If you voted Sinn Fein in the GE, why did you do it?

is_that_so

limnam wrote: »

Sure,


We can film people talking in pubs

Get over yourself. There's barely anywhere you can go these days that some idiot takes out a phone and you know what they record is going to be shared somewhere.

nigeldaniel

I did not vote SF and think a lot of 20 somethings did so for the excitement and fun of it. Some young ones just like to sock it to grown-ups everywhere. I doubt some of them knew the first thing about the candidates they voted for, just went looking for the SF logo the ballot paper.

Robert McGrath

limnam wrote: »

Shame on harris for hiding cervical cancer results from dieing women.

.

You seem misinformed with this point. What exactly do you think Harris did?

limnam

GreeBo wrote: »

Ok, lets really dumb it down.

1,000 houses are built in your estate for 25% less than you paid for your house.
Is your argument really that your house wont fall in value?:rolleyes:

As I said.


FG have built the most social housing in the last 30 years.


What impact has that had on NE?


Not hypothetical nonsense. Real world. It happened. What impact did it have?


FG want to build 112k houses over the next 7 years.


SF want to 100 over 5.


Why would this not impact FG but SF?

GreeBo

limnam wrote: »

As I said.


FG have built the most social housing in the last 30 years.


What impact has that had on NE?


Not hypothetical nonsense. Real world. It happened. What impact did it have?


FG want to build 112k houses over the next 7 years.


SF want to 100 over 5.


Why would this not impact FG but SF?

So your argument is that from a housing perspective, there is no difference between SF and FG?
So that means that anyone who voted SF due to housing is an idiot?

Ush1

GreeBo wrote: »

So your argument is that from a housing perspective, there is no difference between SF and FG?
So that means that anyone who voted SF due to housing is an idiot?

The best I've heard is "they can't be any worse". It's a sad indictment.

limnam

GreeBo wrote: »

So your argument is that from a housing perspective, there is no difference between SF and FG?
So that means that anyone who voted SF due to housing is an idiot?

The argument is (again)


There's no evidence to suggest building social housing will drown the country in NE.


Saying that. I imagine, the SF vote was not the amount of houses that would be built. Is that they believed FG wouldn't do it and hoped SF might.

GreeBo

Ush1 wrote: »

The best I've heard is "they can't be any worse". It's a sad indictment.

It's certainly a new definition of "Change"...

limnam

Ush1 wrote: »

The best I've heard is "they can't be any worse". It's a sad indictment.

I think that shows why

pure desperation

dark crystal

nigeldaniel wrote: »

I did not vote SF and think a lot of 20 somethings did so for the excitement and fun of it. Some young ones just like to sock it to grown-ups everywhere. I doubt some of them knew the first thing about the candidates they voted for, just went looking for the SF logo the ballot paper.

What about the 40-65 age group who also voted for Sinn Féin in their droves?

Were they just having an auld skit too?

BASHIR

The pontificating of self proclaimed experts should be on the list too.

end of the road

GreeBo wrote: »

How is it for the public good if the vulnerable people are the ones who will end up in negative equity?

The very people you despise so much (#TheWealthy) wont be impacted as I already demonstrated.

i don't dispise the wealthy.
i don't dispise anyone unless they do something seriously wrong.
moving away from protecting small numbers of people from negative equity at the expense of a whole generation of people who are either unable to afford to rent or buy, or who just about scrape the rent together, is for the public good as it allows people to be in a position where they have a much much greater chance to be able to house themselves and in turn contribute a lot more to society which in turn benefits the country and society as a whole.
it removes a major major pressure for people.

turbbo wrote: »

Yeah it's lies all round with Trump and Boris now we've got Mary Lou. It really is the end of the world isn't it?

our mary lou is nothing like borris and trump. there is absolutely no comparison between her and dum and dummer.

twowheelsonly

Eric Cartman wrote: »

I understand that, but that doesn't help anyone unemployed, its social housing theyve promised to build and only 10% of social housing applicants are in full time employment.

Where did you get this 10% figure ?

Employment figures are 'massaged' BTW, depending on the spin needed at any given time. "We have less than 5% unemployed ….. " (but another 15% only work part-time..) "Only 10% of SH applicants are in full time employment...." (but another 40% are part time and would be full time except for lack of a stable address / childcare costs..)

There's a damn good chance that someone currently living hand to mouth and staying in a hotel or B&B will settle into a steadier working life once they have a permanent address. It can't be easy to pick up employment in those circumstances.

JP Liz V1

I did not want to vote for the ****es from FF, FG, GP and Lab

PARlance

PARlance wrote: »

You sure like your accountants! Having been one, and being married to one, I can safely say that it probably holds the lowest percentage of dynamic people compared to similar type professions. I know senior accountant's who haven't had to make a meaningful decision in their working life. Some real bright people too, don't get me wrong, but they generally don't choose politics.

Glad Irish Water got a little mention though.

Hi and thanks for the reply. With regard to Joan Bruton and Peter Mathews, I will use the analogy of an aircraft experiencing serious mechanical failure mid flight.

The pilots are struggling to gain control of the aircraft, but luckily enough there are not one, but two pilots among the passengers who are eager to contribute their combined knowledge of approx 70 years to ensure that the plane regains control.

Instead, it is decided that some of the cabin crew assist (because they have been with us for so long).

Im sorry but FG lied straight in the face of the public who voted for them back in 2012. They said they would ask for a write-down on the Anglo debt, and instead they allowed this debt to be doubled to over €60 billion.

In fairness to FG, they have kept this article by Peter Mathews on their website.

I have taken a screen shot of it for further reference.

That promissory note could literally be torn up

quokula

BASHIR wrote: »

The pontificating of self proclaimed experts should be on the list too.

Exactly the same thinking that led to Trump and Brexit.

As much as SF voters like to protest, they’re just another side of the same coin.

PARlance

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Hi and thanks for the reply. With regard to Joan Bruton and Peter Mathews, I will use the analogy of an aircraft experiencing serious mechanical failure mid flight.

The pilots are struggling to gain control of the aircraft, but luckily enough there are not one, but two pilots among the passengers who are eager to contribute their combined knowledge of approx 70 years to ensure that the plane regains control.

Instead, it is decided that some of the cabin crew assist (because they have been with us for so long).

Im sorry but FG lied straight in the face of the public who voted for them back in 2012. They said they would ask for a write-down on the Anglo debt, and instead they allowed this debt to be doubled to over €60 billion.

In fairness to FG, they have kept this article by Peter Mathews on their website.

I have taken a screen shot of it for further reference.

That promissory note could literally be torn up

I'm afraid I'm not buying the analogy, I think your overstating an accounting qualification for the Minister of Finance role. Don't get me wrong, it's a plus, but far from a necessity imo. There's a team of accountants in the department, understanding them, budgets, projections, economics and dealing with stakeholders is more important than knowing how to correctly depreciate fixed assets.

A more apt analogy may be that Joan and Paul were plane engineers an both could confirm that the plane was indeed no longer a going concern...(a hilarious accounting reference, meaning that the plane was fcuked/not going to survive). And even at that, the plane would probably have crashed before they stuck their head out to give an opinion.

Anyway, there's plenty to blame FG about. I just found it very odd that you came out swinging, and devoted most of your post, to a couple of accountants who didn't get roles that you felt they may have deserved. FG messed up in much bigger ways than not giving Joan Burton the Finance role....

PARlance

PARlance wrote: »

I'm afraid I'm not buying the analogy, I think your overstating an accounting qualification for the Minister of Finance role. Don't get me wrong, it's a plus, but far from a necessity imo. There's a team of accountants in the department, understanding them, budgets, projections, economics and dealing with stakeholders is more important than knowing how to correctly depreciate fixed assets.

A more apt analogy may be that Joan and Paul were plane engineers an both could confirm that the plane was indeed no longer a going concern...(a hilarious accounting reference, meaning that the plane was fcuked/not going to survive). And even at that, the plane would probably have crashed before they stuck their head out to give an opinion.

Anyway, there's plenty to blame FG about. I just found it very odd that you came out swinging, and devoted most of your post, to a couple of accountants who didn't get roles that you felt they may have deserved. FG messed up in much bigger ways than not giving Joan Burton the Finance role....

ok fair enough, yes I am familiar with going concern (unfortunately).

Would it have made a difference to the promissory note negotiations, if someone like Joan Burton had been minister for finance, and was able to talk to bankers and financiers in their own language?

limnam

limnam wrote: »

If we take the average house price of 380k.........

The average speil is really not typical though, I live in a place worth maybe 200k at the moment.

Foxtrol

Deleted User wrote: »

ok fair enough, yes I am familiar with going concern (unfortunately).

Would it have made a difference to the promissory note negotiations, if someone like Joan Burton had been minister for finance, and was able to talk to bankers and financiers in their own language?

Not to completely downplay my own qualification but being a chartered accountant by itself really brings little to nothing to help in that situation. You'd get more from a few hours research on the promissory note topic than the qualification (especially back when she qualified).

My opinion would be different if she had qualified and gone into an industry that was related to it but there is no evidence she has that background. All I can see online is that she used the qualification to teach in 3rd level, which is generally dealing with basic concepts, outside of the real world.

To go back to the earlier flight example I'd go one further than PARlance, if Burton is on that plane all she'd be was a passenger with a general engineering degree but with no experience with planes. There's several other people on the flight who are actually engineers (Civil Service) who will be doing all the work. Maybe there is some different result if she's put in charge but her qualification is no guarantee that it would be a positive one.

GreeBo

Augeo wrote: »

The average speil is really not typical though, I live in a place worth maybe 200k at the moment.

Median is the important stat in all these things.
House price
Rent
Salary

Etc etc

You can't make decisions based on averages any more then you can do it in individual cases.

Snickers Man

maccored wrote: »

Ever try making sense? You should give it a go. You could start by reading that car crash of a reply you made and translate it into something intelligible. "simples"

Sigh!

If you want effectively to tell the questioner (ie me) to "**** off and mind my own business" with regard to this poll then all you have to do is visit another thread on this forum, or another topic on this site (of which there are many) or go visit another site altogether.

You are under no obligation to answer.

Still angry?
Can't help you.

LeeroyJ.

Housing, Infrastructure, public services. Literally anything is an improvement at this point.

Snickers Man

Masteryos wrote: »

There are people out there (especially young people) who are on hard times and are playing by the rules and are finding their quality of life not improving at all.

I'll say it again for those who struggle to get it, there are many (young) people out there who ..[are]...Working hard only to see most of your wages go towards a landlord who is only in that position thanks to being born earlier than you

Nail on the head.

It is clear from the results of the poll (imperfect as it is) that this is the most important topic for those who voted Sinn Fein.

Indeed, as an update at the time of writing, despite the fact that some people have graciously (or not ) pointed out the haphazard nature of the poll options, I think they can be divided neatly into questions that deal with "bread and butter" issues such as housing, schooling and health, and those that deal with the "national question" (border polls, Brexit, rebel songs)

Of those who voted for Sinn Fein a whopping 86.45% chose bread and butter issues as being the reason why they did so. A mere 13.56%, at the time of writing, were more concerned about "Green Jersey" issues.

You mightn't think that listening to scumbags like David Cullinane and Dessie Ellis, but that's what people are voting for. By their own admission.

The more urbane Sinn Fein representatives like Pearse Doherty (you can be urbane and from Donegal, they're not mutually exclusive!) are full of phrases like "preparing for Irish unity" as a sop to the saighdiúirí but it's clear where their priorities are. And that they align with most people who voted for them.

limnam

GreeBo wrote: »

Median is the important stat in all these things.
House price
Rent
Salary

Etc etc

You can't make decisions based on averages any more then you can do it in individual cases.

Feel free to do it on medians


You still won't be able to afford it.

Foxtrol

Foxtrol wrote: »

Not to completely downplay my own qualification but being a chartered accountant by itself really brings little to nothing to help in that situation. You'd get more from a few hours research on the promissory note topic than the qualification (especially back when she qualified).

My opinion would be different if she had qualified and gone into an industry that was related to it but there is no evidence she has that background. All I can see online is that she used the qualification to teach in 3rd level, which is generally dealing with basic concepts, outside of the real world.

To go back to the earlier flight example I'd go one further than PARlance, if Burton is on that plane all she'd be was a passenger with a general engineering degree but with no experience with planes. There's several other people on the flight who are actually engineers (Civil Service) who will be doing all the work. Maybe there is some different result if she's put in charge but her qualification is no guarantee that it would be a positive one.

There were several articles written on this very subject back when FG were voted into government. I remember her saying that she was disappointed at being overlooked for the position of M of F.

Vincent Browne claims that it was sexism on behalf of the FG cabinet that she didn't get the ministerial position.

Link to article here

The suspicion remains that the decision to overlook her for the two senior finance posts was influenced by sexism. She was the best person for both of the finance jobs, and she was overlooked in favour of less-qualified males.

The conspiracy theorist in me feels that there may have been another reason why she wasn't offered the position, but I would be very wary of posting the link on here as it could land me in trouble. (it did make the front page of the Irish Times back in 2011 though)

maccored

Snickers Man wrote: »

Sigh!

If you want effectively to tell the questioner (ie me) to "**** off and mind my own business" with regard to this poll then all you have to do is visit another thread on this forum, or another topic on this site (of which there are many) or go visit another site altogether.

You are under no obligation to answer.

Still angry?
Can't help you.

doesnt look like its me getting (s)nickers in a twist. my answer to the OP was its my own business. you then told me to go off to another thread or some such rubbish - which is something else thats none of your concern

LeeroyJ.

nigeldaniel wrote: »

I did not vote SF and think a lot of 20 somethings did so for the excitement and fun of it. Some young ones just like to sock it to grown-ups everywhere. I doubt some of them knew the first thing about the candidates they voted for, just went looking for the SF logo the ballot paper.

You are the reason the 'Ok Boomer' Phrase exists. You just flat out insulted and played down an entire generation as some sort of rebellion to the ('grown-ups'?!)
If you think your opinion or vote is somehow more valuable than that of an 18, 21 or 29 year old, you need to take a hard look in the mirror.

joeguevara

LeeroyJ. wrote: »

You are the reason the 'Ok Boomer' Phrase exists. You just flat out insulted and played down an entire generation as some sort of rebellion to the ('grown-ups'?!)
If you think your opinion or vote is somehow more valuable than that of an 18, 21 or 29 year old, you need to take a hard look in the mirror.

In all fairness he/she did now 'some' rather than all.

Foxtrol

Deleted User wrote: »

There were several articles written on this very subject back when FG were voted into government. I remember her saying that she was disappointed at being overlooked for the position of M of F.

Vincent Browne claims that it was sexism on behalf of the FG cabinet that she didn't get the ministerial position.

Link to article here

The conspiracy theorist in me feels that there may have been another reason why she wasn't offered the position, but I would be very wary of posting the link on here as it could land me in trouble. (it did make the front page of the Irish Times back in 2011 though)

Articles written by people who very likely don't know what a chartered qualification means, especially when it isn't supported by relevant industry experience.

Given that they are getting all the technical support from the civil service/advisers, political experience is as much or even more important given the circumstances