Ireland to contribute €16 billion more than it receives to EU in next 7 years

View

mick087 wrote: »

Self-determination and democracy and then more democarcy and then even more democarcy especially with the ability for the
citizens to remove people from office, this is such an important consideration in determining the democratic health of a country.
The EU democratic health is not in a good way.

My Generation vote was an idea a starting point to build on. Yes its bold yes its controversial yes a massive thing to take on. But it gets the EU talking it get the Citizens talking. We could easily do this when voting for MEPS. A seperate ballot sheet asking do we wish to remain in the EU or not.

But no knock the idea down before it starts. No change required all is well we know whats best for you attitude continues.


The EU needs to change or states within the EU will fall under dictatorships, there are some very nasty groups getting bigger with in the EU.

Out of curiosity, given that we never had a referendum to establish whether the people wanted us to be independent in the first place, much less held one to reconfirm that we were/are every subsequent decade or so, do you regard it as “undemocratic” that we are not still a constituent past of the U.K.?

fly_agaric

Bambi wrote: »

Did I say that any of my posts were milquetoast criticisms of the EU? No, I said that any criticism of the EU, even the most milquetoast, is responded to with a strange level of invective from some parties around here. Thats a fair comment

Fair enough. I don't see very much milquetoast criticism on here, generally it is angry wailing representing a very out there, one might say strange position in Irish politics but a common view on here. OPs EU-damning image/screenshot was being posted about twitter by Irexit party and the like.

Bambi wrote: »

I don't think that the EU were responsible for the bank guarantee, the level of the debt and the level of austerity that followed, its just a matter of record.

The Finance Minister at the time stated that the ECB forced the bank guarantee. The next Finance Minister stated that the ECB made a similar threat to ensure no senior bondholders were burned a few years later, The banking inquiry also found that the ECB made an explicit threat to ensure the Irish government did not burn any bondholders.

A former deputy director IMF stated that the EU imposed a level of debt and austerity on Ireland that it felt was entirely excessive and that the ECB acted solely in the EU's interests.

So yeah, I don't "think" anything in that regards, I dont have to, the facts are there.

Was going to mention our own bank guarantee unilateral decision that put us on the hook for Anglo Irish Bank and speculative borrowings (lumped in with debts of our 'too big to fail' pillar banks) but was beaten to it.
The "treatment" of it by the Troika can be argued but underlying cause of the economic disaster was the mismanagement by the Irish state (the economic policies & regulation of the banks) and the greed and stupidity of the Irish private sector (bank and construction/land/property development industry behaviour). It is a long time ago and not so sharp in my memory now I admit.

coolshannagh28

View wrote: »

Actually the vast majority of the debt we borrowed was used to fund our expenditure on public services. Our government went to great lengths to ensure that the monies borrowed were not used for the banks.

An accurate but unpopular opinion.

Dyr

View wrote: »

Our Finance Minister at the time introduced the bank guarantee and subsequently presented it to the ECB as a fait accompli. He, like his successor, had a vested political interest in misrepresenting what happened.

How do you know he misrepresented what happened? Of course, you dont know, you just choose to believe Trichets version of events.

You can believe Trichet or you can believe Lenihan, McSharry and Ryan.

And then 2 years later, you can also believe Trichets version of events or Noonans, who also claimed that Trichet leaned on him and he leaned Trichet leaned on his predecessor in the same manner. You can believe, like the Banking inquiry did, along with the ECBs letters and Noonans testimony that Trichet leaned on Noonan in the same way Lenihan claimed he was leaned on

You can believe Trichets version of events or Ajai Chopras.

At some point, you'll have to admit that you keep believing Trichet on his word alone over a lot of other people.

micosoft

mick087 wrote: »

Self-determination and democracy and then more democarcy and then even more democarcy especially with the ability for the
citizens to remove people from office, this is such an important consideration in determining the democratic health of a country.
The EU democratic health is not in a good way.

My Generation vote was an idea a starting point to build on. Yes its bold yes its controversial yes a massive thing to take on. But it gets the EU talking it get the Citizens talking. We could easily do this when voting for MEPS. A seperate ballot sheet asking do we wish to remain in the EU or not.

But no knock the idea down before it starts. No change required all is well we know whats best for you attitude continues.


The EU needs to change or states within the EU will fall under dictatorships, there are some very nasty groups getting bigger with in the EU.

It isn't a starting point, bold, or even controversial. To be frank it's an asinine idea that the slightest level of thinking would allow it to be rejected out of hand.

- Should the American people get asked every election if they should dissolve the Union?
- Should British people get asked every election if they should dissolve the union?
- Should any club - Golf Club, Embroidary Club, Snooker club etc have an AGM that asks to dissolve itself.

If this silly idea was to happen the other members of the EU would rightfully ask us just to leave.

The bigger issue here is that you have falsely defined Democracy as something it is not. In fact your ideas are deeply undemocratic and at best seem designed to undermine democratic institutions but forcibly destabilising them. There is a reason that referendums are banned in German. It's to protect Democracy.

There are plenty of opportunities to reform the EU. You should look at them rather than using the only tool you think is out there - an in-out referendum.

micosoft

Bambi wrote: »

How do you know he misrepresented what happened? Of course, you dont know, you just choose to believe Trichets version of events.

You can believe Trichet or you can believe Lenihan, McSharry and Ryan.

And then 2 years later, you can also believe Trichets version of events or Noonans, who also claimed that Trichet leaned on him and he leaned Trichet leaned on his predecessor in the same manner. You can believe, like the Banking inquiry did, along with the ECBs letters and Noonans testimony that Trichet leaned on Noonan in the same way Lenihan claimed he was leaned on

You can believe Trichets version of events or Ajai Chopras.

At some point, you'll have to admit that you keep believing Trichet on his word alone over a lot of other people.

So this can go around in circles but at the end of the day, the Irish electorate voted in Bertie Ahern and Mcreevy not once, not twice but three times to blow up the economy when the dogs in the street knew it could not last. FG tried a fiscally restrained campaign in 2002 and were badly punished for it. So everyone went all in in 2007 - gold houses and rocket cars for all. This is all on the record.

The fact of the matter is that we, the electorate, got ourselves into a position where we lost control of our country. Blaming a foreign bogeyman is much easier than accepting that the electorate democratically created a scenario where other people had to tell us how to run our country.

Dyr

micosoft wrote: »

So this can go around in circles but at the end of the day, the Irish electorate voted in Bertie Ahern and Mcreevy not once, not twice but three times to blow up the economy when the dogs in the street knew it could not last. FG tried a fiscally restrained campaign in 2002 and were badly punished for it. So everyone went all in in 2007 - gold houses and rocket cars for all. This is all on the record.

The fact of the matter is that we, the electorate, got ourselves into a position where we lost control of our country. Blaming a foreign bogeyman is much easier than accepting that the electorate democratically created a scenario where other people had to tell us how to run our country.

Like I said earlier, you can accept that we ate the pill at the EUs insistence or say "we all partied" and try to move swiftly on. We managed to take out the world economy at the same time, that was quite the party Bertie threw.

First Up

micosoft wrote:

The fact of the matter is that we, the electorate, got ourselves into a position where we lost control of our country. Blaming a foreign bogeyman is much easier than accepting that the electorate democratically created a scenario where other people had to tell us how to run our country.

We are lucky that the foreign bogeyman spelled out what would happen if the Irish government "burned the bondholders" as the dunces in SF (and on Boards) demanded.

Dyr

First Up wrote: »

We are lucky that the foreign bogeyman spelled out what would happen if the Irish government "burned the bondholders" as the dunces in SF (and on Boards) demanded.

And as FG and Labour were going to do before Trichet threatened Noonan? Not to mention those Icelandic dunces who tanked their economy for a generation by telling bank creditors to take a hike...oh wait


We all partied, us feckless Irish sor

First Up

Bambi wrote:

And as FG and Labour were going to do before Trichet threatened Noonan? Not to mention those Icelandic dunces who tanked their economy for a generation by telling bank creditors to take a hike...oh wait

You think we should have followed Iceland?

Ever been to Iceland?

View

Bambi wrote: »

How do you know he misrepresented what happened? Of course, you dont know, you just choose to believe Trichets version of events.

You can believe Trichet or you can believe Lenihan, McSharry and Ryan.

And then 2 years later, you can also believe Trichets version of events or Noonans, who also claimed that Trichet leaned on him and he leaned Trichet leaned on his predecessor in the same manner. You can believe, like the Banking inquiry did, along with the ECBs letters and Noonans testimony that Trichet leaned on Noonan in the same way Lenihan claimed he was leaned on

You can believe Trichets version of events or Ajai Chopras.

At some point, you'll have to admit that you keep believing Trichet on his word alone over a lot of other people.

I know because the bank guarantee was hailed as the most cunning of all cunning plans by our government when it was first introduced here. It was a unilateral measure introduced by our government which had spent the previous decade claiming we were more “Boston than Berlin”, a claim that rapidly got dropped once it became apparent that “Boston” wasn’t going to loan us a nickel.

Dyr

First Up wrote: »

You think we should have followed Iceland?

Ever been to Iceland?

Do you now accept that both FG and Labour were among the dunces who were going to burn the bondholders?

First Up

Bambi wrote:

Do you now accept that both FG and Labour were among the dunces who were going to burn the bondholders?

No I do not. All options were quite rightly explored but that government was always going to take a responsible decision, unlike those who were waving Greek flags and cheering them over a cliff.

fly_agaric

Bambi wrote: »

Like I said earlier, you can accept that we ate the pill at the EUs insistence or say "we all partied" and try to move swiftly on. We managed to take out the world economy at the same time, that was quite the party Bertie threw.

As said, its all hazy now but funny the bit at the end blaming "the world economy" was Berties (FFs) line on the whole thing. Those Lehman Brudders did us in!
No, you're very right not "everyone" partied but there were some big parties going on here.

If we hadn't had a very simple + almost entirely home grown bank crisis here (no fancy derivatives etc. just banks dishing out unsustainable amounts of money for properties/development) we probably could have weathered the global crash instead of destroying the country & needing a bailout from the Troika.

micosoft

mick087 wrote: »

Not a quetion of me me getting my way Graham, it was the fact that the treaty was rejected and within 48 hours we was told to Vote again.
Do you think that was fair and democratic?

Thats simply not true.

What actually happened is that we went back to our peers in the EU who asked us what our concerns were. The listened and they addressed them with a number of changes to the treaty to address our concerns. This took place over a number of months.

mick087 wrote: »

Is democracy never in my lifetime to have an opportunity of voting to remain or leave the EU?

If the rest of the country disagrees with having that referendum. Yes. That literally is the definition of democracy.

micosoft

Bambi wrote: »

Like I said earlier, you can accept that we ate the pill at the EUs insistence or say "we all partied" and try to move swiftly on. We managed to take out the world economy at the same time, that was quite the party Bertie threw.

I don't recall Germany or France or Belgium or Sweden or in fact the majority of other countries needing the Troika come in to run the country. Funny how that only happened to grossly mismanaged economies who lost the choice on whether to take their medicine and eat the pill or not. It's a hard lesson to learn but with your democratic vote comes accountability.

micosoft

Bambi wrote: »

And as FG and Labour were going to do before Trichet threatened Noonan? Not to mention those Icelandic dunces who tanked their economy for a generation by telling bank creditors to take a hike...oh wait


We all partied, us feckless Irish sor

Comparing Ireland to Iceland isn't an especially useful exercise given the fundamental difference in our economies but let's play with it...

In pretty much every indicator Ireland is doing as good if not better than Iceland since 2008 such as GNI. Iceland is not a land of milk and honey and has had to go back to a fisheries and tourism dependent economy. I know a number of Icelanders who had to deal with capital controls for a full decade.

It is possible for Icelands solution to have been right for Iceland and Irelands right for Ireland and looking back from 2020 the consensus is that we took the right decision.

Again. Can you show what party stood in 2007 on a platform of deflating the bubble with counter cyclical policies. A common thread on boards seem to be demanding democratic rights but rejecting any accountability.

mick087

micosoft wrote: »

Thats simply not true.

What actually happened is that we went back to our peers in the EU who asked us what our concerns were. The listened and they addressed them with a number of changes to the treaty to address our concerns. This took place over a number of months.


If the rest of the country disagrees with having that referendum. Yes. That literally is the definition of democracy.

The first Lisbon referendum the Irish people rejected this.
Yes we went to our peers in the EU.The EU told us
The No vote in the referendum was blocking the treaty coming into play in the EU.
What Conversation then happened between the EU and Ireland for us to have the second Lisbon referendum ?
The text of the Lisbon was changed correct.
Why the first referendum was ignored was never really answered.

No i don't think we should have referendum on remaining in the EU at the moment there is not need to because at this point in time the majority wish to remain.

ohnonotgmail

mick087 wrote: »

Not a quetion of me me getting my way Graham, it was the fact that the treaty was rejected and within 48 hours we was told to Vote again.
Do you think that was fair and democratic?

Is democracy never in my lifetime to have an opportunity of voting to remain or leave the EU?

mick087 wrote: »

The first Lisbon referendum the Irish people rejected this.
Yes we went to our peers in the EU.The EU told us
The No vote in the referendum was blocking the treaty coming into play in the EU.
What Conversation then happened between the EU and Ireland for us to have the second Lisbon referendum ?
The text of the Lisbon was changed correct.
Why the first referendum was ignored was never really answered.

No i don't think we should have referendum on remaining in the EU at the moment there is not need to because at this point in time the majority wish to remain.

so your original post was completely incorrect.

VinLieger

mick087 wrote: »

Why the first referendum was ignored was never really answered.

But it wasn't ignored because they asked us what the problems were, changed things accordingly and we had a 2nd referendum with those changes in place....

You even acknowledged this happened in your post?

mick087 wrote: »

No i don't think we should have referendum on remaining in the EU at the moment there is not need to because at this point in time the majority wish to remain.

But you also think we should have one regardless of public opinion every 25 years..... because?

Do you even read what you write? You are constantly contradicting yourself.

Also can you please answer the question i have asked several times now why we should have a referendum about the EU every 25 years but not one on every prior referendum result we have done since the founding of the state?

mick087

micosoft wrote: »

It isn't a starting point, bold, or even controversial. To be frank it's an asinine idea that the slightest level of thinking would allow it to be rejected out of hand.

- Should the American people get asked every election if they should dissolve the Union?
I would leave this up to the Americans to decide.

- Should British people get asked every election if they should dissolve the union?
Again this is up to the UK to decide.

- Should any club - Golf Club, Embroidary Club, Snooker club etc have an AGM that asks to dissolve itself.
If this silly idea was to happen the other members of the EU would rightfully ask us just to leave.
Maybe it is a silly idea but that's all it was an idea a thought as i clearly stated at the time. Change must come if it don't come then the EU will not survive.

The bigger issue here is that you have falsely defined Democracy as something it is not. In fact your ideas are deeply undemocratic and at best seem designed to undermine democratic institutions but forcibly destabilising them. There is a reason that referendums are banned in German. It's to protect Democracy.
Your idea and my idea of Democracy is differernt yes
Yes id did know that about Germany i find it quite a frighting.

There are plenty of opportunities to reform the EU. You should look at them rather than using the only tool you think is out there - an in-out referendum.
Would you not be in favour of some sort change in the EU then? If you do what are these reforms and how could they be achieved? Or would you be happy with status quo.

micosoft

Duplicate

micosoft

mick087 wrote: »

- Should the American people get asked every election if they should dissolve the Union?
I would leave this up to the Americans to decide.

Agreed. The people of Ireland have decided in every election not to put forward a Brexit party to call a referendum.

mick087 wrote: »

- Should British people get asked every election if they should dissolve the union?
Again this is up to the UK to decide.

Again, agreed. The people of Ireland have decided in every election not to put forward a Brexit party to call a referendum.

mick087 wrote: »

- Should any club - Golf Club, Embroidary Club, Snooker club etc have an AGM that asks to dissolve itself.
If this silly idea was to happen the other members of the EU would rightfully ask us just to leave.
Maybe it is a silly idea but that's all it was an idea a thought as i clearly stated at the time. Change must come if it don't come then the EU will not survive.

In a debate it's typically good form to have some thought put into any "ideas" put forward. Peoples lives can be destroyed by badly thought out ideas as many English Fishermen are discovering.

Change is constantly happening in the EU through the various democratic institutions of the EU. Just last week the democratically elected Heads of State of all the EU members agreed after a robust discussion to create a massive fund to aid recovery in Europe. This will now be signed off by the European Parliament which you had the privilege of voting for an MEP in.

mick087 wrote: »

The bigger issue here is that you have falsely defined Democracy as something it is not. In fact your ideas are deeply undemocratic and at best seem designed to undermine democratic institutions but forcibly destabilising them. There is a reason that referendums are banned in German. It's to protect Democracy.
Your idea and my idea of Democracy is differernt yes
Yes id did know that about Germany i find it quite a frighting.

So if you know that referendums were used by the Nazi's in Germany to extinguish democracy why do you propose them? You are massively conflicted in your views.

mick087 wrote: »

There are plenty of opportunities to reform the EU. You should look at them rather than using the only tool you think is out there - an in-out referendum.
Would you not be in favour of some sort change in the EU then? If you do what are these reforms and how could they be achieved? Or would you be happy with status quo.

The EU is constantly changing and evolving. No status quo being held and frankly arguing we need referendums because we don't like the changes in the EU and then arguing the EU never changes are contradictory.

Improvements have occurred like MEP's having the opportunity to sit under pan EU parties and not just their national party. So you see Fianna Gael MEP's under European Peoples Party and the Greens under the European Green Party. You will have seen the logos on the candidate posters in the last election. And you can now see those parties manifestos for Europe online.

There is believe it or not a range of options between your "blow everything to smithereens if it is not perfect and to my liking" and "status quo with no change". This is normal in a democracy - slow and steady change at the limit

In any case...

- Personally I would like a European Constitution but that was voted down by the electorate so I accept the hodge0podge we are left with. Not ideal but not unworkable.

- I'd also like Ireland to give up it's (fake) neutrality and militarily align with our friends and fellow democracies in the EU so that we can balance against the hard strength of Russia, China and eliminate our dependence on the US.

I accept the majority don't want this at this time so won't happen. That's democracy. But I'm not demanding an In-Out referendum because of it either.

View

To my mind, it has always appeared that many of the people clamouring for referenda on the EU are doing so purely in order to undermine (parliamentary) democracy and overturn the referenda on membership that they lost. That was certainly the case in the U.K. where Brexiters were all in favour of another membership referendum until they won, but have been completely hostile to one since then.

In our case, the entire referendum process has proven ill-suited and cumbersome resulting in the government continually trying to constitutionallly “bullet proof” the Treaties by continually amending the constitution even though in the Crotty judgement the Supreme Court specially rejected the idea that every new EU treaty required a referendum.

McGiver

micosoft wrote:

- I'd also like Ireland to give up it's (fake) neutrality and militarily align with the EU so that we can balance against the hard strength of Russia, China and eliminate our dependence on the US.

Applause.

You can hardly be neutral when you:
A) outsource the defence of your airspace to a foreign (and now increasingly belligerent) power (UK)
you have practically toothless army
C) you are hosting a military base of a foreign power (US)

Insisting on neutrality status in this situation is laughable and hypocritical.

See Switzerland how neutrality is done in real life.

mick087

micosoft wrote: »

Agreed. The people of Ireland have decided in every election not to put forward a Brexit party to call a referendum.

Again, agreed. The people of Ireland have decided in every election not to put forward a Brexit party to call a referendum.


In a debate it's typically good form to have some thought put into any "ideas" put forward. Peoples lives can be destroyed by badly thought out ideas as many English Fishermen are discovering.

Change is constantly happening in the EU through the various democratic institutions of the EU. Just last week the democratically elected Heads of State of all the EU members agreed after a robust discussion to create a massive fund to aid recovery in Europe. This will now be signed off by the European Parliament which you had the privilege of voting for an MEP in.


So if you know that referendums were used by the Nazi's in Germany to extinguish democracy why do you propose them? You are massively conflicted in your views.



The EU is constantly changing and evolving. No status quo being held and frankly arguing we need referendums because we don't like the changes in the EU and then arguing the EU never changes are contradictory.

Improvements have occurred like MEP's having the opportunity to sit under pan EU parties and not just their national party. So you see Fianna Gael MEP's under European Peoples Party and the Greens under the European Green Party. You will have seen the logos on the candidate posters in the last election. And you can now see those parties manifestos for Europe online.

There is believe it or not a range of options between your "blow everything to smithereens if it is not perfect and to my liking" and "status quo with no change". This is normal in a democracy - slow and steady change at the limit

In any case...

- Personally I would like a European Constitution but that was voted down by the electorate so I accept the hodge0podge we are left with. Not ideal but not unworkable.

- I'd also like Ireland to give up it's (fake) neutrality and militarily align with the EU so that we can balance against the hard strength of Russia, China and eliminate our dependence on the US.

I accept the majority don't want this at this time so won't happen. That's democracy. But I'm not demanding an In-Out referendum because of it either.

All what you state here is pointing to you wanting a Untied states of Europe.
You are never going to achieve this not only is there inequality in each state there is inequality between states to.

Germany have never voted on a referendum be it joining the EU or common market.

In Germany the right is once again on the rise because concerns the people have are not being listened to.

Yes i agree our neutrality is fake and we should be doing more to make sure our neutrality is real.

Its all good and well saying we should align more when it comes to the militarily. Are you going to sign up to join a European EU army, will you want your kids to join a European EU army.

mick087

VinLieger wrote: »

But it wasn't ignored because they asked us what the problems were, changed things accordingly and we had a 2nd referendum with those changes in place....

You even acknowledged this happened in your post?



But you also think we should have one regardless of public opinion every 25 years..... because?

Do you even read what you write? You are constantly contradicting yourself.

Also can you please answer the question i have asked several times now why we should have a referendum about the EU every 25 years but not one on every prior referendum result we have done since the founding of the state?

I said it was an idea that is what said an example something to think about.

No i don't think it would a good idea to vote on every referendum result we have done since the founding of the state.

Graham

mick087 wrote: »

No i don't think it would a good idea to vote on every referendum result we have done since the founding of the state.

Just the ones where you were unhappy with the outcome?

Sounds democratic. :pac:

mick087

Graham wrote: »

Just the ones where you were unhappy with the outcome?

:pac::pac: of course :pac::pac:

First Up

37 referendums have taken place in Ireland, all to make changes to the Constitution. No referendum has ever been held about anything else.