FF vs. FG

Cronus333

Can someone point out a major policy difference between our 2 civil war parties? I mean besides their choice of coalition partners and who is better between Collins and de Valera.

Cronus333

Cronus333 wrote:

who is better between Collins and de Valera.

Ummm, don't think Collins was in either tbh.

One could use you point in many contexts, is there that much between the Democrats and Republicans in the US? Between Labour and the Conservatives in England? I appreciate that the ideology is not a million miles apart - one big difference at the moment is that a vote for FG is a vote to put Labour into Government.

Thomond Pk

Deleted User wrote:

Ummm, don't think Collins was in either tbh.

One could use you point in many contexts, is there that much between the
Democrats and Republicans in the US?

Hmmm FF would definitley not compare favourably with the democrats

Deleted User wrote:

Between Labour and the Conservatives in England?

FF would definitely compare with the Tories a long prolonged period of power which relusted in the collpase of all public services.

Whilst FG sit with Eurpoean Peoples Party FF sit with Berlesconi and the Far Right in Europe they have no influence in the European parliment because they are fundamentally anti-european. Where as FG sit in the second largest block on the parliment who can deliver.

Deleted User wrote:

I appreciate that the ideology is not a million miles apart -one big difference at the moment is that a vote for FG is a vote to put Labour into Government.

The last Labour Finance minister delivered 7% GDP growth and rising, falling unemployment and low inflation. Whilst McCreevy departed with rising unemployment, high inflation and falling growth. Strip out growth in credit fuelled consumer spending and this economy is in trouble. When FG were in government Dell were hiring today they are letting staff go.

Thomond Pk

Thomond Pk wrote:

The last Labour Finance minister delivered 7% GDP growth and rising, falling unemployment and low inflation. Whilst McCreevy departed with rising unemployment, high inflation and falling growth. Strip out growth in credit fuelled consumer spending and this economy is in trouble. When FG were in government Dell were hiring today they are letting staff go.

Come on. Are you honestly saying the economy of the country was better in 1997 than today? Look at the broader picture, not just Dell. What was the rate of unemployment in 1997 compared to today? How many non nationals came to Ireland for work in 1997 and how many are employed here now? I appreciate that the Celtic Tiger wasn't the be all and end all, I could even appreciate the argument that the last non FF Government helped in it's creation, but let's not pretend it didn't happen at all and the country is in a weaker state than it was 8 years ago.

I do take your point that FF and the Democrats don't compare. One has a pretty impressive failure rate at election time, including selecting a vote loser who threw the last election to govern his country away. Ahern is no Kerry anyway.

Thomond Pk

Deleted User wrote:

Come on. Are you honestly saying the economy of the country was better in 1997 than today?

Look at the broader picture, not just Dell. What was the rate of unemployment in 1997 compared to today?

The country is far less attractive FDI destination than 1997 because the government did nothing to control inflation either consumer, producer or services based on failure to invest sufficiently or authoriutively in infrastructure or control property markets.

Deleted User wrote:

How many non nationals came to Ireland for work in 1997 and how many are employed here now?

It was the previous government in 1996 whoi reformed the law to make it easier for Non-nationals to entrer Ireland.

Deleted User wrote:

I appreciate that the Celtic Tiger wasn't the be all and end all, I could even appreciate the argument that the last non FF Government helped in it's creation, but let's not pretend it didn't happen at all and the country is in a weaker state than it was 8 years ago.

Given the constant economic recycling that occurs in the commercial world jobs will always be lost, when you have a cost base as high as Ireland's it is very difficult to attract FDI. Remember companies now have to be super-profitable on an OECD average to break even here.

Deleted User wrote:

I do take your point that FF and the Democrats don't compare. One has a pretty impressive failure rate at election time, including selecting a vote loser who threw the last election to govern his country away. Ahern is no Kerry anyway.

Your right he's got the intellectual ability of George Bush and the popularity of Berlesconi as was written in the leeters page of the examier.

'Has Bertie seen deLoite or is he still out of Touche?'

Thomond Pk

Thomond Pk wrote:

Your right he's got the intellectual ability of George Bush and the popularity of Berlesconi as was written in the leeters page of the examier.

Intellectual snobbery. One could point out that the difference between Ahern and the author is that one leads the country whereas the other whiles his time away by writing letters to the Examiner...

therecklessone

Deleted User wrote:

Intellectual snobbery. One could point out that the difference between Ahern and the author is that one leads the country whereas the other whiles his time away by writing letters to the Examiner...

Or one could point out that if this is what represents political debate in this country then its no wonder the general public is so disillusioned with politics.

Deleted User wrote:

one big difference at the moment is that a vote for FG is a vote to put Labour into Government.

If thats the approach FF will take to the next general election then it appears they'd have more in common with Republican-style negative campaigning.

Would you like me to point out the last time FG (or their predecessors) held power without Labour support?

therecklessone

therecklessone wrote:

Or one could point out that if this is what represents political debate in this country then its no wonder the general public is so disillusioned with politics.

It was meant to be a response to a specific point. You cannot expect a stimulating political debate to be based on whether one letter writer to the Examiner feels Bertie has a high IQ or not. I just felt such a discourse said more about the letter writer than Bertie.

Thomond Pk

therecklessone wrote:

Or one could point out that if this is what represents political debate in this country then its no wonder the general public is so disillusioned with politics.

Very well put it is that level of arrogance that has them where they are in the polls and got them the results they got in both the local elections and the past two by-elections. Letter writers vote as do their friends they tend to be the type that influence opinion in the pubs and clubs of the Country. When you stop listening your days are numbered;

Thomond Pk

Deleted User wrote:

It was meant to be a response to a specific point. You cannot expect a stimulating political debate to be based on whether one letter writer to the Examiner feels Bertie has a high IQ or not. I just felt such a discourse said more about the letter writer than Bertie.

It did it proved he had a sense of humour unlike Bertie 'who knows where people live'

Do you never get tired of defending FF Conor?

therecklessone

Deleted User wrote:

It was meant to be a response to a specific point. You cannot expect a stimulating political debate to be based on whether one letter writer to the Examiner feels Bertie has a high IQ or not. I just felt such a discourse said more about the letter writer than Bertie.

No, but as a general indication of the thrust of most of the "debate" in Irish politics its pretty telling. And its not limited to this thread either.

The OP asked a valid question, yet pretty quickly the thread descends into a tit-for-tat that resembles, surprise surprise, post Civil War politics!!! :rolleyes:

I've seen you trot out the "a vote for FG is a vote for Labour" line a few times now. Is that the FF street team mantra?

Thomond Pk

Thomond Pk wrote:

Letter writers vote as do their friends they tend to be the type that influence opinion in the pubs and clubs of the Country.

Can you prove that the guy who wrote a letter with the arrogance to question someone else's intellectual ability (i) has friends and (ii) goes to pubs?

therecklessone

therecklessone wrote:

The OP asked a valid question, yet pretty quickly the thread descends into a tit-for-tat that resembles, surprise surprise, post Civil War politics!!!

The thread is entitled 'FF v FG'. Are you actually surprised with how it has developed? I would suggest that it was never going to do anything else but descend, particularly once people sought fit to question intelligence. It was certainly never going to ascend into pure political discourse.

Thomond Pk

Conor the guy who wrote the letter has a wicked sense of southern humour it was only one line long.

Are you really suggesting that Bertie is regarded as even an intellectual middle-weight?

therecklessone

Deleted User wrote:

The thread is entitled 'FF v FG'. Are you actually surprised with how it has developed? I would suggest that it was never going to do anything else but descend, particularly once people sought fit to question intelligence. It was certainly never going to ascend into pure political discourse.

Thus is exposed the fatal flaw of Irish politics, the inability to think inside the box, let alone outside...

Thomond Pk

Thomond Pk wrote:

Are you really suggesting that Bertie is regarded as even an intellectual middle-weight?

I haven't made that argument either. I just don't think it's something you or I can judge. But if we are going for character assasination, I would suspect he might have more 'up there' than a party leader who thought it was appropriate to tell a racist joke...to members of the media...:eek:

Thomond Pk

What was said in a pub amongst private friends has nothing to do with his ability to run this country. At least he doesn't have anyone on his ministerial team who was stupid enough to do it on the floor of Dail on the public record fully aware that a stenographer was recording everything and that it would show up on a Google search.

geraghd

Whats different about FG and FF? Well FG are Christian Democrats and so stand for such beliefs with respective core values. FF are.. well... em... what do FF stand for??..

netwhizkid

geraghd wrote:

what do FF stand for??..

Fat fools, Fianna Failure, Fianna Fall, :- Fall hopefully, Fianna fail are committed to ruining this country through capitalism and want it to be every man for himself ala USA, where you have to pay for everything health, education, etc. And that all these things should be provided by private enterprise. They will ruin this country if reelected and if they are i am immigrating out. the PDs and the same except they border of Nazism and won't be happy until every thing you do is a crime and they would love to curtail all civil liberties. Oh and for Michael Collins he was a great leader and true Irish Hero, as for De Valera, he was a tramp and his body should be buried in a landfill, he forced Collins to go to London knowing he would only get the 26 counties. Then the low ba*tard had Collins shot during the civil War in Dunmanway not beal na blath as propaganda tells. Which De Valera started incidentally the civil war that is. Fianna Fail tend to see him as a hero and along with CJ Haughey they were the worst men in Irish politics of the 20th century. Dev presided over years of poverty and of course the economic war with britain which brought the country to its knees, They presided over massive clerical abuse IE, Catholic Pervert priests and done nothing about it. They declared in 1959 that Ireland was too poor to have a lavish transport system as a Railway and commenced to obliterate nearly every rural branch line which was the heart of commerce and the only link to the outside world. They then left the country with roads not fit for donkeys. FF need i say more, they should be tried for high treason. Whatever bungling FG/Labour did last time round it was minimal compared to the disgrace of a job these low life have done.

netwhizkid

netwhizkid wrote:

Oh and for Michael Collins he was a great leader and true Irish Hero, as for De Valera, he was a tramp and his body should be buried in a landfill, he forced Collins to go to London knowing he would only get the 26 counties. Then the low ba*tard had Collins shot during the civil War in Dunmanway not beal na blath as propaganda tells. Which De Valera started incidentally the civil war that is.

My my my, that's a very angry post. I can only presume you are going out of your way to be offensive, and that is not your standard response to any question regarding the civil war.

I think the original poster asked if there was any difference between the two save the Civil War, and clearly you feel the best reponse is to fight the Civil War all over again. I won't be falling for WUMmery anyway, I just wonder will anyone else take the bait. If you had been a little less violent with the language, and a little more subtle, your ruse may have worked.

Incidentally, I note you're from Kerry - a county where a majority of TDs voted against the Treaty...

Time Magazine

Christ netwhizkid. I'm nowhere near a Fianna Fáil voter, but Christ a lot of what you said there also runs anathema to Fine Gael ideals (and also common sense and historical fact...).

netwhizkid wrote:

Fianna fail are committed to ruining this country through capitalism

Would you like to suggest an alternative to capitalism? Seriously like. Tell me why socialism, which impoverished all to whom it enwrappede, would work here?

and want it to be every man for himself ala USA, where you have to pay for everything health, education, etc.

Aside from that being a lie, believe it or not health and education have to be paid for in one way or another? Why pay for them with taxes that burden everyone like VAT? Why not get the people who use them to pay for themselves? Well if they can't afford it, those earning over €30,000 pay 42% tax - there is already re-distribution for those who can't afford things.

Here's a notion for you. As a utilitarian who still has student-social concerns; I suggest the best way to provide for the poorest is by enriching the economy and taxing fairly. So basically that means provide for growth with low taxes and yet provide for equity with high revenues. If you wish to criticise Fianna Fáil, I suggest you point to the relative poverty rate and waste. An absolutely essential element to my utilitarian views is that there is no waste and that everything is optimised; and that means getting the individual to pay for things that they can pay for.

And that all these things should be provided by private enterprise. They will ruin this country if reelected and if they are i am immigrating out.

Where would you go? America? Britain? Cuba?

the PDs and the same except they border of Nazism and won't be happy until every thing you do is a crime and they would love to curtail all civil liberties.

The PD's are libertarians, they want a small state and an even smaller police force. And do you not advocate a strong state if you're so against privatising state services?

Oh and for Michael Collins he was a great leader and true Irish Hero, as for De Valera, he was a tramp and his body should be buried in a landfill, he forced Collins to go to London knowing he would only get the 26 counties. Then the low ba*tard had Collins shot during the civil War in Dunmanway not beal na blath as propaganda tells.

Would you like to back this up? I'm sure my colleagues in the Collins 22 Society would like to hear your argument.

Which De Valera started incidentally the civil war that is. Fianna Fail tend to see him as a hero and along with CJ Haughey they were the worst men in Irish politics of the 20th century.

I'd tend to agree with you there in fairness, but:

Dev presided over years of poverty and of course the economic war with britain which brought the country to its knees,

And Irish ports out of the Crown's control.

They presided over massive clerical abuse IE, Catholic Pervert priests and done nothing about it.

They knew about it?

They declared in 1959 that Ireland was too poor to have a lavish transport system

They were right. Had the spent that money there would have been no money for education or health or something else.

commenced to obliterate nearly every rural branch line which was the heart of commerce and the only link to the outside world.

Except for roads, and isn't Ireland fairly affluent now? You yearn for the greatness of big business, but bemoan capitalist systems?

They then left the country with roads not fit for donkeys.

Well, just about fit for donkeys. But how would you have paid for roads?

FF need i say more, they should be tried for high treason.

Or at least refusing to accept a double democratic mandate during the Civil War.

Whatever bungling FG/Labour did last time round it was minimal compared to the disgrace of a job these low life have done.

I agree with that sentiment, but I wouldn't say FG/Labour bungled anything in their last term.

lazydaisy

The OP was a good and valid question. Can someone please start talking about policy?

Let's list some categories:

Foreign policy.
Economic policy.
Social policy.
Environmental policy.
Human rights policy.
Individual rights & freedoms.
Role of state control and leadership.
Immigration policy.
Church and state policy.

Please add to any I have left out. And can we not turn this into a catfight please gentlemen?:)

sceptre

Angry Banana wrote:

Would you like to suggest an alternative to capitalism? Seriously like. Tell me why socialism, which impoverished all to whom it enwrappede, would work here?

I'd really prefer to see that answer in a different thread. Or something. I'll happily embrace a "why communism really works on a grand scale and why markups in grocery stores are the devil's playthings" thread or a "the underpants gnomes were right - rip off all you can and charge your granny top whack to get her knickers back" thread as long as such threads have some coherency.

lazydaisy wrote:

And can we not turn this into a catfight please gentlemen?:)

Pfft, that's my line:)

Lazydaisy's got a fine list there for any contributors to be commenting on. Anyone who doesn't bother commenting on items within that list or valid additions is wasting their time, my time, your time and a few brain cells that may be next to working ones.

bonkey

sceptre wrote:

I'd really prefer to see that answer in a different thread.

In fairness, surely its the question that doesn't belong here in the first place.

NWK suggested that FF are ruining the country by capitalism. AB's return question was what alternative do we have to capitalism.

Alternative in which sense?
As a means to ruin the country? (This would be the only interpretation I can see which is relevant to the original comment.)

When it comes to the country being ruined, personally, I don't see the choice methodology as important at all.

I don't see how it would be better or worse to have a party committed to ruination through socialism compared to a party committed to ruination through capitalism.

Of course, the suggestion that FF is committed to the ruination of the country is farcical in the first place. It suggests that their failures have not been due to incompetence, but rather have been deliberately engineered.

jc

lazydaisy

lazydaisy wrote:

Please add to any I have left out.

The North of Ireland - let's not lump it in with foreign policy, or that'll open another can of worms!!

Time Magazine

bonkey wrote:

In fairness, surely its the question that doesn't belong here in the first place.

Bonkey, sceptre, sorry lads it was half in-jest. He said capitalism, and capitalism in itself, was ruining the country to which I (too subtly, sorry) pointed out that there's no* real viable alternative and that capitalism is the best way of providing for the poor. Now back on topic folks!

*Don't be pedantic . Or at least do it another thread.

lazydaisy

Since you guys are bantering about capitalism would one of you care to offer an unopinionated decription of the ECONOMIC POLICY of FG and FF? And leave whether it works or doesnt for another time or what you think of it for another time? Please dont say one is communist and the other laissez faire capitalist because some people do not know what they are - even people who use the terms. Please be specific about:

And if you're talking about the rich and the poor please let us know who you consider to be rich and poor - as in income levels and property ownership.

Taxes [income, sales, luxury,on cars, petrol, plastic bags,etc]
Business tax/small busness tax
Small business incentives
Inflation
Immigration & Labour
Competition and anti-monopoly law
state subsidisation
semi-state ownership of companies
Import/Export policy
Relationship with unions
Minumum wage
Distribution of wealth [not only among rich and poor but also rural/urban]
Productivity
Standard of living
Pensions

Again - please feel free to add. And please will someone start to answer the OP.

sceptre

bonkey wrote:

In fairness, surely its the question that doesn't belong here in the first place.

Indeed and it is. I can't blame AB for replying and that's what I was getting to with the nasties. I could have upped the clarity and dropped the humour.