Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Sinn Fein and how do they form a government dilemma

Options
13637394142216

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 68,972 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Whatever.

    Funny you get shy when challenged. You just ignore challenges to your proclamations. Like these for instance where I addressed your 'questions':

    I asked you to re-ask your question, you haven't as yet


    You say no bullying happens, I provide multiple reports it does, you ignore those. No I haven't

    You say nobody was expelled for bullying, I provide reports that multiple people have been, you ignore those. I questioned your use of 'loads' expelled and reminded you that all parties expel members

    You demand I answer your questions, yet ignore any put to you. I asked you to re-ask your question, you haven't as yet

    You gaslight every piece of evidence put to you. Allegations are NOT evidence, I have reminded you no court or tribunal have found anyone guilty of bullying to the extent alleged. Pretending allegations are evidence would be closer to 'gaslighting' tbh.

    I gave you reports of approx 25 people involved in bullying, harassment and psychological warfare within SF, with multiple accounts from former SF members, you ignore it all. No I don't. What you are ;giving' are allegations made by former members of the party who may or may not have agendas. None of these allegations are accompanied by any evidence.


    I have asked for that evidence. You have not provided any. Again an allegation is NOT evidence, if it was imagine the round up of the guilty we would have to do across the political spectrum.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,288 ✭✭✭twinytwo


    We all know you are SF till you die, but have you even read their last election manifesto? Their math does not math. Should they get into power (potentially with some weird leftist consortium - imagine Paul Murphy or RBB with even a sniff of power)- one of 2 things will happen. 1. They ride the exchequer until the arse falls out of it and do not make it to the next election or 2. They talked their way in government, dont do anything they are screaming from the rafters about, hang around long enough to get those ministerial pension entitlements and get booted out the next election.



  • Registered Users Posts: 68,972 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    How many manifestos have been met in governments since the foundation of the state would you say?

    I expect SF to meet as many as previous governments and to run the state.

    If they are just the same as FG FF then they will not get a vote from me next time out.

    Nobody is assured of my vote in other words.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,480 ✭✭✭Clo-Clo


    Sinn Fein as we have seen is all noise. Once you start to question them on how it will work it falls to pieces. Once you get past the faux outrage show by Pearse on every topic you end up with nothing. I thought the guy was a good TD but honestly he has dropped down the ranks very quickly.

    Of course some people lap up the faux outrage, the ripping of his mask off to show how outraged he is etc. Not me. The alternative budgets that have come out would be an embarrassment to any other finance Minister. The huge deal they made about taxing everyone over 140k to pay for all the gret work they would do, then a few months later it was 100k. Today? well who knows. That's a 28% error. Unbelievable. Nobody can excuse such a huge error and once that happened Pearse should have been moved out of Finance for Sinn Fein but sure who else do you put in?



  • Registered Users Posts: 68,972 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Do you know why FF FG and the Greens have not made the retirement age 67 if we have a ticking timebomb?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 18,002 ✭✭✭✭VinLieger


    For the same reason SF arent doing it, they are all terrified of the grey vote and having to explain properly to the country that the pension system as it currently works will be unfundable by 2040 without HUGE income tax increases.

    You can disagree all you want but the facts are we are at 4:1 workers to retireees now and will be at 2:1 by 2050. Far too many people are still 100% reliant on the state pension and there will simply not be enough tax payers to fund it based on current rules in 20 years time. If we doubled our birthrate tomorrow things might be recoverable but we would still have a rough 10 years before the people born start working and paying tax.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,480 ✭✭✭Clo-Clo


    So much for the Sinn Fein tag-line of "Change"

    Even their hardcore supporters know that's a load of nonsense



  • Registered Users Posts: 68,972 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    So it's safe to say FF/FG/Grs are not dealing with this timebomb.

    Will you vote for them? What about you @Clo-Clo @[Deleted User] is it a deal breaker for you?



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,480 ✭✭✭Clo-Clo


    It is funny, I see a video from the Ard Fheis with Sinn Fein going on about "Change". How many times can we say Change in a speech.

    "A government that will get the basic right", how any Sinn Fein member can say this when you look at Northern Ireland. The guys talking is MP for North Belfast, wonder what basic he has managed

    Also complaining about FG and FF in the video. Someone should tell them they need a coalition by all forecasts.

    https://www.instagram.com/reel/Czi-Dd6okdd/



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,002 ✭✭✭✭VinLieger


    Well FG were trying to by pushing for increases to the pension age which FF and SF were against and thus the idea was scrapped, SF are also against the prsi increase. So currently SF oppose all solutions and offer no alternatives that i have seen.

    I dont know who I will be voting for yet but FG are the only ones talking sense on this issue.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 68,972 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Well FG were trying to by pushing for increases to the pension age

    Funny, I thought they were in government since 2011.



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,002 ✭✭✭✭VinLieger


    Yes they were and the pension time bomb existed back then however was far less of a priority as you might remember there were other more immediate financial issues to deal with?

    Since 2016 they have had it as an issue to deal with but were hamstrung by FFs reluctance to deal with it as their voter base is the oldest.

    Also as I said they are introducing the PRSI increase to help but imo it still wont be enough yet SF are still against it. Do you have anything to say about SF having no solutions while opposing all the current ones suggested by the politically independent fiscal advisory council?



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I choose closer to the election, who I'm going to vote for, typically an Independent or two.

    Its unlikely to be anyone from a party associated with bullying, harassment, psychological warfare, assaults, and suspected links to organized crime and terrorism

    I'm just fussy like that I guess 🤷‍♂️



  • Registered Users Posts: 68,972 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    SF agree to the pension age increase if people can opt to retire at 65 (specifically people in jobs were it is not possible to work beyond that age without huge pain and discomfort) and they want employers to bear the brunt of the PRSI increases.

    I think it is false to say they have no solutions. 'Solutions, you don't agree with' might be a better way of phrasing it.

    Sinn Féin TD Claire Kerrane, who also sits on the committee, said she would have “no issue” in increasing or decreasing the pension age if people had access to it at 65.

    “In some jobs, you physically can’t keep going,” she said.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Lets see if I have this right

    The proposal from SF to address the pension issue is to maybe increase or maybe decrease the pension age, but whatever they might decide to do everyone can just ignore it and retire at 65 anyway thereby not fixing anything and instead actually making the problem significantly worse

    Did I miss anything?



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,002 ✭✭✭✭VinLieger


    Yup just watch every industry and union lobby to have their workers added to the 65 list. Its basically increasing the age officially but in reality reducing it.

    Also lets not forget SF want to reduce the tax relief on private pension funds at a time when we need more not less people to start using them.

    I cannot fathom why the left in this country insist on narrowing our tax base when it already is one of the narrowest in europe.



  • Registered Users Posts: 68,972 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    You do know currently members of the Dáil can retire at 50?

    Senior TDs can start claiming gold-plated pensions in their 50s | Independent.ie

    Here is what she said again:

    would have “no issue” in increasing or decreasing the pension age if people had access to it at 65.



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,656 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    Regarding the pension timebomb, didn't MLMD say in the last GE debate about the 'Demographics looking after themselves'?


    Sinn Fein reminds me of BoJo.

    All noise, all jazz, all rhetoric, all theatre, popular with the electorate and good at elections, but no detail, no working policy, no clue how to run a country day by day and when the rubber hits the road, it will be a mighty car crash of epic proportions.

    SF doing an about-turn on PRSI and the pension age is proof of this.

    Now that they are close to power, they are absolutely terrified of saying anything remotely controversial. They are neo-FF in a way. All things to all people, trying to keep everyone happy. But in power, you have to make decisions and this country already has a gap in the 'Just **** get on with it'.

    SF will be happy to do nothing if it keeps everyone 'happy'.



  • Registered Users Posts: 68,972 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    All noise, all jazz, all rhetoric, all theatre,

    Surely that is more apt for a party in power since 2011 who claim to be concerned about this issue and who only today managed to windowdress a bit?



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Here is what she said again:

    would have “no issue” in increasing or decreasing the pension age if people had access to it at 65.

    I covered that in the post you quoted. Actually, you're right, there is more

    The SF plan to address the pension timebomb is

    • maybe increase or maybe decrease the retirement age but allow everyone to ignore it and just retire earlier, at 65
    • Reverse PRSI increases to stop filling the gap in funding available to pay for pensions
    • Create a fund for pensions, but use it up, on other projects, before its ever used by pensions
    • Reduce tax relief on private pension contributions thereby increasing the reliance on the public pension

    Am I missing anything else? This is truly big brain stuff from SF.



  • Registered Users Posts: 68,972 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    So you added in the word 'maybe'?

    You are a piece of work DaCor, I'll give you that. The leaps you make and present as facts are gas.



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,656 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    No, but I do realise that almost every retort and criticism to the beloved SF is normally a "look over there at FG/FF.."

    My position is, if one wants to have a go at the government there is a dedicated thread for that.

    This one is dedicated to SF, and I note you have no retort for that.



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,656 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    SF is making it up on the hoof.



    Their latest Manifesto doesnt mention pensions at all.

    For the 2020 GE manifesto, there is a bit about retiring at 65, but little if any on how to fund it.




  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    She said "increase or decrease". You can't do both, so "maybe increase", or "maybe decrease" it is.

    Its a side-effect of SF trying to sit on both sides of every fence. Not my fault if she can't say what she means.

    Is this better?

    • increase or decrease the retirement age (SF are not sure which, but definitely one of them and whichever they choose will have a profound effect because they will, in effect be increasing or decreasing the retirement age (again, not sure which)) but allow everyone to ignore it and just retire earlier at 65 regardless

    I'm ok with either version, I'll let you decide which is the better interpretation of "increase or decrease the pension age" while at the same time allowing such a change to be ignored and everyone retire earlier at 65 anyway. Feel free to propose your own wording alternatively



  • Registered Users Posts: 68,972 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    So contrary to what has been said, they are not against a rise in the pension age, they are ok with it if the vulnerable are protected and she wasn't talking about TD's who can retire at 50.

    She never said boo about maybe, but your agenda is already well established, you want to give a certain picture so you make stuff up.



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,656 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    Sinn Fein literature and rhetoric are very very clear on the issue of the pension age.

    DaCor is very correct in his assessment.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,480 ✭✭✭Clo-Clo


    Everyone has an opinion or as you like to say "agenda"

    Who knows what Sinn Fein policy is to be honest, it seems to change like the wind on every topic.

    What was it someone called them before, the "flip flop party".

    In their latest "alternative budget" they talk about speeding up the transition to renewable, at the same time they are trying to block wind farms in planning. "Flip flop" best description



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Correction, they are not opposed to increasing or decreasing the pension age, so long as everyone can retire at 65 anyway.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 27,959 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    Gerry is so afraid of the court case that he is trying to get it thrown out without that evidence being heard.



Advertisement