What have we come to

FrancieBrady

holyhead wrote: »

You just don’t give up do you. If you can’t respect a fellow poster then don’t post!

I have zero respect for a poster who will manipulate others posts.

'Playing a part in the start of the troubles' does not equal 'blame' for the troubles starting'.

FrancieBrady

holyhead wrote: »

How long can the impasse of no new government last until an election is triggered?

This went on for 53 days last time.

holyhead

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I have zero respect for a poster who will manipulate others posts.

'Playing a part in the start of the troubles' does not equal 'blame' for the troubles starting'.

There is a world of difference between peaceful marching and activities of the IRA/SF.

Yurt2

holyhead wrote: »

How long can the impasse of no new government last until an election is triggered?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thejournal.ie/president-higgins-government-formation-2709445-Apr2016/%3famp=1

Here was some of the chatter around the President's role from the last time out.

FrancieBrady

holyhead wrote: »

There is a world of difference between peaceful marching and activities of the IRA/SF.

Who said anything different?

No peaceful marches, no violent reactions, no escalation.

machaseh

holyhead wrote: »

There is a world of difference between peaceful marching and activities of the IRA/SF.

The IRA of the past is not today's SF. Irish people need to stop yammering on about the past all the time and look towards the future.

There are still IRA remnants that exist today, but they are mostly just a glorified mafia. SF wouldn't support them now.

Tony EH

Deleted User wrote: »

We don’t need the Celtic tiger back. I’d prefer slow and steady progress over boom and bust.

So would a lot of folk. But you'll be left waiting if FFG were still dominant. They have no intention of moving away from the neo liberal, boom and bust style of nonsense economics that only benefits those with the wealth to ride out the bad times.

We need to get away from this way of governing if future generations are to actually have a future.

We need a system that allows regulated growth and easing when necessary, that benefits everyone, and doesn't drive the country off a cliff when the plateau is reached. But what we have with FFG is a party that crashed the country and another who learned absolutely nothing from 2008.

In short, just not good enough.

tayto lover

machaseh wrote: »

The IRA of the past is not today's SF. Irish people need to stop yammering on about the past all the time and look towards the future.

There are still IRA remnants that exist today, but they are mostly just a glorified mafia. SF wouldn't support them now.

You’d want to tell that to David Cullinane.
He embarrassed his party and set them back a good bit by putting doubts in people’s minds regarding them moving on.

jmayo

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The dangers of not knowing your history.

You know that Hume's idea of taking people out onto the streets was the key act that brought the decades of oppression, gerrymandering and inequality to the boil?

When you bring something to the boil...the lid generally comes off.

Hume and the people he led were the problem in NI in the 60's just as much as the Unionists were.
Add in criminally inept British and Irish governments and you had a heady mix. The IRA were not interested and were almost defunct in the early to middle 60's.
What would have happened had Hume listened to his many detractors and stayed off the streets?
When you let the lid come off, it can sadly morph into something else and in Ireland's case, some identified the root cause of the problem as partition (and I cannot argue with them nor as it happens could John Hume) and a continued occupation of this island. When Hume recognised that all his initiatives were never going to work...Sunningdale - The Anglo Irish Forum etc. there is NO DOUBT he stepped up to the plate and initiated the talks that led to the a solution. And he should forever be lionised for his part in that. (Mallon, McGrady and the rest of the SDLP forced him to do it as a solo run to 'protect the party BTW)

Stop trying to sanitise people. It does your argument no favours.

What are you trying to intimate with that statement ?
Are you seriously trying to lay blame on John Hume for the troubles.
Because to me that entire post is slanted that way, if he hadn't bothered protesting there would be no troubles.
By fook that is one giant leap.
Hume and the people he led ????

As we say down our way, "francie you are some fooking tulip."

Hume never encouraged anyone to kill anyone else.
Hume never encouraged anyone to continue the slaughter.

machaseh wrote: »

The IRA of the past is not today's SF. Irish people need to stop yammering on about the past all the time and look towards the future.

There are still IRA remnants that exist today, but they are mostly just a glorified mafia. SF wouldn't support them now.

Funny how sinn fein and it's supporters want to forget the past and look towards the future when it suits them.

Also why are sinn fein so against the Special Criminal Court if they have no connections with anyone that might face it ?

FarmerBrowne

Heard a bit of MLMD addressing her party today, gave lip service to health and homelessness but waffled on for ages on a referendum for a United Ireland. This seems to be their big one so they can give the 2 fingers to unionists, would be more in their line to focus in on trying to plan how they are going to implement their ludicrous election objectives than harping on about a United Ireland that most people really couldn't less care about or don't want.

FrancieBrady

jmayo wrote: »

What are you trying to intimate with that statement ?
Are you seriously trying to lay blame on John Hume for the troubles.
Because to me that entire post is slanted that way, if he hadn't bothered protesting there would be no troubles.
By fook that is one giant leap.
Hume and the people he led ????

As we say down our way, "francie you are some fooking tulip."

Hume never encouraged anyone to kill anyone else.
Hume never encouraged anyone to continue the slaughter.

Hume led the civil rights movement, which provoked violent reaction for the state security forces and that escalated tensions leading to the lid coming off.

Hume 'played a part' in the beginning of the modern conflict/war.

If you had had no civil rights you would have no British troops deployed, no Burntollet, no Bloody Sunday and no re-emergence of the IRA.

Nobody is blaming Hume. but he most certainly was involved and played a part....relax in your kaks there.

I see sheep

FarmerBrowne wrote: »

waffled on for ages on a referendum for a United Ireland. This seems to be their big one

It's the reason SF exists, what do you expect

I'm about to shock you but having radical green environmental protection policies is the Green Party's 'big one'

FarmerBrowne

I see sheep wrote: »

It's the reason SF exists, what do you expect

I'm about to shock you but having radical green environmental protection policies is the Green Party's 'big one'

Exactly but why in the name of God did they get to where they got to in the election based on an issue like a United Ireland where nobody really cares. There are far more pressing issues that you might want to vote a party into power on.

quokula

Tony EH wrote: »

So would a lot of folk. But you'll be left waiting if FFG were still dominant. They have no intention of moving away from the neo liberal, boom and bust style of nonsense economics that only benefits those with the wealth to ride out the bad times.

We need to get away from this way of governing if future generations are to actually have a future.

We need a system that allows regulated growth and easing when necessary, that benefits everyone, and doesn't drive the country off a cliff when the plateau is reached. But what we have with FFG is a party that crashed the country and another who learned absolutely nothing from 2008.

In short, just not good enough.

If you say you want slow sustainable improvements, how does kicking out the government within a couple of years of them balancing the budget because they haven't immediately magically fixed everything help with that?

machaseh

FarmerBrowne wrote: »

Heard a bit of MLMD addressing her party today, gave lip service to health and homelessness but waffled on for ages on a referendum for a United Ireland. This seems to be their big one so they can give the 2 fingers to unionists, would be more in their line to focus in on trying to plan how they are going to implement their ludicrous election objectives than harping on about a United Ireland that most people really couldn't less care about or don't want.

Why not obth?

You can strive for a united ireland while fixing the current issues we have right now. Both things are kind of separate from each other.

I see sheep

I see sheep wrote: »

Why are you associating SF with boom and bust?

It’s more the electorate.
They want a boom which inevitably lead to a bust.
I’d prefer neither extreme.

James Brown

quokula wrote: »

If you say you want slow sustainable improvements, how does kicking out the government within a couple of years of them balancing the budget because they haven't immediately magically fixed everything help with that?

That's the propaganda. The economy doing well with record breaking numbers of children homeless and a housing crisis with working people needing state aid might beg to differ.
They fixed nothing. The mechanics of the economy remains unchanged since the crash and through tough times the tax payers built it back up. The major flaw here is with high employment and a strong economy, they let health fester and over saw and exacerbated the housing and homeless crises.
The no over night/magic fix/magic wand played okay back in 2011-2016, but they've not made much inroads.
Add to that ignorance and a self entitled attitude. That's why they're out on their arse.

Tony EH

quokula wrote: »

If you say you want slow sustainable improvements, how does kicking out the government within a couple of years of them balancing the budget because they haven't immediately magically fixed everything help with that?

Nobody's being "kicked out" after a couple of years though. In the case of FG, they've been in place for just under a decade and they've done nothing about the problems that face younger folk in this country. Worse than that, they don't even seem to be ideologically disposed to bother doing anything about those issues. They were given the trust of the people in 2011 after FF blew things spectacularly and all they did was just let the kettle boil again to where we are now and we're looking at another potential bust scenario coming soon.

We have, frankly, ridiculous situations facing far too many people in this country, with regards to basic living requirements. A modest house will set you back a criminal amount of money that hocks you into debt until you're an OAP and the alternative is extortionate rents by a cartel of private landlords who can up the rent price every 12 months if they wish. We may have so called "full employment", but jobs (many of which are mickey mouse) are transitory these days and simply cannot be counted on. You can, literally, be in work one month and out the next on the whim of the employer. And all the while you can watch granny die on a trolley in A+E.

Something needs to change. We need to move away from this idea that there's "endless" growth, constantly pushing a situation until it blows and we all get thrown back to square one. We cannot keep going around and around like this.

Jinglejangle69

Tony EH wrote: »

Nobody's being "kicked out" after a couple of years though. In the case of FG, they've been in place for just under a decade and they've done nothing about the problems that face younger folk in this country. Worse than that, they don't even seem to be ideologically disposed to bother doing anything about those issues. They were given the trust of the people in 2011 after FF blew things spectacularly and all they did was just let the kettle boil again to where we are now and we're looking at another potential bust scenario coming soon.

We have, frankly, ridiculous situations facing far too many people in this country, with regards to basic living requirements. A modest house will set you back a criminal amount of money that hocks you into debt until you're an OAP and the alternative is extortionate rents by a cartel of private landlords who can up the rent price every 12 months if they wish. We may have so called "full employment", but jobs (many of which are mickey mouse) are transitory these days and simply cannot be counted on. You can, literally, be in work one month and out the next on the whim of the employer. And all the while you can watch granny die on a trolley in A+E.

Something needs to change. We need to move away from this idea that there's "endless" growth, constantly pushing a situation until it blows and we all get thrown back to square one. We cannot keep going around and around like this.

Precisely why FG need to be in opposition and not in government:)

Cupatae

Tony EH wrote: »

Nobody's being "kicked out" after a couple of years though. In the case of FG, they've been in place for just under a decade and they've done nothing about the problems that face younger folk in this country. Worse than that, they don't even seem to be ideologically disposed to bother doing anything about those issues. They were given the trust of the people in 2011 after FF blew things spectacularly and all they did was just let the kettle boil again to where we are now and we're looking at another potential bust scenario coming soon.

We have, frankly, ridiculous situations facing far too many people in this country, with regards to basic living requirements. A modest house will set you back a criminal amount of money that hocks you into debt until you're an OAP and the alternative is extortionate rents by a cartel of private landlords who can up the rent price every 12 months if they wish. We may have so called "full employment", but jobs (many of which are mickey mouse) are transitory these days and simply cannot be counted on. You can, literally, be in work one month and out the next on the whim of the employer. And all the while you can watch granny die on a trolley in A+E.

Something needs to change. We need to move away from this idea that there's "endless" growth, constantly pushing a situation until it blows and we all get thrown back to square one. We cannot keep going around and around like this.

100% agree, awful lot of smoke and mirrors going on when it comes to some of these facts, near full employment ECT but when you dig into it alot of em are Mickey mouse jobs that at best you d need to be working 2 of depending on where your from to get by between rent or mortgage criminal high car insurance child care ECT

I'd imagine anyone reeling off these facts as fantastic are very far removed from the reality of them .

Tony EH

Deleted User wrote: »

It’s more the electorate.
They want a boom which inevitably lead to a bust.
I’d prefer neither extreme.

I don't think this is the case. The electorate want stability, not boom and bust, which doesn't benefit the vast majority of them. The electorate want to be able to plan their lives, which a lot cannot do because their futures are so grim at the moment. A lot of them won't own their own home, will be in a constant state of flux in in private renting, will lose their job(s) at some point and ultimately be beholden to a situation that's absolutely out of their control.

People I've talked to are sick of this. They don't want this merry go round of boom and bust any more. It doesn't help them.

We have grown adults, in their 40's, being forced to go back to mammy and daddy, because they can't even buy a tiny 1 bed apartment that reasonably distanced to their place of work. That's a crazy situation.

Edgware

Deleted User wrote: »

It’s more the electorate.
They want a boom which inevitably lead to a bust.
I’d prefer neither extreme.

Well they have a bit of form in the BOOM BOOM! department

James Brown

Deleted User wrote: »

It’s more the electorate.
They want a boom which inevitably lead to a bust.
I’d prefer neither extreme.

That's simply not true.
If you recall the 2011 election Kenny got in on the promise of 'changing the way we do business'. Hard and tough but necessary times. He blew it opting for more of the same and crony deals.
They got in again by the skin of their teeth and with welcomed support from FF. What hypocrites.

frillyleaf

How will SF actually form a government if FF refuse to work with them?

It seems odd that SF didn't run enough seats but maybe they didn't expect as much support . It really could come down to a numbers issue if they can't fill all the seats!

All seems to very quiet, I wonder will there be another election and if so SF will likely lose a lot of seats due to recent video clips and information about their candidates :eek: We will likely be with FF FG by the end of May !

FrancieBrady

frillyleaf wrote: »

How will SF actually form a government if FF refuse to work with them?

It seems odd that SF didn't run enough seats but maybe they didn't expect as much support . It really could come down to a numbers issue if they can't fill all the seats!

All seems to very quiet, I wonder will there be another election and if so SF will likely lose a lot of seats due to recent video clips and information about their candidates :eek: We will likely be with FF FG by the end of May !

If everybody holds to their current positions there will be another election. That is inevitable.

James Brown

FrancieBrady wrote: »

If everybody holds to their current positions there will be another election. That is inevitable.

Funny how FG would merrily leech off of FF to keep bums in seats but are now running to opposition in a huff and MM is looking for absolute power or nothing. 'Stability'? That's so last year, f*** the country....

Varadkar reminds me of when Stewie got turned down at American Idol.

I see sheep

frillyleaf wrote: »

How will SF actually form a government if FF refuse to work with them?

It seems odd that SF didn't run enough seats but maybe they didn't expect as much support . It really could come down to a numbers issue if they can't fill all the seats!

All seems to very quiet, I wonder will there be another election and if so SF will likely lose a lot of seats due to recent video clips and information about their candidates :eek: We will likely be with FF FG by the end of May !

I think SF would do better if there's a new election.

They can spin it as them being excluded from being part of the government despite being the most popular party so I don't see why anyone would switch from them.

And if they're smarter about placing candidates they could win a lot more seats (albeit possibly at the expense of some PBP and other left wing candidates)

Foxtrol

Tony EH wrote: »

I don't think this is the case. The electorate want stability, not boom and bust, which doesn't benefit the vast majority of them. The electorate want to be able to plan their lives, which a lot cannot do because their futures are so grim at the moment. A lot of them won't own their own home, will be in a constant state of flux in in private renting, will lose their job(s) at some point and ultimately be beholden to a situation that's absolutely out of their control.

People I've talked to are sick of this. They don't want this merry go round of boom and bust any more. It doesn't help them.

We have grown adults, in their 40's, being forced to go back to mammy and daddy, because they can't even buy a tiny 1 bed apartment that reasonably distanced to their place of work. That's a crazy situation.

If voters read the SF manifesto, a vote for them doesn't point to wanting stability though. Several of their policies would fundamentally change elements of our economy.

It is a huge gamble in the hopes of getting increased services. They may want personal stability but voted for the opposite.

Tony EH

Foxtrol wrote: »

If voters read the SF manifesto, a vote for them doesn't point to wanting stability though. Several of their policies would fundamentally change elements of our economy.

It is a huge gamble in the hopes of getting increased services. They may want personal stability but voted for the opposite.

I didn't vote for them myself, but I've talked to a lot of folk that did over the past few days and there were some surprising people involved too. People that I'd never thought with take a punt on the Shinners...ever.

But the overriding trend throughout all the feedback was that people are uncertain of their futures and simply do not see FFG (especially FG) being responsive to those fears. The folk I talked to want stability in their futures as far as being able put a roof over their heads. They reckon that the jobs market has been lost to chance long ago and understand that the job they're in now may not be there in a few years time, but it's the housing situation that was uppermost in everyone's minds.

I understand their fears completely too, even though I'm pretty ok at the moment. Still have a long way to go on a mortgage, mind you. But we're relatively ok. But, as one girl pointed out to me, she and many of her peers don't even get a sniff at a mortgage and under current trends, never will.

That's the stability I'm talking about. The stability of people's lives as far a basic living requirements are concerned.

The "fundamental changes" in our economy may be what's needed, I don't know. But what I do know is at present we follow a model that guarantees a bust, because markets are uncontrolled and are let get to a point where they go bang. With this neo-liberal way of doing things, we have collapses that are built in and while that may be considered "stable" by some, the vast majority of people don't view it that way.

Yurt2

Tony EH wrote: »

I didn't vote for them myself, but I've talked to a lot of folk that did over the past few days and there were some surprising people involved too. People that I'd never thought with take a punt on the Shinners...ever.

But the overriding trend throughout all the feedback was that people are uncertain of their futures and simply do not see FFG (especially FG) being responsive to those fears. The folk I talked to want stability in their futures as far as being able put a roof over their heads. They reckon that the jobs market has been lost to chance long ago and understand that the job they're in now may not be there in a few years time, but it's the housing situation that was uppermost in everyone's minds.

I understand their fears completely too, even though I'm pretty ok at the moment. Still have a long way to go on a mortgage, mind you. But we're relatively ok. But, as one girl pointed out to me, she and many of her peers don't even get a sniff at a mortgage and under current trends, never will.

That's the stability I'm talking about. The stability of people's lives as far a basic living requirements are concerned.

The "fundamental changes" in our economy may be what's needed, I don't know. But what I do know is at present we follow a model that guarantees a bust, because markets are uncontrolled and are let get to a point where they go bang. With this neo-liberal way of doing things, we have collapses that are built in and while that may be considered "stable" by some, the vast majority of people don't view it that way.

A very good summation of a lot of people's feelings. Headline GDP figures aren't bankable for a hell of a lot of people.