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

General Irish politics discussion thread

Options
1102103105107108154

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 7,218 ✭✭✭Brussels Sprout


    Last I heard of her she was on an American Neo-Nazi's podcast asking him "how had he celebrated the Fuhrer's birthday".

    Yeah. She went all the way down the rabbit hole.



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,704 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    Just to be pedantic.

    The Ukrainians are not 'Asylum seekers' as they are granted special status by the EU and are treated in the most part as granted asylum, and are permitted to work.



  • Registered Users Posts: 27,910 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    Which is why it is difficult to blame the government for the situation with asylum seekers. In fact, it seems that the government is far more welcoming than the people are.



  • Registered Users Posts: 68,848 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    It’s not the people who are cutting their weekly allowance and length of time they can stay in accommodation.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,747 ✭✭✭PommieBast


    The gov't comitted to housing far more than they had space to accomodate, and trying to honour this commitment is perfect fuel for the far-right fire that gov't does not care about those who work for a living.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 68,848 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    It’s easier to blame the people, the vast majority of whom have done what they were asked to do and more, than to allow any criticism of how those in power have handled the situation.



  • Registered Users Posts: 68,848 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Now that this story has been established as being true.

    If they are genuinely against this happening, why not legislate against it and be done with it?




  • Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 39,749 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    Are you assuming that Varadkar/Govt hasn't been discussing this with the DoF or is it just that you want the legislation to be rushed?



  • Registered Users Posts: 68,848 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Not assuming anything. Why not, if it is wrong or if you believe it to be wrong, legislate against it happening at all. Why the incompetent rulemaking in leaving a loophole or choice that this fund has taken?

    The post had a '?' and is a question.



  • Registered Users Posts: 27,910 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    One of the problems of living in a democracy is that people have rights, those rights also extend to people who own companies. You can legislate to manage rights but you cannot deny rights. The government has put a penal stamp duty tax of 10% on those companies who buy more than 10 residential properties in a year. However, if they were to ban such purchases outright or to impose a tax of say 50% stamp duty on such transactions, they could well be infringing on rights and/or in breach of EU competition law.

    It would also be a level of interference in the market beyond any seen before. However, what is most ironic about this is that if you go back a decade or so, many of those objecting to institutional landlords now were calling for small landlords to be replaced by institutional landlords back then. That includes some of the long-time posters on here as well as prominent opposition spokespersons.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 68,848 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Mairead McGuinness, she of FG origin, has spoken on this in an EU capacity.

    The European Commission has ruled that for a European Union (EU) Member State to restrict home buying to non-residents there must be "overriding reasons of general interest" recognised in the case law of the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU). This was the view of the European Commissioner for Financial Services, Financial Stability and Capital Markets Union, Mairead McGuinness, in response to a parliamentary question from Rosa Estaràs, a Spanish member of the People's Party (PP) from the Balearic Islands.


    In the official response, Brussels recalls that Article 63 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU prohibits restrictions on capital movements related to the acquisition of real estate, "including housing", by non-resident citizens. It points out, however, that "such restrictions may be justified" on "grounds of public policy or public security, or on overriding reasons of general interest recognised in the case law of the CJEU, provided that they are not discriminatory and are proportionate to the aim pursued".

    This means that the measures must be "appropriate to ensure, in a consistent and systematic manner, the attainment of the objective pursued" and not go "beyond what is necessary to attain it",


    Seems to me that we have an 'overriding reason(s) of general interest' to restrict. The previous measure has not worked, is it time to look at further legislative measures like other EU countries on this list have.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 26,886 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    I'd generally be very pro institutional landlords over individual landlords, but I'd rather it was done via build-to-lets as opposed to this

    But generally speaking you are correct, these things are not as easy as writing legislation saying "no company can buy more than one house at a time" or whatever.



  • Registered Users Posts: 27,910 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    Are you an expert of EU Freedom of Movement Law? If not, then your guess that we can do something more is only a guess and your criticism of government actions to date is based on nothing. If we have only one example of an institution buying property in bulk since the government brought in the stamp duties, the likely EU response is that Ireland has reduced the problem and the measures go far enough.



  • Registered Users Posts: 29,421 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    ....are we truly living in a democracy, as it some how resembles a plutocracy!

    ...once again, the financialised approach to property has catastrophically failed, its now in uncontrollable positive and negative feedback loops, so just bloody stop it now, or else.....

    ...this is clearly out of control, this market based approach is clearly an absolute disaster....



  • Registered Users Posts: 68,848 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Stop trying to limit the discussion.

    I asked a question, I claimed NO expertise.

    The question for the government seems to centre around, are there 'overriding reasons of general interest'?

    Seems to me that there are.

    As I said, I claim no expertise, but the  'penal stamp duty tax of 10%' has not turned out to be 'penal' enough and the question my inexpert mind asks, will more funds realise that this stamp duty is not that penal and there are profits to be made.



  • Posts: 0 ✭✭ Barbara Gifted Speech


    There is an election in 15months or before.

    It would seem that nearly everyone has issues with the current government and many are off the opinion that voting for FF-FG-SF or Lab will lead to to the samenor worse as it is now.

    So who are people here going to vote for in the next GE?



  • Registered Users Posts: 27,910 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    I am voting Green in the next general election, I have some issues with the current government (I have had issues will all governments in my lifetime), but the alternatives are far far worse. Neither SF nor PBP have a credible policy to address the climate change issue.

    Post edited by Boards.ie: Mike on


  • Registered Users Posts: 68,848 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    At the moment I am voting SF.

    I'm a long time (2011-16) believer that the power swap and subsequent coalescing of FF/FG has been a toxic influence and a sham or pretense that they offer something different. SF represent the best chance to end that. If they turn out to be the same then I will have to look elsewhere. SF have also committed to beginning to plan and pressure as an Irish government for a Border Poll which is something I wholeheartedly support.

    Post edited by Boards.ie: Mike on


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,395 ✭✭✭Clo-Clo


    Post edited by Boards.ie: Mike on


  • Registered Users Posts: 14,298 ✭✭✭✭retalivity


    There are literally no options for me.

    FF - grew up in a FF household, vowed never to vote for them after the Bertie years, have held true to this.

    FG - the party I am apparently 'most aligned' with but despise them, admittedly due to specific scandals that impacted people I know. Not a chance i'll vote for them.

    SF - god no, cowboys.

    Greens/Labour - mudguards for the larger parties, but still Labour pissed me off in the noughties, greens piss me off now. Cannot warm to Bacik or Ryan either, and both would actively put me off.

    SD's - ideally could do something, but think they'll just be another Labour/Greens: promise loads, deliver nothing, take a hiding.

    PBP/Aontu - head the balls,

    Independents - meh, might fix the pothole down the road, what about progressive tax or welfare changes?

    I'll probably end up voting for the local councillor (LAB), purely cos she seems a decent sort, does work for her constituents etc. But its a real process of eliminations, where she is the best of a very bad bunch.

    Post edited by Boards.ie: Mike on


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 68,848 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady




  • Registered Users Posts: 21,435 ✭✭✭✭Water John




  • Registered Users Posts: 68,848 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    😁 I have never hidden the fact John.

    Who you voting for?



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,611 ✭✭✭Fionn1952


    Wouldn't touch FG, FG or SF with a barge pole, PBP are nutters, Aontu are SF all bar one issue which I disagree with them on. An awful lot of the INDs are nutters or one issue people. The, 'Ireland First' type parties.....no thanks.

    My preference would be Social Democrats, Greens, Labour in that order.

    Post edited by Boards.ie: Mike on


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,747 ✭✭✭PommieBast


    Guessing a good portion will be sitting out this election. They want FF/FG out but for some voting SF is still one step too far.

    Post edited by Boards.ie: Mike on


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,704 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    STV allows voters to vote against as well as for.

    There are few that normally vote FG that will vote SF but not FG - even down the card. Maybe some FF voters might give SF a preference, but historically, that does not happen much.



  • Registered Users Posts: 27,910 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    The FG vote has held up since the last general election, can't see any more of them switching to SF, if any did.



  • Registered Users Posts: 21,435 ✭✭✭✭Water John


    I voted Soc Dem the last time. Will see the list of candidates in my constituency before deciding.



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,298 ✭✭✭✭retalivity


    Because i'm not really, im voting for the person rather than the party, and only by elimination of nearly everyone else. If it was Bacik or O'Riordan standing, i wouldnt be voting for them



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 68,848 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    It’s a vote for Labour in a GE all the same.



Advertisement