People like SF candidates but won't vote for SF

RandomName2

Matt Barrett wrote: »

The money we spend on 25 year leases, hotel Bills. Maybe raise tax on vulture funds?
They money we use to buy houses rather than build?

Could you point to a Sinn Fein policy which proposes raising tax on vulture funds?

Cheerful Spring2

SantaCruz wrote: »

Yes, agreed.

Ireland's very generous social welfare system was being funded by unsustainable taxes. The taxes disappeared with the crash, but the cost of social welfare etc. was still there, and cuts were minimal.

The gap between taxes and costs was borrowed - that's the 130 billion or so.

I'd be concerned that if we start punishing higer earners and big employers more (most pay over 50% in marginal tax already) then we will once again slash the amount of tax we take as they leave the country, leave a massive debt, and nobody to pay it, and nobody to pay for social services.

You're criticizing the wrong people for the national debt. Social welfare is high agreed, still most of the welfare money is spend inside the country and often helps small business owners keep their business open. Cut welfare many firms might close down especially very small retail shops based in rural areas.

 Benefits outweight the negatives and only scratching the surface where this welfare boosts the economy longterm.

Multinationals are not going to leave, the tax bill is low for them here.  There no hint any party planning to increase the corporation tax.

 Wages are high in this country, the biggest problem is cost of housing! It is the largest bill most taxpayers have. Do something about this earners will have more takehome pay!

James Brown

SantaCruz wrote: »

How much does all that add up to?

Also, are you sure you want a health service with no consultants?

No idea, I do know building is cheaper than buying.

The consultants were for IW. Money well spent

SantaCruz wrote: »

...
(also I didn't 'single out social welfare' - I mentioned 'social welfare, pensions, health service, etc')

People got to eat, even the old and sick.
Those 25 year leases need paying, 90% up front.

ThunbergsAreGo

Why are people voting SF? They are obviously hitting the right notes

What policy is it?

James Brown

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

They tried your tactic of ignoring the unpalatable for 13 years look how that worked...

The same SF play book is used ignore-deny-discredit-blame-u turn-apology (when expedient) - offer to meet the family - and hope it blows over

It's of no interest to me personally. Start a "I hate shinners' thread

Once they build social housing they have my support.

feargale

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Saw it. Ignored it. Cool?

Oh jaypers awful cool entirely, with a body-swerve worthy of George Best. OK. You find the question uncomfortable.

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Why would somebody hoping for a united Ireland, (myself and Enda Kenny) take either as an option? I'll pull a Jim Kirk ‎to your Kobayashi Maru thanks

Because you know damned well that the Commonwealth question will arise in any serious discussion about a UI, unless:
1. You intend to outbreed the Prods. Good luck with that. Hollow be thy game, thy condom come.And even if you did a UI majority doesn't follow.
2. They haven't gone away, you know, and you envisage having them back, and damn the GFA.
3. You are going to use the auld kobayashi to pull a magic rabbit out of the hat. Like spending 22 billion when there is 11 billion available.

SantaCruz

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

You're criticizing the wrong people for the national debt. Social welfare is high agreed, still most of the welfare money is spend inside the country and often helps small business owners keep their business open. Cut welfare many firms might close down especially very small retail shops based in rural areas.

I'm not criticising anyone for the national debt, aside from Fianna Fail. They let spending run away, and were largely responsible for the bubble and crash (or at least not mitigating them).

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

 Benefits outweight the negatives and only scratching the surface where this welfare boosts the economy longterm.

There is a balance to be struck. When it makes no sense to try hard and work hard anymore, the balance is gone. We are not too far off that right now, in my view. I'd certainly emigrate if my taxes increased again.

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Multinationals are not going to leave, the tax bill is low for them here.  There no hint any party planning to increase the corporation tax.

 Wages are high in this country, the biggest problem is cost of housing! It is the largest bill most taxpayers have. Do something about this earners will have more takehome pay!

Sinn Fein are talking about spending an extra 10 billion or so a year*. Where is this money is going to come from?

*happy to be corrected on this - this is a guesstimate

RandomName2

ThunbergsAreGo wrote: »

Why are people voting SF? They are obviously hitting the right notes

What policy is it?

They are hitting no notes.

People are pissed off with Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael, with a lot of justification. They're just voting for the next largest block instead.

SantaCruz

Matt Barrett wrote: »

No idea, I do know building is cheaper than buying.

That's not true Matt. It can go either way, depending on what the market is doing. Many companies have sold and leased back their own property (including banks, I think?) as they can do other more useful things with the capital.

But the biggest problem with building is that you need to borrow that capital, and pay interest on it.

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Those 25 year leases need paying, 90% up front.

What makes you think that the leases are paid up front? I would be absolutely astonished if that were the case, but please show me where you got this idea from and I'm happy to be corrected.

FrancieBrady

RandomName2 wrote: »

They are hitting no notes.

People are pissed off with Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael, with a lot of justification. They're just voting for the next largest block instead.

And the change that is happening is that a choice is emerging that can challenge the powerswap parties.

That is what has changed. All the talk about ceilings and limits to votes are being blown out of the water. I am struggling to think of an election (I am mid 50's) ever when another party was two points ahead of FF and FG.

Has it ever happened?

ThunbergsAreGo

RandomName2 wrote: »

They are hitting no notes.

People are pissed off with Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael, with a lot of justification. They're just voting for the next largest block instead.

Must be hitting some note, is it a Brexit or Trump vote?

Many on here are voting SF, I am just wondering why

ThunbergsAreGo

FrancieBrady wrote: »

And the change that is happening is that a choice is emerging that can challenge the powerswap parties.

That is what has changed. All the talk about ceilings and limits to votes are being blown out of the water. I am struggling to think of an election (I am mid 50's) ever when another party was two points ahead of FF and FG.

Has it ever happened?

So what is it that is making you vote SF?
Which of their policies

woohoo!!!

Eoin O'Broin is heads and shoulders above any other parties housing reps. We need to change the Rebuilding Ireland strategy and hasten the transition from HAP (handout to landlords and distorts the private rental market) to Council of housing body builds. Also far far cheaper in the medium and long term given that the state retains the asset. Tory England has a much higher rate of social housing provision and this is still lower than the EU average.

RandomName2

FrancieBrady wrote: »

And the change that is happening is that a choice is emerging that can challenge the powerswap parties.

That is what has changed. All the talk about ceilings and limits to votes are being blown out of the water. I am struggling to think of an election (I am mid 50's) ever when another party was two points ahead of FF and FG.

Has it ever happened?

literally the election before last. Labour briefly polled higher than either FG or FF before ultimately coming 2nd in 2011.

Idbatterim

SantaCruz wrote: »

Yes, agreed.

Ireland's very generous social welfare system was being funded by unsustainable taxes. The taxes disappeared with the crash, but the cost of social welfare etc. was still there, and cuts were minimal.

The gap between taxes and costs was borrowed - that's the 130 billion or so.

I'd be concerned that if we start punishing higer earners and big employers more (most pay over 50% in marginal tax already) then we will once again slash the amount of tax we take as they leave the country, leave a massive debt, and nobody to pay it, and nobody to pay for social services.

The marginal rate of tax is already doing serious damage. People in my work place turn down extra hours if they are hit by the marginal rate and that’s at thirty five an hour !!!

Idbatterim

woohoo!!! wrote: »

Eoin O'Broin is heads and shoulders above any other parties housing reps. We need to change the Rebuilding Ireland strategy and hasten the transition from HAP (handout to landlords and distorts the private rental market) to Council of housing body builds. Also far far cheaper in the medium and long term given that the state retains the asset. Tory England has a much higher rate of social housing provision and this is still lower than the EU average.

THE councils are morons on an epic scale. You’d need a new housing body etc

James Brown

feargale wrote: »

Oh jaypers awful cool entirely, with a body-swerve worthy of George Best. OK. You find the question uncomfortable.



Because you know damned well that the Commonwealth question will arise in any serious discussion about a UI, unless:
1. You intend to outbreed the Prods. Good luck with that. Hollow be thy game, thy condom come.And even if you did a UI majority doesn't follow.
2. They haven't gone away, you know, and you envisage having them back, and damn the GFA.
3. You are going to use the auld kobayashi to pull a magic rabbit out of the hat. Like spending 22 billion when there is 11 billion available.

So refusing to answer a question is a change or direction? Okay
Half my Da's family are prods
Not a fan of the 'RA but see their side. I didnt have to live through being a catholic up there.
Sit down son.

ThunbergsAreGo

FrancieBrady wrote: »

And the change that is happening is that a choice is emerging that can challenge the powerswap parties.

That is what has changed. All the talk about ceilings and limits to votes are being blown out of the water. I am struggling to think of an election (I am mid 50's) ever when another party was two points ahead of FF and FG.

Has it ever happened?

But the number of candidates they are running is a ceiling

Edgware

ThunbergsAreGo wrote: »

Why are people voting SF? They are obviously hitting the right notes

What policy is it?

Responding to an opinion poll is not voting.
Voting takes place Saturday. It's good to see S F on the back foot though. Stepping up to senior hurling isn't that easy

ThunbergsAreGo

Edgware wrote: »

Responding to an opinion poll is not voting.
Voting takes place Saturday. It's good to see S F on the back foot though. Stepping up to senior hurling isn't that easy

Again that's your perspective , as per the opinion polls 25 percent and many on here are voting SF, is it unfair to ask why?

Snow Garden

Being honest I am pissed off that the last few days of the campaign are being dominated by 2 people I have never heard of (Conor Murphy and Paul Quinn).
This country has so many major political problems and ye we are discussing NI politicians and forced apologies. Call me heartless but I couldn't give a fiddlers.

James Brown

SantaCruz wrote: »

That's not true Matt. It can go either way, depending on what the market is doing. Many companies have sold and leased back their own property (including banks, I think?) as they can do other more useful things with the capital.

But the biggest problem with building is that you need to borrow that capital, and pay interest on it.

What makes you think that the leases are paid up front? I would be absolutely astonished if that were the case, but please show me where you got this idea from and I'm happy to be corrected.

No it's true. You build en masse its cheaper than buying or leasing, paying 90% of the 25 year lease up front.
Theres an entire industry built around it.

I googled it.on the government website. I posted the link somewhere.

Here:

https://www.housing.gov.ie/housing/social-housing/leasing/enhanced-long-term-social-housing-leasing-scheme

Its 95%, my bad.
Dug it out like the saint I am

Any way paying 25 years rent would likely build you a house especially if you were building a bunch.

woohoo!!!

Idbatterim wrote: »

THE councils are morons on an epic scale. You’d need a new housing body etc

FG were looking to set up a land development agency to provide national co-ordination. The Councils are the ones who know how many houses are needed and what type/household size. However the agency was to be set up on a profit making basis which flies in the face of providing a public good this replicating the problem with nama. On this alone, FG need to be turfed out and drop under 30 seats for their blinkered approach.

James Brown

Snow Garden wrote: »

Being honest I am pissed off that the last few days of the campaign are being dominated by 2 people I have never heard of (Conor Murphy and Paul Quinn).
This country has so many major political problems and ye we are discussing NI politicians and forced apologies. Call me heartless but I couldn't give a fiddlers.

Yep. Disgusting, the whole sh*t show IMO.

The Rape of Lucretia

Snow Garden wrote: »

Being honest I am pissed off that the last few days of the campaign are being dominated by 2 people I have never heard of (Conor Murphy and Paul Quinn).

Its certainly discombobulating for SF that that is so, but is very relevant to the election. The issue goes to the core of SF, what they are, what they represent, their goals, ethos and morality. And why right minded people should not vote for them. A litmus test that SF clamourously fails.

The Rape of Lucretia

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Yep. Disgusting, the whole sh*t show IMO.

That goes for both SF branches, north and south.

FrancieBrady

ThunbergsAreGo wrote: »

But the number of candidates they are running is a ceiling

This time, yes. Obviously.

SantaCruz

Matt Barrett wrote: »

No it's true. You build en masse its cheaper than buying or leasing, paying 90% of the 25 year lease up front.
Theres an entire industry built around it.

I googled it.on the government website. I posted the link somewhere.

Here:

https://www.housing.gov.ie/housing/social-housing/leasing/enhanced-long-term-social-housing-leasing-scheme

Its 95%, my bad.
Dug it out like the saint I am

Any way paying 25 years rent would likely build you a house especially if you were building a bunch.

Ok, I appreciate you digging that out, and I see where you got that from.

I did a bit more digging, and it turns out that's not what's happening. It seems that they agree a 'market rent' - so 1k per month or whatever for an apartment, and then the council or whoever says we'll pay you (up to) 95% of that per month for 25 years. And that 'market rent' is reviewed every three years.

More details here:

Agreement for lease and lease
There is limited scope for negotiation of the Agreement for Lease and Lease by the Proposer with the local authority except for non-material amendments.

The Proposer must make rent free concessions to the local authority where the Units are not delivered by the “target date” in the Agreement for Lease.

The local authority pays rent directly to the Proposer. The maximum proposed rental yield is 95% of the current market value rent. Rent reviews occur every 3 years in line with CPI.

The way it is written in the doc you sent, I can see why you interpreted it that way. And I totally agree that if they were doing that (paying the lease in advance for 25 years), it would be nuts - they would have to borrow that money anyway, and at that point you might as well build yourself.

SantaCruz

woohoo!!! wrote: »

FG were looking to set up a land development agency to provide national co-ordination. The Councils are the ones who know how many houses are needed and what type/household size. However the agency was to be set up on a profit making basis which flies in the face of providing a public good this replicating the problem with nama. On this alone, FG need to be turfed out and drop under 30 seats for their blinkered approach.

I've never heard of that - any chance of a link?

Cheerful Spring2

SantaCruz wrote: »

I
Sinn Fein are talking about spending an extra 10 billion or so a year*. Where is this money is going to come from?

*happy to be corrected on this - this is a guesstimate

I have not looked into it.

We'll never know is the fear-mongering about Sinn Fein true when people are afraid to try something new..Sinn Fein will not form a government on its own, they'll have a partner. Everyone will see if there social and economy policies are good or bad. You'll get the same government with FF and FG and, if you want this still, your choice. I like a tune up and see where it takes us and Sinn fein performance is terrible this will be written in stone and only then will criticisms be fair.