New Dail / New Taoiseach

Quin_Dub

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?

Not at all , that's how all these things are costed regardless of who's asking.

The department are asked - "How much money would be collected if we changed this tax rate from x to y?" etc.

Each question is asked separately , they do not account for things like "If I increase Tax X on Business activity Y , how much might that business activity decline?"

For budget costings for everybody , they simply answer the basic mathematical questions , they do not try to answer the intangible questions around upstream or downstream impacts.

Inquitus

blanch152 wrote: »

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.

It's sad people don't listen, because you just need to be numerate and literate to realise that SF's numbers do not add up in the slightest, you don't need to be an economic genius.

blanch152

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Not at all , that's how all these things are costed regardless of who's asking.

The department are asked - "How much money would be collected if we changed this tax rate from x to y?" etc.

Each question is asked separately , they do not account for things like "If I increase Tax X on Business activity Y , how much might that business activity decline?"

For budget costings for everybody , they simply answer the basic mathematical questions , they do not try to answer the intangible questions around upstream or downstream impacts.

And that is where the average voter has to step in to look at the credibility of the figures put forward and analyse the effects on activity. I am not saying that the proposals put forward by Sinn Fein are wrong or unfair, they may well be fair, but the numbers won't add up that way when they are implemented.

It is the same with measures like carbon tax. People complain about carbon tax, but the Greens would be happiest if carbon tax raised zero revenue, as it would mean that the whole country has switched away from carbon to avoid the tax.

Field east

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.

I’ ve been away for a long time but when I left I thought that there were several more parties / independents contesting the election .?????. It’s undisputed , based on your figures, that SF has won the election by the proverbial mile. You might just check your figures again in case the current high wind blew a few figures off your work table.!,!

Bishop of hope

Inquitus wrote: »

It's sad people don't listen, because you just need to be numerate and literate to realise that SF's numbers do not add up in the slightest, you don't need to be an economic genius.

Good dig there. Keep saying that, that's the type of ****e that turns voters the other way.
There should be a boards.ie party, the country would have no problems with all the economists and such on here.

Johnboy1951

Originally Posted by Johnboy1951
Are you implying that the SF figures were costed in a different manner to those of other parties?
Is there some evidence of this?

blanch152 wrote: »

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.

Not answering the question I was asking ....... is there some reason to believe that the SF figures were costed differently to other parties by the Dept of Finance?

You posted

The individual measures were probably costed by the Department of Finance on an individual basis

,
For that to be noteworthy it would have to be different to how other parties' figures were treated.
Else it was just thrown in there to try to bolster your speculation.

...... and in case it is of interest ...... no I do not believe the figures are attainable ...... and I feel similarly about other parties' figures ......

nkl12xtw5goz70

Bishop of hope wrote: »

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?

The real question is whether the SF surge was a repeatable event or a once-off protest vote. I believe it was the latter.

If I were leading FF or FG, I'd risk a second election on the basis that it couldn't be much worse and might be a lot better. Any political strategist worth his salt could make hay with "Up the Ra" and "Tiocfaidh ár lá," asking the electorate whether they want to plunge the country back into the Troubles.

mickdw

Department just cost a tax measure. They don't tell you that it will drive out business or anything like that.
The issue is that SF has lots of pie in the sky plans that if taken at today's level of economic activity produce a tax income gain but they do not factor in the swift loss of many of the big businesses due to that incoming policy.
The other parties for the most part have more experience of such issues and as such don't go in that direction.
Why not tax all big business 70 percent?
We would all be rich, it would fix the hospitals, the housing etc. The department of finance would confirm that a 70 percent tax on company profits would bring it x billions at todays activity levels. You wouldn't get a penny of it though. They would all have made other arrangements.

BluePlanet

Inquitus wrote: »

It's sad people don't listen, because you just need to be numerate and literate to realise that SF's numbers do not add up in the slightest, you don't need to be an economic genius.

Nope.
It's based on real data.

The goals however are contingent upon some rosy assumptions and substantial logistical hurdles that make them very optimistic.

blanch152

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

Not answering the question I was asking ....... is there some reason to believe that the SF figures were costed differently to other parties by the Dept of Finance?

You posted
,
For that to be noteworthy it would have to be different to how other parties' figures were treated.
Else it was just thrown in there to try to bolster your speculation.

...... and in case it is of interest ...... no I do not believe the figures are attainable ...... and I feel similarly about other parties' figures ......

Your question has been comprehensively answered by Quin Dub.

As for other parties, if you want to pick holes in their manifestos, go right ahead. I see huge holes in Sinn Fein's costings and have pointed them out. So far, nobody has been able to counter that except with what about the others.

LuckyLloyd

blanch152 wrote: »

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.

This isn’t a viable path to a stable coalition and you know it - you also know SF know it. Irrelevant twaddle.

BluePlanet

blanch152 wrote: »

Your question has been comprehensively answered by Quin Dub.

As for other parties, if you want to pick holes in their manifestos, go right ahead. I see huge holes in Sinn Fein's costings and have pointed them out. So far, nobody has been able to counter that except with what about the others.

I don't think people actually care that much blanch152.
Election manifestos are like wish-lists and they don't survive intact after contact with coalition partners.

People in this election want something different than the 2 parties represent.
I'm not sure so many of them care about how it's added up on a spreadsheet.

It's like people want the party to aim for such and such goal, and land as close as possible. If they can't reach the bulls-eye then pity, but if they made a genuine effort then they might get a pass.

Ballso

BluePlanet wrote: »

People in this election want something different than the 2 parties represent.
I'm not sure so many of them care about how it's added up on a spreadsheet..

People are sick of experts

seamus

BluePlanet wrote: »

Election manifestos are like wish-lists and they don't survive intact after contact with coalition partners.

Careful now. That's sounds scarily like, Rabbitte's infamous, "Isn't that what you tend to do during an election" comment that killed Labour.

BluePlanet

seamus wrote: »

Careful now. That's sounds scarily like, Rabbitte's infamous, "Isn't that what you tend to do during an election" comment that killed Labour.

Yeah he commited the sin of saying it out loud.
But the problem is also the person saying it.
SF by and large, are not entitled, holier than thou, im smarter than all ye, aholes

is_that_so

Arlene says no to a border poll, but with reasons.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/election-2020/dups-foster-rejects-sinn-fein-border-poll-calls-indicating-declining-support-for-unification-38946742.html

blanch152

BluePlanet wrote: »

I don't think people actually care that much blanch152.
Election manifestos are like wish-lists and they don't survive intact after contact with coalition partners.

People in this election want something different than the 2 parties represent.
I'm not sure so many of them care about how it's added up on a spreadsheet.

It's like people want the party to aim for such and such goal, and land as close as possible. If they can't reach the bulls-eye then pity, but if they made a genuine effort then they might get a pass.

It is easy to promise the world, impossible to deliver it.

If it doesn't add up on a spreadsheet, it can't be delivered without a magic money tree. Sinn Fein in the North had the supplication route to Westminister, that won't work down here.

RandomName2

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

they simply acted as kingmakers following the election and then fell silent when things went wrong. Their role should have been as a check and balance against FG, and they abdicated this responsibility.

Much worse, they seemed absolutely determined to get water charges in. They wasted a billion euro on it. A billion euro. This was at a time we could hardly afford it. I got shouted down by people saying we needed to 'diversify taxation' in order to survive. This was the Labour line.

Why can't parties just admit when they get things wrong:

• Fianna Fail: 'We caused the crash. Lisbon for Jobs was a lie. Economic pessimists should not go hang themselves, they were in fact right'
• Fine Gael: 'We failed to improve infrastructure. Following through with the daft location of the Children's hospital was a mistake. We completely mistreated whistle-blowers.'
• Labour: 'Water charges were a mistake. We should have held the government accountable'
• Greens: 'As coalition partners we are complete liabilities'
• Sinn Fein: 'Bombs need ball bearings if they want to be properly effective'
• Renua: 'It was a mistake to be formed by someone who left their party because they were anti-abortion, and then attempt not to be a single-issue organization'

Is that really too difficult for them to say?

Sam Russell

Sinn Fein got 24% of the 1st pref votes and got 24% of the seats.

The Green Party got 7.4% of 1st Pref votes and 7.5% of the seats.

FF got 22% of the 1st Prf votes and 24% of the seats.

FG got 20% of 1st Pref and 21.8% of the seats.

Isn't STV a marvelous and democratic system. If SF had more candidates, they may not have got more 1st Pref votes, but may well have got more seats, but not certain.

No landslide or dividend for any party. It is spin to suggest a party with less than 25% of the vote has a landslide.

It is likely that at least two of the above parties will need to go into coalition to form a government, but probably three of them.

CrankyHaus

RandomName2 wrote: »

Much worse, they seemed absolutely determined to get water charges in. They wasted a billion euro on it. A billion euro. This was at a time we could hardly afford it. I got shouted down by people saying we needed to 'diversify taxation' in order to survive. This was the Labour line.

Why can't parties just admit when they get things wrong:

• Fianna Fail: 'We caused the crash. Lisbon for Jobs was a lie. Economic pessimists should not go hang themselves, they were in fact right'
• Fine Gael: 'We failed to improve infrastructure. Following through with the daft location of the Children's hospital was a mistake. We completely mistreated whistle-blowers.'
• Labour: 'Water charges were a mistake. We should have held the government accountable'
• Greens: 'As coalition partners we are complete liabilities'
• Sinn Fein: 'Bombs need ball bearings if they want to be properly effective'
• Renua: 'It was a mistake to be formed by someone who left their party because they were anti-abortion, and then attempt not to be a single-issue organization'

Is that really too difficult for them to say?

I agree. I'd much sooner forgive an apologetic party and give it a second chance than be convinced by its PR machine that it "did the right thing" when I know well it did no such thing.

sozbox

STB. wrote: »

Ah yes Labour, they are the party with the rose, a symbol of better tomorrows.

There was a time when they represented the working class. In 2011 they made promises to those good enough to believe them. The party were rewarded with 20% of first preference votes with 37 TD's returned to Dáil Eireann. Within a short period of time they broke all of those promises (7 parliamentary members left as a result). They delivered austerity, froze pay, introduced a universal social charge and backed FG to the hilt, all to pay back unsecured gambling bong holders. They justified it with a ignorant and intelligence insulting mantra of doing good work for the country. The reality is that the country is set back decades, with no money left for infrastructure nor services.

At the 2016 GE they got the answer from even their most loyal followers, and were reduced to 7 TD's, some of which barely scraped in. Brendan Howlin didn't even meet the quota, and required the elimination of the lowest candidates in his own constituency.

Since 2016 Labour under Howlin have had ample time in opposition to go back to basics and challenge the situation on housing, taxation, health care and education policy, however ironic. They didn't. Infact if you ever have an accident or a heart complaint in his home town, pray to St Anthony that he finds you an ambulance.

They didn't rebuild their party, they have long lost the trust of lifetime supporters. Clearly Howlin was trying to hold off AK47's "power suits me" challenge to his leadership. These power struggles have been a feature of labour in the past 20 years. The reality is the damage is well done and their is nothing left to fight over leading. SF have taken advantage of their absence.

In the current election, at least 3 of their TD's were way past retirement age, yet still ran. This self serving one last spin egotism should have stopped in 2016. There are now less than a handful left.

Whoever takes over the remnants and seeks to resurrect their brand, should revisit where they came from and start at grassroots level. They can start by going over to the side of the Custom House, opposite Liberty Hall, and beg forgiveness from the man whose monument stands there.

Labour didn’t “introduce the USC”

Stewball

subpar wrote: »

Its time for Howlin to go , he is well meaning but a bit of a windbag. Alan Kelly is the right age and has an edge to him and is good media performer.

If Alan Kelly is the answer then they're doomed.
Nash is a far better option and he's not as tainted as Kelly & Howlin from their coalition with FG.

One positive to come out of this election is Joan Burton losing her seat - if they had her knocking around for another few years they'd lose even more ground on the SocDems.

Am I right in thinking only a sitting TD can be elected leader?

PommieBast

RandomName2 wrote: »

Is that really too difficult for them to say?

It would be nice of the world actually worked that way.

Field east

BluePlanet wrote: »

I don't think people actually care that much blanch152.
Election manifestos are like wish-lists and they don't survive intact after contact with coalition partners.

People in this election want something different than the 2 parties represent.
I'm not sure so many of them care about how it's added up on a spreadsheet.

It's like people want the party to aim for such and such goal, and land as close as possible. If they can't reach the bulls-eye then pity, but if they made a genuine effort then they might get a pass.

Could you be a bit more specific re the word ‘ something’ in the 2 nd para

Weepsie

Maybe not the right place to ask or state, but I know michelle o Neill is an elected rep of SF in NI and the effective 2nd in command, but she's not elected to representative in the south.

She has no business imo being at any sort of discussion about forming our next government.

Weepsie

BluePlanet wrote: »

Yeah he commited the sin of saying it out loud.
But the problem is also the person saying it.
SF by and large, are not entitled, holier than thou, im smarter than all ye, aholes

Some of them are
Or they are pretending to be working class despite their private educations, privileged upbringings and access to universities that those who elected them could only dream of.

Sam Russell

Weepsie wrote: »

Maybe not the right place to ask or state, but I know michelle o Neill is an elected rep of SF in NI and the effective 2nd in command, but she's not elected to representative in the south.

She has no business imo being at any sort of discussion about forming our next government.

Well, at least she is visible. How many shadowy figures are there in the backroom pulling the puppet strings?

Whatever happened to P O'Neil?

Better Than Christ

subpar wrote: »

Alan Kelly is the right age and has an edge to him and is good media performer.

Mr Irish Water himself? This is him in 2016, the day twenty-six of his colleagues lost their seats...



A very confident media performer, but is he popular within the party? Would he be popular with the voters Labour needs to win back?

Having said that, apart from Alan Kelly, who else is there?

Brendan Howlin
Sean Sherlock
Ged Nash
Duncan Smith
Aodhán Ó Ríordáin

Nash seems like the best of that lot.

CIARAN_BOYLE

Weepsie wrote: »

Maybe not the right place to ask or state, but I know michelle o Neill is an elected rep of SF in NI and the effective 2nd in command, but she's not elected to representative in the south.

She has no business imo being at any sort of discussion about forming our next government.

That's a fair point. It's also irrelevant because every part will have sundry hangers on at the table. Yes she has a bigger role than most but it's not exclusively hers.

The negotiation is on behalf of SF not the Sinn Fein parliamentary party.

I would say I dont like the process that Sinn Fein have about going into coalition but I similarly disapprove of a lot of parties processes.

IAMAMORON

Weepsie wrote: »

Maybe not the right place to ask or state, but I know michelle o Neill is an elected rep of SF in NI and the effective 2nd in command, but she's not elected to representative in the south.

She has no business imo being at any sort of discussion about forming our next government.

Not in her capacity as deputy first minister.

But as a Sinn Fein member she has every right to advise her party over any matters. Like them or hate them Sinn Féin are an all island party, they are allowed utilise their members in any way they see fit.

Any member of any party is allowed to help them negotiate, no matter what their seniority is.