New Dail / New Taoiseach

BigMo1

Inquitus wrote: »

24.5% of the vote for SF versus 43.1% for FF/FG I don't see a clear pattern for change there, I see voters voting for more centrist government.

I haven't double-checked the numbers but IIRC SF only ran 45 candidates, 37 of whom were elected. If, buts and maybes I know but you'd have to imagine if 82% of the candidates they ran got elected, their results would have been even stronger with a larger candidate pool.

Also, their candidates topped the poll in the constituencies of: Leo (Taoiseach), M Martin (Leader FF), Coveney (Tanaiste), Donohue (Finance), Harris (Health).

If you can't see a clear pattern for change there, your eyes are closed.

Dots1982

unit 1 wrote: »

Simple really, ff,fg, and greens is a stable option to keep country safe from sf silliness.
They could easily go together, improve(solve is impossible) the housing and other issues, let the sf fever burn itself out and revisit in 5 years time.
Confidence and supply, civil war politics, are for the bin.
Leo for 2 years, then hold nose and hand over to MM for the remainder.
The thoughts of an alternative lefty arrangement would keep it in check from splintering, but they have to be upfront and honest and bury any hatchets early.
All said and done, probably the best option.

I guess the wishes of the electorate don’t come into it?

Buer

Inquitus wrote: »

FF and FG combined got far more of the vote than SF, there is no clear demand for new representation, a Gov of the left, or whatever bolloxology people want to come up with, this nonsense has been spouted all weekend.

FF/FG have gone from 93 seats i.e. a comfortable majority to 73, significantly short of a majority.

FF/FG had a conveserion rate of 44% from candidates (73/166). SF had a conversion rate of 88% (37/42).

There's clearly been a significant shift in what people want to see. I didn't vote for SF and have no affection for them but it's pointless trying to ignore the results and argue that the population want to maintain FF/FG in power. If SF had run 86 candidates like FF, they'd be blowing their seat count out of the water.

Inquitus

BigMo1 wrote: »

I haven't double-checked the numbers but IIRC SF only ran 45 candidates, 37 of whom were elected. If, buts and maybes I know but you'd have to imagine if 82% of the candidates they ran got elected, their results would have been even stronger with a larger candidate pool.


Also, their candidates topped the poll in the constituencies of: Leo (Taoiseach), M Martin (Leader FF), Coveney (Tanaiste), Donohue (Finance), Harris (Health).


If you can't see a clear pattern for change there, your eyes are closed.

When you only run 1 candidate in almost all constituencies you will top the poll when you get a similar % to FF and FG who are running 2 or more, this is not a mandate for change, it's just simple math, lol.

Field east

blanch152 wrote: »

Yes, but if we spend it on Sinn Fein social welfare increases and Apple win their case, how do we pay it back?

It would BE EXTREMELY RECKLESS - to put it mildly- to rely on even a cent of the escrow account for ANYTHING until the EU courts have finally ruled

Geuze

listermint wrote: »

Assume tax breaks and land availability.

The builders are here. They're just building offices and hotels due to the same tax breaks.


It's .... Money... Not resources.

What tax reliefs exist for construction of hotels?

Please be specific in your answer.

I am not aware of any.

I am aware that building hotels and student accomm is much more profitable than apartments, due to the huge rental incomes possible.

But I'm not aware of any tax breaks?

Inquitus

Field east wrote: »

It would BE EXTREMELY RECKLESS - to put it mildly- to rely on even a cent of the escrow account for ANYTHING until the EU courts have finally ruled

Agreed, if Apple and Ireland lose the case, the EU will probably spread the money far and wide.

Geuze

Quin_Dub wrote: »

True,

But how many voted "For" Sinn Fein as opposed to voting "Against" FF & FG ?

I'm not convinced about the overall strength of the mandate to be honest.

They did very well to hoover up the protest vote ahead of the usual run to Independents etc. , but it was a protest vote not a vote in tacit support of SF in my view.

How they hold on to that protest vote or even increase it is the big challenge for them.

Correct.

blanch152

Let us look at the numbers for Mary-Lou:

Sinn Fein: 37
Greens: 12
Labour: 6
Soc Dem: 6
Sol/PBP: 5
Aontu: 1
I4C: 1

Total: 68

Assume that Ceann Comhairle is given to a FF or FG TD, you then need 80 to get a majority, meaning that Mary-Lou needs 12 of the 19 independents.

Thomas Pringle and Carol Nolan are Sinn Fein gene pool independents.
Michael McNamara is Labour gene pool.

We are on 71. After that, it is a matter of doing a deal with the rural independents, and our hero will be home and dry with her left-wing alliance.

Of those who she won't do a deal with, I can only see Grealish as being completely outside the pale.

Field east

Inquitus wrote: »

That'll be SF's problem, if they are that stupid.

NO, it will be a governments problem. Will it be the incoming gov problem or it’s the next gov after that or after that again or after that again - and it is the tax payer that would have to cough up

BigMo1

Inquitus wrote: »

When you only run 1 candidate in almost all constituencies you will top the poll when you get a similar % to FF and FG who are running 2 or more, this is not a mandate for change, it's just simple math, lol.

Not when transfers would carry another candidate over the line in so many cases.

Also, you conveniently ignored the point around the senior cabinet TDs and the leader of the country being decimated by their own electorate.

Weepsie

Dots1982 wrote: »

I guess the wishes of the electorate don’t come into it?

Nearly As much of the electorate voted for it as against it., Particularly when you remove the handful of independents who get in regardless of what's going on. Lowry, Healy Rae etc

Plenty voted against FG and FF while explicitly not voting for SF too as they think they are vague at best.

Field east

BigMo1 wrote: »

SF have secured 37 seats with significantly less candidates than FF or FG. There is very obvious demand for new representation.

Inquitus

BigMo1 wrote: »

Not when transfers would carry another candidate over the line in so many cases.

Also, you conveniently ignored the point around the senior cabinet TDs and the leader of the country being decimated by their own electorate.

By decimated, I assume you mean elected.....

PommieBast

BarryD2 wrote: »

If anyone heard the irritating Bríd Smith last night, they'll have quickly concluded that her agenda is to have FF/FG back in. About the only thing she'd agree with SF on is 'celebrating the war of independence' her words.

Brid Smith only got elected due to transfers from SF. Not looked at the other seats they won, but I am pretty sure if SF ran more candidates S-PBP would have been decimated. I suspect the SD and Greens also owe a seat or two to SF transfers.


The left have a vested interest in pulling something together - a fresh election with more SF candidates standing would see many of them culled.

flexcon

unit 1 wrote: »

Simple really, ff,fg, and greens is a stable option to keep country safe from sf silliness.
They could easily go together, improve(solve is impossible) the housing and other issues, let the sf fever burn itself out and revisit in 5 years time.
Confidence and supply, civil war politics, are for the bin.
Leo for 2 years, then hold nose and hand over to MM for the remainder.
The thoughts of an alternative lefty arrangement would keep it in check from splintering, but they have to be upfront and honest and bury any hatchets early.
All said and done, probably the best option.

As someone who gave the first preference vote to Sinn Fein - This is probably the eventual outcome I'd prefer myself.

Sinn Fein can be a great good attempting to hold account the government then.

I am someone who has an income from Areas where Sinn Fein would tax more but I personally am a very liberal lefty if I can afford it. So what you describe above is probably a win-win

Dots1982

Weepsie wrote: »

Nearly As much of the electorate voted for it as against it., Particularly when you remove the handful of independents who get in regardless of what's going on. Lowry, Healy Rae etc

Plenty voted against FG and FF while explicitly not voting for SF too as they think they are vague at best.

SF’s got over 700k first preference votes. FF short of 500K. SF won the election, are the favored party of the people, it wasn’t even close and it’s time for them to take the reins of the country.

Inquitus

PommieBast wrote: »

Brid Smith only got elected due to transfers from SF. Not looked at the other seats they won, but I am pretty sure if SF ran more candidates S-PBP would have been decimated. I suspect the SD and Greens also owe a seat or two to SF transfers.


The left have a vested interest in pulling something together - a fresh election with more SF candidates standing would see many of them culled.

The same thing applies to FF/FG, they won't want an immediate rerun of an election where SF can rectify the huge error in judgement they made this time round, with regard to candidate numbers.

Field east

Inquitus wrote: »

24.5% of the vote for SF versus 43.1% for FF/FG I don't see a clear pattern for change there, I see voters voting for more centrist government.

PLUS , IMO, Lowry, Two Healy Rays, Grealish, Naughton, M McGrath, Murphy (Wexford) + plus other independents that escape me at the moment. That would increase the 43.1 % to ?

nkl12xtw5goz70

Quin_Dub wrote: »

True,

But how many voted "For" Sinn Fein as opposed to voting "Against" FF & FG ?

I'm not convinced about the overall strength of the mandate to be honest.

They did very well to hoover up the protest vote ahead of the usual run to Independents etc. , but it was a protest vote not a vote in tacit support of SF in my view.

How they hold on to that protest vote or even increase it is the big challenge for them.

Agreed. Normally, a protest vote against FG goes to FF, and vice versa. This time, FF were seen to have propped up FG, and so the protest vote was against both the major parties, mainly to the benefit of SF.

However, I'd guess many first-time SF voters are already appalled by the antics of the party they supported. That its party leader was forced to defend chants of "Up the Ra" and "Tiocfaidh ár lá" and €700 million was wiped off bank shares before the counting was even done does not bode well.

That said, I hope SF do get into government. It will be a circus, but hopefully it will teach younger voters a lesson about voting for ethno-nationalists and the far left.

Inquitus

Dots1982 wrote: »

SF’s got over 700k first preference votes. FF short of 500K. SF won the election, are the favored party of the people, it wasn’t even close and it’s time for them to take the reins of the country.

That's simply untrue the % of first preference votes is below, 2.3% of votes can't take you from less than 500k to over 700k I am afraid. Its a 50k odd difference at most. Not sure why people would lie about facts?

blanch152

Geuze wrote: »

SF propose two major revenue-raising measures, see the end of their manifesto.

https://www.sinnfein.ie/files/2020/SF_GE2020_Manifesto.pdf

Stamp duty on commercial property increased from 7.5% to 12.5%.

I wonder do they account for the behavioural response? I doubt it.

Change in treatment of capital allowances = 700m+

A huge focus of their revenue-raising is on those earning over €100k.

- Introduce a 5% high income levy on individual incomes above €140,000
- Taper out tax credits on individual incomes over €100,000 to €140,000
- Reduce subsidies to gold-plated pensions by reducing the earnings
limit and reducing the Standard Fund Threshold to €1.2 million
- Introduce a 15.75% rate of employer’s PRSI on portion of salaries
over €100,000

Together, they expect these four measures to raise €1.7 billion. We took in €22.9 billion in 2019, so these measures together represent an increase of 7.5% in income tax. I don't believe that is possible, because a number of mitigating responses will be taken by those affected. The individual measures were probably costed by the Department of Finance on an individual basis, which would mean that the combined effect of such a targetting of this high-earning sector was not considered. There could be a shortfall of €1 billion from these measures.

Sinn Fein also expect to get €722m from taxing intangible assets onshored by multinationals. Well, if that happens, those multinationals will immediately offshore those intangible assets and probably more besides. Our corporation tax will be negatively affected and if this measure only resulted in a drop of say €300m in corporation tax we would be doing well, meaning that there could be another shortfall of €1 billion.

I can certainly understand why these measures could be seen as being fair and redistributive, but that does not mean that they will raise revenue in the way expected. There are a number of other tax measures that will either cost more or raise less revenue that Sinn Fein project, so a hole of €2 billion in Sinn Fein's manifesto on the tax side would not be surprising.

Dots1982

Inquitus wrote: »

That's simply untrue the % of first preference votes is below, 2.3% can't take you from less than 500k to over 700k I am afraid. Not sure why people would lie about facts?

Sorry, you’re completely right. Someone sent onto me a stat that aggregated the votes of the UK and Irish election that I misread.

blanch152

BigMo1 wrote: »

Not when transfers would carry another candidate over the line in so many cases.

Also, you conveniently ignored the point around the senior cabinet TDs and the leader of the country being decimated by their own electorate.

Leo Varadkar got 8,478 votes in this election. He got 8,247 in 2016, 8,555 in 2011 and 6,928 in 2007.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dublin_West_(D%C3%A1il_constituency)#2016_general_election

How was the leader of the country decimated by his own electorate? There really is some silly hyperbole going around about these results, so people should check their facts before posting something silly.

Field east

BigMo1 wrote: »

I haven't double-checked the numbers but IIRC SF only ran 45 candidates, 37 of whom were elected. If, buts and maybes I know but you'd have to imagine if 82% of the candidates they ran got elected, their results would have been even stronger with a larger candidate pool.

Also, their candidates topped the poll in the constituencies of: Leo (Taoiseach), M Martin (Leader FF), Coveney (Tanaiste), Donohue (Finance), Harris (Health).

If you can't see a clear pattern for change there, your eyes are closed.

A kind of half truth , if even that. What would have been the case if FF and FG put up only one canditate in those constituencies?

Johnboy1951

blanch152 wrote: »

A huge focus of their revenue-raising is on those earning over €100k.

- Introduce a 5% high income levy on individual incomes above €140,000
- Taper out tax credits on individual incomes over €100,000 to €140,000
- Reduce subsidies to gold-plated pensions by reducing the earnings
limit and reducing the Standard Fund Threshold to €1.2 million
- Introduce a 15.75% rate of employer’s PRSI on portion of salaries
over €100,000

Together, they expect these four measures to raise €1.7 billion. We took in €22.9 billion in 2019, so these measures together represent an increase of 7.5% in income tax. I don't believe that is possible, because a number of mitigating responses will be taken by those affected. The individual measures were probably costed by the Department of Finance on an individual basis, which would mean that the combined effect of such a targetting of this high-earning sector was not considered. There could be a shortfall of €1 billion from these measures.

........

Are you implying that the SF figures were costed in a different manner to those of other parties?
Is there some evidence of this?

nkl12xtw5goz70

Inquitus wrote: »

The same thing applies to FF/FG, they won't want an immediate rerun of an election where SF can rectify the huge error in judgement they made this time round, with regard to candidate numbers.

I can see that argument, but a rerun would also let FF and FG refocus their messaging on the issues they now know people care most about. FG ran on taxes and Brexit when people care more about health and housing.

Also, the coincidence of election day with Storm Ciara may have kept many older voters (the FG/FF base) at home.

Thirdly, people may see that a protest vote for the left leads, in pragmatic terms, to no possibility of forming a government.

Finally, FG and FF can make hay with all the "Up the Ra" and "Tiocfaidh ár lá" rhetoric already emanating from Sinn Fein, asking voters if this is the type of politician they want running the country at a very sensitive time in history for Ireland/UK and Republic/North relations.

I don't think another election would produce the landslide for Sinn Fein that some seem to expect.

Bishop of hope

Brock Uninterested Leader wrote: »

I can see that argument, but a rerun would also let FF and FG refocus their messaging on the issues they now know people care most about. FG ran on taxes and Brexit when people care more about health and housing.

Also, the coincidence of election day with Storm Ciara may have kept many older voters (the FG/FF base) at home.

Thirdly, people may see that a protest vote for the left leads, in pragmatic terms, to no possibility of forming a government.

Finally, FG and FF can make hay with all the "Up the Ra" and "Tiocfaidh ár lá" rhetoric already emanating from Sinn Fein, asking voters if this is the type of politician they want running the country at a very sensitive time in history for Ireland/UK and Republic/North relations.

I don't think another election would produce the landslide for Sinn Fein that some seem to expect.

But will FF and FG be prepared to take that chance.
More SF candidates in the right constituencies could give SF 43 or 44. FF and FG just scraped home in a few too, so could both be at the butt end losing 3 or 4 seats each.
Is that a gamble they want to take?

blanch152

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

Are you implying that the SF figures were costed in a different manner to those of other parties?
Is there some evidence of this?

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/election-2020-is-sinn-f%C3%A9in-s-housing-policy-credible-1.4163859

Here is evidence of how the numbers costed by Sinn Fein on their housing policy just don't add up.

Sinn Fein didn't expect to win the election, that is evident by how few candidates they ran. It is also evident by the huge holes in the numbers in their manifesto, it just doesn't add up. Labour, Fianna Fail and Fine Gael pointed this out repeatedly during the campaign, but people weren't listening.

blanch152

Brock Uninterested Leader wrote: »

I can see that argument, but a rerun would also let FF and FG refocus their messaging on the issues they now know people care most about. FG ran on taxes and Brexit when people care more about health and housing.

Also, the coincidence of election day with Storm Ciara may have kept many older voters (the FG/FF base) at home.

Thirdly, people may see that a protest vote for the left leads, in pragmatic terms, to no possibility of forming a government.

Finally, FG and FF can make hay with all the "Up the Ra" and "Tiocfaidh ár lá" rhetoric already emanating from Sinn Fein, asking voters if this is the type of politician they want running the country at a very sensitive time in history for Ireland/UK and Republic/North relations.

I don't think another election would produce the landslide for Sinn Fein that some seem to expect.

I think the best approach for Fianna Fail and Fine Gael is to let Sinn Fein at it. If they get in with everyone else, the only people with governmental experience are Ryan and Howlin. Howlin probably won't last the week, and won't get a Ministry so who does that leave?