FF/FG/Green Next Government

James Brown · 14-09-2020 2:35pm

Truthvader wrote: »

Hurray! Think we finally agree. KPMG wont go near Court. Firstly they simply dont care about any of the creditors. They're only concern will be their own fees. They know if the go near Court they will just attract attention and aggro from the likes of Bowie, Boyd Barrett and Sinn Fein "activists". Why expose yourself to that? My guess is that they will throw the file under a radiator for 6 months leave " the workers" standing around in the rain for the Winter, write off the value of the stock or sell it at a big discount to a purchaser willing to litigate access or force their way in, pay themselves and distribute any crumbs remaining to whoever is entitled

I think you mean 'eureka'. You seem to get it. They've a right to seek what they think they are due whether you think they are due it or not. How it plays out is how it plays out. The workers have a right to disagree.
This all stemmed from LV stating there was no money. There is. If LV wanted to stick his misinformed or lying oar in he could have brought in the recommendations after the Cleary's incident. He didn't bother his barney.
How it is to be allocated is being negotiated. You have a view of sorts and favour the other creditors, that's cula bula.
Why do you blindly support the other creditors over the workers? Can you tell me who they are and what the money is for? It would be odd if you did not have this information to hand.

James Brown · 14-09-2020 2:45pm

Edgware wrote: »

Come back in 4 years time when we have an election

Spring/Summer 2021 is not 4 years away.

Hawthorn Tree · 14-09-2020 2:45pm

The great thing about this government is that the Civil War Politics nonsense is over. The optimum result from this government is that we have only 1 centre-right party at the next GE. I think we are making great progress there.
Hopefully FF will be an irrelevant/tiny party or will merge with FG. Thus far, FF are making all the big mistakes and their minister quality looks positively awful. The Clifden Elite party will come back to haunt both. Covid likes to party? Next couple of years will be fascinating from a political perspective.

blanch152 · 14-09-2020 2:47pm

Bowie wrote: »

I've no idea what SF's stance is. I'm not any party's blind shill. I'd actually read a piece by Joan Collins on it. You need broaden your scope it might inform you better and you could take a break from SF being behind everything anyone does or says that you don't understand so don't like.
Championing the workers is a great thing. You have this theme of looking down on workers, tax payers. Do you not find that counter productive societally speaking?
Now you're off on a 'poor working people bad' rant.

Bowie wrote: »

I think you mean 'eureka'. You seem to get it. They've a right to seek what they think they are due whether you think they are due it or not. How it plays out is how it plays out. The workers have a right to disagree.
This all stemmed from LV stating there was no money. There is. If LV wanted to stick his misinformed or lying oar in he could have brought in the recommendations after the Cleary's incident. He didn't bother his barney.
How it is to be allocated is being negotiated. You have a view of sorts and favour the other creditors, that's cula bula.
Why do you blindly support the other creditors over the workers? Can you tell me who they are and what the money is for? It would be odd if you did not have this information to hand.

Are you still thinking that they are just looking for their entitlements? Or have you accepted that you were wrong on that, that they are getting their entitlements and that they are actually looking for more.

rob316 · 14-09-2020 2:49pm

FF are an awful party, Martin is leader in name but you can tell he doesn't have the respect of the party and they can see Leo is taking him for a ride. Absolutely zero talent in the ranks, there is no one I can look at there and say "he could be leader of the country one day".

James Brown · 14-09-2020 2:52pm

L1011 wrote: »

The weird thing with FF in 2011 was that they never really went below 10% even in Dublin - they got 10-15% (and no transfers after that of course) in Dublin

Their core vote in Dublin has left (or died, being honest) basically. They're now reliant on swing votes like everyone else.

Imagine if Kenny changed the way we do business, hadn't conjured up the Irish Water quango? We'd have no Siteserv deal (currently under investigation), no board jobs for 'our own' and so on. They could have gone from strength to strength with Coveney taking over, but alas, it's like the Scorpion and the Frog, "I could not help myself. It is my nature.".
They needed FF, they brought FF back to the table quicker than they were due. They obviously didn't have the time to fix themselves back up. We've two caretaker wastes leading the first and third biggest parties, (as per election results).
FF need a complete overhaul for optics, because that's all it ever is.

FG may do well enough to concoct some bastardised government next time out, but they'd really need ditch Varadkar IMO.

James Brown · 14-09-2020 3:01pm

blanch152 wrote: »

Are you still thinking that they are just looking for their entitlements? Or have you accepted that you were wrong on that, that they are getting their entitlements and that they are actually looking for more.

Read what you quoted. It will answer all that haunts you.

Have you an answer for my question:

Bowie wrote: »

...
You are stating that the HSE operate completely independently from the department and minster of health, yes or no?

Or have you not had a chance to read up...

blanch152 wrote: »

Surprise, surprise, I did miss it, I don't follow every media story.

..on the topic you felt you had enough info on to throw a few digs but not enough to give an opinion or answer questions on?

Truthvader · 14-09-2020 3:40pm

Bowie wrote: »

I think you mean 'eureka'. You seem to get it. They've a right to seek what they think they are due whether you think they are due it or not. How it plays out is how it plays out. The workers have a right to disagree.
This all stemmed from LV stating there was no money. There is. If LV wanted to stick his misinformed or lying oar in he could have brought in the recommendations after the Cleary's incident. He didn't bother his barney.
How it is to be allocated is being negotiated. You have a view of sorts and favour the other creditors, that's cula bula.
Why do you blindly support the other creditors over the workers? Can you tell me who they are and what the money is for? It would be odd if you did not have this information to hand.

Can't deal with wilful stupidity any longer, Either do the reading you foolishly advised me to do or join Francie and ask Chris Andrews or Dessie Ellis for their expert opinion. It will certainly be what you want to hear

Scoundrel · 14-09-2020 3:59pm

rob316 wrote: »

FF are an awful party, Martin is leader in name but you can tell he doesn't have the respect of the party and they can see Leo is taking him for a ride. Absolutely zero talent in the ranks, there is no one I can look at there and say "he could be leader of the country one day".

FF are finished there is literally no reason to vote them policy wise and as you say the lack of talent is unreal the fact that Jack Chambers is chief whip is astounding the shinners or FG wouldn't have him as a cllr.

Bishop of hope · 14-09-2020 4:06pm

Scoundrel wrote: »

FF are finished there is literally no reason to vote them policy wise and as you say the lack of talent is unreal the fact that Jack Chambers is chief whip is astounding the shinners or FG wouldn't have him as a cllr.

Ah the shinners have Holohan, proposed him for mayor even:D:D

James Brown · 14-09-2020 4:09pm

Truthvader wrote: »

Can't deal with wilful stupidity any longer, Either do the reading you foolishly advised me to do or join Francie and ask Chris Andrews or Dessie Ellis for their expert opinion. It will certainly be what you want to hear

Something something ten minute warning...

LV lied or was misinformed causing him to lie, (Frances back?).

It's really very simple:

1) there is a sum due to the workers.
2) the workers disagree on that.
3) the workers are negotiating to come to a settlement.
4) you have concern for the creditors losing out.

Why are you concerned for the other creditors over the workers and who are they?

blanch152 · 14-09-2020 4:21pm

Bowie wrote: »

Something something ten minute warning...

LV lied or was misinformed causing him to lie, (Frances back?).

It's really very simple:

1) there is a sum due to the workers.
2) the workers disagree on that.
3) the workers are negotiating to come to a settlement.
4) you have concern for the creditors losing out.

Why are you concerned for the other creditors over the workers and who are they?

You have got the facts wrong.

(1) There is a sum due to the workers, in accordance with the law
(2) The workers are getting what they are due
(3) The workers are looking for more
(4) The workers are not entitled to more, they are just looking for more
(5) If the workers get more, someone else will lose out
(6) If suppliers lose out, more jobs could be lost

14-09-2020 4:26pm

blanch152 wrote: »

You have got the facts wrong.

(1) There is a sum due to the workers, in accordance with the law
(2) The workers are getting what they are due
(3) The workers are looking for more
(4) The workers are not entitled to more, they are just looking for more
(5) If the workers get more, someone else will lose out
(6) If suppliers lose out, more jobs could be lost

Perfectly clear. No doubt but..but..but..something..something..LV, Etc!

Truthvader · 14-09-2020 5:57pm

Hawthorn Tree wrote: »

The great thing about this government is that the Civil War Politics nonsense is over. The optimum result from this government is that we have only 1 centre-right party at the next GE. I think we are making great progress there.
Hopefully FF will be an irrelevant/tiny party or will merge with FG. Thus far, FF are making all the big mistakes and their minister quality looks positively awful. The Clifden Elite party will come back to haunt both. Covid likes to party? Next couple of years will be fascinating from a political perspective.

Agree 100%. The problem now is to establish some kind of proper centre left wing alternative. Then we can be a proper grown up democracy

James Brown · 14-09-2020 6:35pm

blanch152 wrote: »

You have got the facts wrong.

(1) There is a sum due to the workers, in accordance with the law
(2) The workers are getting what they are due
(3) The workers are looking for more
(4) The workers are not entitled to more, they are just looking for more
(5) If the workers get more, someone else will lose out
(6) If suppliers lose out, more jobs could be lost

So what you are saying is;

1) there is a sum due to the workers. (1 + 2)
2) the workers disagree on that. (3)
3) the workers are negotiating to come to a settlement. (4)
4) you have concern for the creditors losing out. (5)

As for your (6), jobs lost, so what, sure **** them, greedy gougers. Am I right? :rolleyes:

So we're skipping over:

Bowie wrote: »

...

Have you an answer for my question:

Or have you not had a chance to read up...

Bowie wrote: »

....
You are stating that the HSE operate completely independently from the department and minster of health, yes or no?

..on the topic you felt you had enough info on to throw a few digs but not enough to give an opinion or answer questions on?

Fair enough. Sos I know

Brendan Bendar · 14-09-2020 6:36pm

Lot of anger here........

JohnnyFlash · 14-09-2020 6:39pm

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Lot of anger here........

Sometimes I think deep down they realise magic money trees don’t exist, Brendan.

Brendan Bendar · 14-09-2020 7:01pm

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

Sometimes I think deep down they realise magic money trees don’t exist, Brendan.

Hard to figure out what they realise John.

Maybe it’s that one can’t horse out more than on takes in without causing big trouble.

For me it’s the idea that ‘the State ‘ can take care of everything’

Completely ignoring the fact that the State depends on ‘their ‘ contributions to survive.

You couldn’t make it up John.

FrancieBrady · 14-09-2020 7:47pm

Like Leo's rants, it always backfires.
I mean, did it occur to nobody when someone proposed the vanity project, 'what we have achieved' that maybe a party ripped a new one in the last election should be careful doing puff pieces? It's ok to say no to PR people.

https://twitter.com/RomanShortall/status/1305529144915251200

smurgen · 14-09-2020 7:50pm

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

Sometimes I think deep down they realise magic money trees don’t exist, Brendan.

I dunno, the magic money tree seemed to sprout new branches very very quickly johnny at the start of the pandemic.

https://www.rte.ie/amp/1148539/

James Brown · 14-09-2020 8:01pm

smurgen wrote: »

I dunno, the magic money tree seemed to sprout new branches very very quickly johnny at the start of the pandemic.

https://www.rte.ie/amp/1148539/

The folks who bought Ireland's Eye.

JohnnyFlash · 14-09-2020 8:03pm

smurgen wrote: »

I dunno, the magic money tree seemed to sprout new branches very very quickly johnny at the start of the pandemic.

https://www.rte.ie/amp/1148539/

That’s borrowing, dude. Bonds. That has to be paid back though.

blanch152 · 14-09-2020 8:36pm

Bowie wrote: »

So what you are saying is;

1) there is a sum due to the workers. (1 + 2)
2) the workers disagree on that. (3)
3) the workers are negotiating to come to a settlement. (4)
4) you have concern for the creditors losing out. (5)

As for your (6), jobs lost, so what, sure **** them, greedy gougers. Am I right? :rolleyes:

)

No, what I am saying was clearly set out in my post.

You are making things up again. Either you accept the facts as they are, or we can't even discuss opinion as to whether they deserve more, were badly treated, should just accept it or whatever.

It is impossible to have a rational discussion with a believer in alternative facts.

blanch152 wrote: »

You have got the facts wrong.

(1) There is a sum due to the workers, in accordance with the law
(2) The workers are getting what they are due
(3) The workers are looking for more
(4) The workers are not entitled to more, they are just looking for more
(5) If the workers get more, someone else will lose out
(6) If suppliers lose out, more jobs could be lost

James Brown · 14-09-2020 8:56pm

blanch152 wrote: »

No, what I am saying was clearly set out in my post.

You are making things up again. Either you accept the facts as they are, or we can't even discuss opinion as to whether they deserve more, were badly treated, should just accept it or whatever.

It is impossible to have a rational discussion with a believer in alternative facts.

You simply reworded what you said I got wrong. Now I'm willfully making things up?

Just look at this nonsense:

I wrote "1) there is a sum due to the workers."
You said I was wrong and countered with, "(1) There is a sum due to the workers, in accordance with the law". Like ffs Blanch give over.

I have given my opinion of the facts numerous times. You haven't even bothered. So I don't find your latest dodge credible.
You disagreeing with my opinion of the facts is not me making things up, again or any other time. It's a massive unquoted inferred fudge.
However you dodging direct questions is you dodging direct questions.

I'll leave the HSE question be.

Who are these creditors and what are they due money for? Do you know if the workers getting what they are looking for will cause job loses?

14-09-2020 9:10pm

Bowie wrote: »

You simply reworded what you said I got wrong. Now I'm willfully making things up?

Just look at this nonsense:

I wrote "1) there is a sum due to the workers."
You said I was wrong and countered with, "(1) There is a sum due to the workers, in accordance with the law". Like ffs Blanch give over.

I have given my opinion of the facts numerous times. You haven't even bothered. So I don't find your latest dodge credible.
You disagreeing with my opinion of the facts is not me making things up, again or any other time. It's a massive unquoted inferred fudge.
However you dodging direct questions is you dodging direct questions.

I'll leave the HSE question be.

Who are these creditors and what are they due money for? Do you know if the workers getting what they are looking for will cause job loses?

Brilliant. Just. Brilliant.

Bishop of hope · 14-09-2020 9:12pm

Bowie wrote: »

You simply reworded what you said I got wrong. Now I'm willfully making things up?

Just look at this nonsense:

I wrote "1) there is a sum due to the workers."
You said I was wrong and countered with, "(1) There is a sum due to the workers, in accordance with the law". Like ffs Blanch give over.

I have given my opinion of the facts numerous times. You haven't even bothered. So I don't find your latest dodge credible.
You disagreeing with my opinion of the facts is not me making things up, again or any other time. It's a massive unquoted inferred fudge.
However you dodging direct questions is you dodging direct questions.

I'll leave the HSE question be.

Who are these creditors and what are they due money for? Do you know if the workers getting what they are looking for will cause job loses?

These workers have unions which they have paid dues to to represent them, why can't they sort all this out and if they can't wtf are they being paid for.
It's govts job to see that the legislation that gives the workers their rights is in place but if there is a dispute with a private company then that is a civil matter and shouldn't be up to govt to sort out really.
Political footballing of their situation by opposition politicians who even if in govt would be as helpless to force anything other than seeing that statutory rights are seen to be delivered by them, but unable to force private companies to comply.
A **** storm not of govt making or solving really, but **** talk makes it appear as if its govts fault.
Once they get their state rights that's all any govt can see to.

James Brown · 14-09-2020 10:16pm

Bishop of hope wrote: »

These workers have unions which they have paid dues to to represent them, why can't they sort all this out and if they can't wtf are they being paid for.
It's govts job to see that the legislation that gives the workers their rights is in place but if there is a dispute with a private company then that is a civil matter and shouldn't be up to govt to sort out really.
Political footballing of their situation by opposition politicians who even if in govt would be as helpless to force anything other than seeing that statutory rights are seen to be delivered by them, but unable to force private companies to comply.
A **** storm not of govt making or solving really, but **** talk makes it appear as if its govts fault.
Once they get their state rights that's all any govt can see to.

They didn't bother enacting any recommendations raise from the Cleary's debacle. Now we have a similar scenario. Transferring assets and leaving in the dead of night.
Yes, no need for government to get involved, but if they decided to one would think they'd side with the Irish tax paying worker. LV stuck his oar in to tell porkies. This was an effort to spin the yarn that the workers were looking for money that wasn't there. Odd for a public representative, (maybe not for a FG one) to decide to get involved and 'err' against the workers.
We could call anything political footballing. It doesn't matter. It's about your opinions and which politicians or party support you views. I don't care if a politician is using an issue as long as they work in helping to settle or resolve it. That goes from Housing to Brexit and all in between.
If the recommendations on things like the state being able chase up transferred assets were carried out they might be able to do something.
The workers currently have the right to protest. If they getting nothing further so be it. They've the right to seek it. If Varadkar wants to get involved it should be honestly and for the people who like to get up early of a morning.

dundalkfc10 · 14-09-2020 10:19pm

https://twitter.com/jimfitzpatrick/status/1305559455707340805?s=19

Leo could have had Delaney in charge instead of Martin. He would fit perfectly in with this mafia in charge too

14-09-2020 10:21pm

Bowie wrote: »

They didn't bother enacting any recommendations raise from the Cleary's debacle. Now we have a similar scenario. Transferring assets and leaving in the dead of night.
Yes, no need for government to get involved, but if they decided to one would think they'd side with the Irish tax paying worker. LV stuck his oar in to tell porkies. This was an effort to spin the yarn that the workers were looking for money that wasn't there. Odd for a public representative, (maybe not for a FG one) to decide to get involved and 'err' against the workers.
We could call anything political footballing. It doesn't matter. It's about your opinions and which politicians or party support you views. I don't care if a politician is using an issue as long as they work in helping to settle or resolve it. That goes from Housing to Brexit and all in between.
If the recommendations on things like the state being able chase up transferred assets were carried out they might be able to do something.
The workers currently have the right to protest. If they getting nothing further so be it. they've the right to seek it. If Varadkar wants to get involved it should be honestly and for the people who like to get up early of a morning.

No need for anyone to get involved. The former workers are getting what they’re entitled to. The small number who are demanding more are very few and are ruining the chances of them ever gaining employment again. They really need take stock.
Yes, closing the shop during a pandemic was a bit off, but the business has been in trouble for years. Can’t have been much of a surprise to anyone.

Bishop of hope · 14-09-2020 10:41pm

Bowie wrote: »

They didn't bother enacting any recommendations raise from the Cleary's debacle. Now we have a similar scenario. Transferring assets and leaving in the dead of night.
Yes, no need for government to get involved, but if they decided to one would think they'd side with the Irish tax paying worker. LV stuck his oar in to tell porkies. This was an effort to spin the yarn that the workers were looking for money that wasn't there. Odd for a public representative, (maybe not for a FG one) to decide to get involved and 'err' against the workers.
We could call anything political footballing. It doesn't matter. It's about your opinions and which politicians or party support you views. I don't care if a politician is using an issue as long as they work in helping to settle or resolve it. That goes from Housing to Brexit and all in between.
If the recommendations on things like the state being able chase up transferred assets were carried out they might be able to do something.
The workers currently have the right to protest. If they getting nothing further so be it. They've the right to seek it. If Varadkar wants to get involved it should be honestly and for the people who like to get up early of a morning.

That's just a rant at Leo.
It doesn't change anything.

FF/FG/Green Next Government

Comments