Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

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

Options
1…2627293132…34

Comments

  • Options
    #842
    efanton
    Registered Users Posts: 1,164 ✭✭✭efanton


    rn wrote: »
    It's nearly time to vote for FG or FF in order of preference. Party politics has delivered this great country we live in. Steady as she goes, keep prosperous Ireland going.

    'Steady as she goes, and full steam ahead' said Captain Edward John Smith.
    FG and FF supporters looked on and admired his obvious skilled seamanship


  • Options
    #843
    NovemberWren
    Registered Users Posts: 374 ✭✭NovemberWren


    the_syco wrote: »
    Are SF going to get rid of HAP, and build 50,000 houses with their own money?


    they will kick people out of the council houses that they want themselves; and give it to their 'favourite' toe-rags.

    shinners 'are' beautiful, y'know.

    And; the exact same applies to majestic F.F.

    [btw I thought it was 100,000 houses S.F. said they will build].


  • Options
    #844
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,013 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    NovemberWren wrote: »
    =the_syco;112449854]Are SF going to get rid of HAP, and build 50,000 houses with their own money?


    they will kick people out of the council houses that they want themselves; and give it to their 'favourite' toe-rags.

    shinners 'are' beautiful, y'know.

    And; the exact same applies to majestic F.F.

    [btw I thought it was 100,000 houses S.F. said they will build].

    It's a bit early isn't it?


  • Options
    #845
    smurgen
    Registered Users Posts: 6,933 ✭✭✭smurgen


    I'm sure also NAMA will throw up scandal after scandal for decades to come. A massive transfer of nationalised assets to private entities at a huge discount.one transaction estimated to have made a loss of up to 800 million euro alone.

    https://fora.ie/project-eagle-report-2-2-3286731-Mar2017/


  • Options
    #846
    christy c
    Registered Users Posts: 2,196 ✭✭✭christy c


    smurgen wrote: »
    I'm sure also NAMA will throw up scandal after scandal for decades to come. [/url]

    You're sure? I doubt that somehow.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #847
    smurgen
    Registered Users Posts: 6,933 ✭✭✭smurgen


    christy c wrote: »
    You're sure? I doubt that somehow.

    Any evidence to support this doubt of yours?


  • Options
    #848
    christy c
    Registered Users Posts: 2,196 ✭✭✭christy c


    smurgen wrote: »
    Any evidence to support this doubt of yours?

    Evidence? I said doubt, as in I'm not 100% sure.

    Your party political broadcast posts would lead me to doubt it.


  • Options
    #849
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,013 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    The Siteserv deal is a good example. Still under investigation.


  • Options
    #850
    smurgen
    Registered Users Posts: 6,933 ✭✭✭smurgen


    christy c wrote: »
    Evidence? I said doubt, as in I'm not 100% sure.

    Your party political broadcast posts would lead me to doubt it.

    Not party political. This is taxpayer wealth that is being destroyed. Us selling assets at a massive discount damages everyone.


  • Options
    #851
    christy c
    Registered Users Posts: 2,196 ✭✭✭christy c


    Matt Barrett wrote: »
    The Siteserv deal is a good example. Still under investigation.

    You seem to already have concluded that investigation in your own head due to the amount of times you post about it.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #852
    smurgen
    Registered Users Posts: 6,933 ✭✭✭smurgen


    Matt Barrett wrote: »
    The Siteserv deal is a good example. Still under investigation.

    The PSNI is investigating the project eagle dealing still.


  • Options
    #853
    christy c
    Registered Users Posts: 2,196 ✭✭✭christy c


    smurgen wrote: »
    Not party political. This is taxpayer wealth that is being destroyed. Us selling assets at a massive discount damages everyone.

    Did NAMA not return a profit for the tax payer? Must admit I haven't followed it very closely in recent years.


  • Options
    #854
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,013 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    christy c wrote: »
    You seem to already have concluded that investigation in your own head due to the amount of times you post about it.

    That's a dodge Christy. You see how you're dodging the example right?


  • Options
    #855
    christy c
    Registered Users Posts: 2,196 ✭✭✭christy c


    Matt Barrett wrote: »
    That's a dodge Christy. You see how you're dodging the example right?

    No, was Siteserv not Anglo? Either way how would that example make anyone sure that NAMA will throw up scandals for decades?


  • Options
    #856
    smurgen
    Registered Users Posts: 6,933 ✭✭✭smurgen


    christy c wrote: »
    No, was Siteserv not Anglo? Either way how would that example make anyone sure that NAMA will throw up scandals for decades?

    Here you go have a good read of this.
    Few great examples in here such as one site sold to a fund for 1.3 million and resold for 13 million a year later with no development money spent.

    https://www.businesspost.ie/insight/how-namas-billions-fed-the-vulture-funds-d964c8cd

    "Nama’s €2.3 billion surplus is actually a loss of €40-plus billion, but it seems clear that the agency is trying to spin its way out of this"

    But yeah poor peoples and dole scroungers are really to blame.


  • Options
    #857
    is_that_so
    Registered Users Posts: 32,136 ✭✭✭✭is_that_so


    smurgen wrote: »
    Here you go have a good read of this.
    Few great examples in here such as one site sold to a fund for 1.3 million and resold for 13 million a year later with no development money spent.

    https://www.businesspost.ie/insight/how-namas-billions-fed-the-vulture-funds-d964c8cd
    Really should have added the caveat that he was part of that cohort who were a big part of the collapse, that he ended up in NAMA and that he doesn't a very positive view of them. NAMA's offloading of portfolios was a judgement call and part of their remit. That's not to say they might have got better deals but most of the comments on deals on NAMA came with 20-20 hindsight.


  • Options
    #858
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,013 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    christy c wrote: »
    No, was Siteserv not Anglo? Either way how would that example make anyone sure that NAMA will throw up scandals for decades?

    Yes. Sitserv investigation is still on going.
    I'd also wager a pretty penny details about Noonan's inappropriate behaviour might raise a few eyebrows.


  • Options
    #859
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,013 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    is_that_so wrote: »
    Really should have added the caveat that he was part of that cohort who were a big part of the collapse, that he ended up in NAMA and that he doesn't a very positive view of them. NAMA's offloading of portfolios was a judgement call and part of their remit. That's not to say they might have got better deals but most of the comments on deals on NAMA came with 20-20 hindsight.

    More they used it like other aspects of the crash to look after their own.


  • Options
    #860
    is_that_so
    Registered Users Posts: 32,136 ✭✭✭✭is_that_so


    Matt Barrett wrote: »
    More they used it like other aspects of the crash to look after their own.
    Nope. They were set up as a bad bank to pull all the toxic debt out of the banks (loans over €5 million) and to dispose of associated assets over an agreed period with a view to returning a (now very large) surplus to the exchequer on windup. It was not of their design to expressly sell to so-called vulture funds but they were the ones best able to stump up the money. The disposal proved a lot more efficient when loans and assets were organised in portfolios. As a concept it has been very successful however regrettable that we had to go that route in the first place.


  • Options
    #861
    christy c
    Registered Users Posts: 2,196 ✭✭✭christy c


    Matt Barrett wrote: »
    Yes. Sitserv investigation is still on going.
    I'd also wager a pretty penny details about Noonan's inappropriate behaviour might raise a few eyebrows.

    You'll have to explain that Matt as I don't follow. It was said that NAMA would throw up scandals for decades. Then you posted something about Siteserv which doesn't have anything to do with NAMA and accused me of dodging. Now it's on to Michael Noonan.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #862
    smurgen
    Registered Users Posts: 6,933 ✭✭✭smurgen


    is_that_so wrote: »
    Really should have added the caveat that he was part of that cohort who were a big part of the collapse, that he ended up in NAMA and that he doesn't a very positive view of them. NAMA's offloading of portfolios was a judgement call and part of their remit. That's not to say they might have got better deals but most of the comments on deals on NAMA came with 20-20 hindsight.

    20/20 hindsight.you must be having a laugh.isn't it funny how those snapping up the portfolios had great hindsight to do it? Almost like they'd an inside track?


  • Options
    #863
    smurgen
    Registered Users Posts: 6,933 ✭✭✭smurgen


    is_that_so wrote: »
    Nope. They were set up as a bad bank to pull all the toxic debt out of the banks (loans over €5 million) and to dispose of associated assets over an agreed period with a view to returning a (now very large) surplus to the exchequer on windup. It was not of their design to expressly sell to so-called vulture funds but they were the ones best able to stump up the money. The disposal proved a lot more efficient when loans and assets were organised in portfolios. As a concept it has been very successful however regrettable that we had to go that route in the first place.

    It's not a surplus. It's a 40 billion euro loss.


  • Options
    #864
    christy c
    Registered Users Posts: 2,196 ✭✭✭christy c


    smurgen wrote: »
    Here you go have a good read of this.
    Few great examples in here such as one site sold to a fund for 1.3 million and resold for 13 million a year later with no development money spent.

    https://www.businesspost.ie/insight/how-namas-billions-fed-the-vulture-funds-d964c8cd

    "Nama’s €2.3 billion surplus is actually a loss of €40-plus billion, but it seems clear that the agency is trying to spin its way out of this"

    But yeah poor peoples and dole scroungers are really to blame.

    What are you waffling about re poor people? You are sure that NAMA would throw up scandals for decades, I doubt that you are sure.


  • Options
    #865
    is_that_so
    Registered Users Posts: 32,136 ✭✭✭✭is_that_so


    smurgen wrote: »
    20/20 hindsight.you must be having a laugh.isn't it funny how those snapping up the portfolios had great hindsight to do it? Almost like they'd an inside track?
    Nah, NAMA would decide to sell off a portfolio based on their judgement of how much could be achieved and more importantly on the requirement to keep reducing the assets it held. Could they have got more in some cases? In hindsight quite possibly but unless you were a part of that decision making you can't say how right or wrong it was.


  • Options
    #866
    is_that_so
    Registered Users Posts: 32,136 ✭✭✭✭is_that_so


    smurgen wrote: »
    It's not a surplus. It's a 40 billion euro loss.
    Eh no that's covered by loans that we are repaying and the promissory notes and their successor. NAMA took existing commercial property-oriented loans off the banks' books. They had nothing to do with addressing the rotten Anglo mess. Can I just add I don't mind bouncing this around and there are probably some points I could read up on again but you don't seem to know anything about it all. I think it would be worthwhile doing some background reading.


  • Options
    #867
    smurgen
    Registered Users Posts: 6,933 ✭✭✭smurgen


    christy c wrote: »
    What are you waffling about re poor people? You are sure that NAMA would throw up scandals for decades, I doubt that you are sure.

    I'm showing the hypocrisy of FG & FF blaming all of societies ills on the poor when the real issue is the scandalous transfer of our counties wealth to developers and investors during the bonfire sales at NAMA.

    https://www.irishexaminer.com/viewpoints/columnists/daniel-mcconnell/when-a-35bn-profit-is-actually-a-40bn-loss-473058.html


  • Options
    #868
    the_syco
    Registered Users Posts: 37,302 ✭✭✭✭the_syco


    Yurt! wrote: »
    There has been a housing construction boom in Berlin of the past few years.
    The last rental freeze in Berlin stopped, or drastically hindered construction.
    Yurt! wrote: »
    The only thing that can be done to mitigate this is strong state intervention making provision for at-cost affordable like Singapore or Vienna. Everything else is wasting people's time.
    Agreed. But the problem with "at cost" is the land. The land is the issue. Unless you CPO the land, said land will be expensive. I remember hearing that the price the land was sold for in Leixlip caused the house prices to be sold at an abnormal price.
    NovemberWren wrote: »
    [btw I thought it was 100,000 houses S.F. said they will build].
    They can pull any number out of their ass; they know they won't have to build them, as they won't get in.


  • Options
    #869
    smurgen
    Registered Users Posts: 6,933 ✭✭✭smurgen


    is_that_so wrote: »
    Nah, NAMA would decide to sell off a portfolio based on their judgement of how much could be achieved and more importantly on the requirement to keep reducing the assets it held. Could they have got more in some cases? In hindsight quite possibly but unless you were a part of that decision making you can't say how right or wrong it was.

    I can say by the profit margin the person who bought the site off Nama and subsequently resold it made. In the one example where a 1.3 million euro site was sold for 13 million euro within 12 months that's a 900% profit. Now if there was modest profits of 40% etc I might have doubt but no legal asset class could give you IRR rates like that.


  • Options
    #870
    christy c
    Registered Users Posts: 2,196 ✭✭✭christy c


    Matt Barrett wrote: »
    Fair point. However you did dodge. You start on about how often I mention it, but fair dues, it's another state entity sold it to O'Brien.
    As regards Noonan, NAMA lost on the Project eagle deal with Cerberus. Noonan met with Cerberus days before the deal went down. That's highly 'inappropriate' and I believe details will out over time. Maybe after he retires.
    Neither of us can factually say we won't hear anymore stories regarding NAMA.

    I did dodge? No I didn't, it was another state entity as you have now said. I thought that as someone who posts about it as regularly as you do that you would have known that. You have also implied wrongdoing in that case, despite acknowledging that there are no findings yet. So in reality there was nothing there for me to dodge.

    Maybe something will come out about Noonan, maybe not.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #871
    christy c
    Registered Users Posts: 2,196 ✭✭✭christy c


    smurgen wrote: »
    I'm showing the hypocrisy of FG & FF blaming all of societies ills on the poor when the real issue is the scandalous transfer of our counties wealth to developers and investors during the bonfire sales at NAMA.

    https://www.irishexaminer.com/viewpoints/columnists/daniel-mcconnell/when-a-35bn-profit-is-actually-a-40bn-loss-473058.html

    Using a term like "blaming all of societies ills on the poor" is just emotive nonsense. The majority or our national debt was racked up on day to day spending.


Advertisement