that Ireland has when it comes to fishing policy and quotas.

Stupidly voting again for the Nice Treaty, after initially saying NO, we now play a very minor role in the EU despite what Irish government will lead you to believe.

Those treaties have destroyed the EU. I understand the reasoning, it was taking too long for agreement to be made and with an increasing number of countries joining the EU that was only going to make matter worse, but the way it is set up now if you are not a country with a huge population your votes count for very little. At least with the veto all policies and laws were agreeably to ALL states. It might be more cumbersome but in my mind it was a far better and fairer system.

Who told us to vote YES, FG ad FF
Who told us to vote NO, SF

Link here if you want to see how voting works in the EU
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apportionment_in_the_European_Parliament

car_radio19834

I was hoping for a FF return but now I have decided to vote SF.

Although the SF candidate won't get in in my constituency.

We need something to change in this country.

I am almost 30 and quality of living is getting worse as time goes on.

SantaCruz

efanton wrote: »

You also have the totally crazy situation where the Czech Republic which has absolutely no coastline whatsoever and no territorial waters having twice the votes that Ireland has when it comes to fishing policy and quotas.

It wouldn't be very democratic to deny them any say in some policy areas just because they don't have a beach. What next? There no fighter jets in Ireland so we aren't allowed say anything about military policy??

SantaCruz

car_radio19834 wrote: »

I was hoping for a FF return but now I have decided to vote SF.

Although the SF candidate won't get in in my constituency.

We need something to change in this country.

I am almost 30 and quality of living is getting worse as time goes on.

What great things that Fianna Fail have done in the last 12 years (your entire adult life) have made you long for their return?

car_radio19834

SantaCruz wrote: »

What great things that Fianna Fail have done in the last 12 years (your entire adult life) have made you long for their return?

They spent money when they had it so was hoping for more of the same. Capital projects happen under FF.

I'd have more money in my pocket.

Idbatterim

Deleted User wrote: »

An economic union only works if you have a federal government. That way money can be dispersed properly and we would be getting a proper percentage of financial aid to properly manage of infrastructure and services to meet the demands put on them by the unprecedented level of immigration we have.

Nobody wants a federal EU. So the question is do we stay stuck in the mud in this half assed broken system that we have now or do we accept that changes need to be made, primarily on free movement. Yes that comes with economic changes but as I've said I believe there can be a better system than what we have now which allows controlled movement amongst member states in areas where specific expertise are required.

The problem is that the EU is ultimately all about achieving a federal state and restricting free movement stops that goal dead in its tracks. This is why we have such a stubborn stance from Brussels.

Very interesting. I almost inconceivably probably like your family am now very open minded to alternatives. Where up to last election I felt , give them a little time. It’s all a question of resources money. I see things getting worse , there is a serious disconnect now between what the government think they will be able to provide and what will transpire. Do you get more into the tax net , increase lpt etc. do you reform welfare ... I know where I’d be starting

Idbatterim

car_radio19834 wrote: »

They spent money when they had it so was hoping for more of the same. Capital projects happen under FF.

I'd have more money in my pocket.

by a Nike the most important in the state didn’t , DU or DM

wexfordman2

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Oh here we go again. I mention immigration control and I'm a Nazi. Full stop, end of argument.

We are incapable of accommodating the level of immigration into the country. Housing crisis, rental crisis, hospital waiting lists, public transport operating way beyond capacity. What exactly is your definition of a burden on the state? Race is not a factor in the debate. Actually I'm going to contradict what I just said and I will agree that it is a factor but it is an argument coming from those against immigration control. They are the ones who will always drag the debate down to an issue of race and make it impossible for a debate to even happen. No politician will touch it in fear of being branded a racist.

The level if immigration we have, is what is helping our economy, filling the jobs needed by industry that is expanding. The minute we run out of staff to feed the likes of google etc, is when they look at relocating elsewhere. Immigration is a good thing for Ireland, especially one with full employment.


Housing crisis, hse and health crisis, waiting lists and poor public transport infrastructure!! Are you seriously saying this is due to immigration? Could you perhaps point me to an era when these issues were not a problem, and the immigration levels we had then ?

Yep, the more you talk, the more you sound like a typical brexiteer to me.

wexfordman2

wexfordman2 wrote: »

The level if immigration we have, is what is helping our economy, filling the jobs needed by industry that is expanding. The minute we run out of staff to feed the likes of google etc, is when they look at relocating elsewhere. Immigration is a good thing for Ireland, especially one with full employment.


Housing crisis, hse and health crisis, waiting lists and poor public transport infrastructure!! Are you seriously saying this is due to immigration? Could you perhaps point me to an era when these issues were not a problem, and the immigration levels we had then ?

Yep, the more you talk, the more you sound like a typical brexiteer to me.

Are you for real? No connection between immigration and our crises? So immigrants dont need homes, hospitals and schools? Are we building enough of them? Can we afford to build enough of them?

Edgware

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Oh I did question it.
Many the arguments. It was like a she had a mental block preventing her from understanding that there were alternatives to both FG and FF - and then she voted LP and put FG in government so it was back to FF.
She is, or rather was, one of the loyalists. She was from a FF family back to the days of Dev and (old) SF before that.
There are many of them - and articles are now appearing in the papers extolling the virtues of such loyalty now that SF are apparently on the rise.

My Dad's family are FG but he abandoned them in 2016 due to cuts affecting pensioners.

Your Ma is used to talking ****e at the Bingo

Jinglejangle69

car_radio19834 wrote: »

They spent money when they had it so was hoping for more of the same. Capital projects happen under FF.

I'd have more money in my pocket.

Lol seriously.

You would have more money in your pocket.

Where were you the last time FF were in power?

When they left government NOONE had more money in their pocket.

Bannasidhe

Edgware wrote: »

Your Ma is used to talking ****e at the Bingo

My Mam has never been to Bingo in her life.

But sure, dismiss people who are party loyalists as that's really the way to convince people to rethink their position. :rolleyes:

SantaCruz

Jinglejangle69 wrote: »

Lol seriously.

You would have more money in your pocket.

Where were you the last time FF were in power?

When they left government NOONE had more money in their pocket.

Well we did - it was just *negative* money.

SantaCruz

Bannasidhe wrote: »

My Mam has never been to Bingo in her life.

But sure, dismiss people who are party loyalists as that's really the way to convince people to rethink their position. :rolleyes:

I think the point with loyalists is that they are not amenable to rational persuasion, so the reasonable thing to do is to dismiss them.

SantaCruz

car_radio19834 wrote: »

They spent money when they had it so was hoping for more of the same.

Oddly enough, this is actually exactly the wrong way to govern. You should be putting money aside in the good times so that you can spend it as fiscal stimulus in the bad times - you know, with capital projects.

Do you have any sense where the boom and bust pheonomenon comes from?

Snow Garden

I had my first canvasser today. Fianna Fail.
Got into an argument with him early on which is quite unlike me. Weirdly he called FG 'the other crowd' which seemed quite arrogant.
I reminded him of a few decades of FF failings.
He ran away.
I guess I am not ready to forgive...

Bannasidhe

SantaCruz wrote: »

I think the point with loyalists is that they are not amenable to rational persuasion, so the reasonable thing to do is to dismiss them.

The die hards might be, but given the trouncing FF got in 2011 and FG managed to lose 26 seats in 2016 when the Crash was still very fresh in people's minds would suggest that usual loyalists can be persuaded to change their vote - as long as phrases like 'talking ****' are avoided - especially if you think that is exactly what they are doing.

metricspaces

SantaCruz wrote: »

. You should be putting money aside in the good times so that you can spend it as fiscal stimulus in the bad times - you know, with capital projects.

This concept of putting money away is simply a popular phrase which gets trotted out but one that holds no weight in reality for our country. We simply could not put enough money away that would have any significant impact in a downturn.

Ireland is a tiny tiny ship in the big ocean of the international markets which we've little to no control of. The best we can do is to ensure we have a broad source of tax and avoid committing to guaranteed future increases in spending, this will allow us adapt quickly in a downturn.

The biggest problem in the last crash was not the banks. It was our governments reliance on tax from the building and related industries, and tied in with this increases in public spending that could not be easily reversed. Cue a big storm and the Government had not got enough money coming in to pay the bills.

LillySV

“I think sometimes you have to tell it like it is,” he said, adding: “The United Kingdom is not in the top 20 countries in the world in terms of population. That’s a fact.

“It is in the top 10 in terms of economy – but everyone knows the world is changing.”

This is what comes out of Varadkar in regard to his nearest neighbour ... what a dumb ****.... he can’t lick the holes of France and Germany enough... who couldn’t give a **** about Ireland

wexfordman2

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Are you for real? No connection between immigration and our crises? So immigrants dont need homes, hospitals and schools? Are we building enough of them? Can we afford to build enough of them?

Except that's not what I said now was it ?

Immigrants in ireland are working tax paying citizens, they contribute to the workforce, productivity, economic expansion, and to the overall tax take. They are an overwhelmingly positive influence to the country. They are not a drain on resources, any more than an irish born citizen at work and contributing.

So, if you are looking to point the finger, how about you answer the question i
I asked you first ?

Can you point out to me a period where we didn't have a housing crisis, and a health service that was in chaos, and identify the immigration figures for that period ?

I am betting, that you wont be able to identify it and pin it on immigration (the only time I recall no housing crisis was when most of the country was emigrating in the 80s).

So, once you point out the time when we had nirvana in the health service and housing due to low or no immigration, then I will concede something. Until then, it's all down to consistent political cowardice, political failure and overly powerful public sector unions.

Not one party, not one minister in the last 40 years, from any political party, of any calibre has sorted the health service, and you sir, are looking for the wrong scapegoat...immigrants indeed!!

wexfordman2

LillySV wrote: »

“I think sometimes you have to tell it like it is,” he said, adding: “The United Kingdom is not in the top 20 countries in the world in terms of population. That’s a fact.

“It is in the top 10 in terms of economy – but everyone knows the world is changing.”

This is what comes out of Varadkar in regard to his nearest neighbour ... what a dumb ****.... he can’t lick the holes of France and Germany enough... who couldn’t give a **** about Ireland

Anything about it untrue ?

NovemberWren

Eric Cartman wrote: »

If we just had the balls to break the unions , trim middle management and cut out the quangos we could both deliver more efficient services and cut taxes. Theres a big funding black hole in the middle of our government and everyone only pays attention to the dail bar and td's sallaries on one end, the lack of funding for teachers and gardai on the other, meanwhile karen the HEO on 75k a year who still has no idea how to use a computer will have her union rep on speed dial if shes even asked to produce 20k worth of productivity for the state and nobody calls it out at the top or bottom.

there was something recently about collective bargaining in the u.s. having been tackled.

what if: every carpenter, electrician, mechanic, bricklayer, ...... were guaranteed by the state a salary for the rest of their working lives?

yet, is this not what persons with degrees, diplomas, H.dips; public sector
bureaucrats [mostly females?] given?

there is a good case for unions; - but is that case mainly for the labouring workers, prob., in large factories - that are dependent on the sale of the goods that are being produced and sold.

alternatively, the persons that have achieved degrees, h.dips, diplomas, -that they are an asset to the state, in themselves, is so; - yet they merely opt to take orders, from HEOs etc. in the form of 'the rules', 'the regulations' ; and so, never risk directly applying their knowledge.
Not sure if they have collective bargaining. but, should they?

LillySV

wexfordman2 wrote: »

Anything about it untrue ?

So they have less population but create more wealth .... and u and Varadkar think that’s a negative!!!???