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
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Occupy Dame St organisation has no purpose

  • 12-12-2011 05:13AM
    #1
    Slideshowbob
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,460 ✭✭✭Slideshowbob


    Sorry - I felt this is the right forum for this as they appear to have an economic agenda and they are parked outside the Central Bank.

    I see they have erected a shed there now - planning permission? http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=75945384

    Anyway I was in town yesterday and approached one of those behind the barrier.

    I asked what he was at - he claimed he represented 99.9% of Irish people (he sounded British btw). He spoke about a guy who had to emigrate coming up and talking to him. I said if Irish people felt as he did there would be 100,000 people outside the bank.

    He also then said the people don't care!

    Contradicting himself!He didn't have a retort and proceeded to open a bag of tobacco for a rollie.


«13

Comments

  • #2
    edanto
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,809 ✭✭✭edanto


    Did you notice any of the large banners saying things like 'Banks didn't share their profits, so why should we pay for their mistakes', or any of the charts and graphs of economic data taped to the old water feature?

    Yes, they are disorganised compared with other Occupy groups, yes they have an eclectic mix of objectives, but if you just want to rant against them and begrudge their politics, why don't you camp out there yourself with a 'down with this sort of thing' sign. Seems a bit odd to judge a nascent group by your own biased interaction with one member.


  • #3
    antoobrien
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,106 ✭✭✭antoobrien


    edanto wrote: »
    Did you notice any of the large banners saying things like 'Banks didn't share their profits, so why should we pay for their mistakes'

    I suggest you go read the article in the Sunday Independent from Ronald Quinlan. Whether you like it or agree with it I think he's hit the nail very firmly on the head.


  • #4
    Slydice
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,501 ✭✭✭✭Slydice


    I see that it serves the purpose of probably being annoying to the government and central bankers.

    I hope it annoys the piss out of any bankers out there and any vested interests in the government who might have benefitted during the boom from any misery that people are now experiencing from the bust.


  • #5
    Denerick
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,488 ✭✭✭Denerick


    I know someone who works in the Central Bank and he says all his work buddies piss their hole laughing at these goons camped out in front.

    I walk past the camp everyday and they remind me of those far right Christian fundamentalists with their loudspeakers and their long readings from the old testament. I got chatting to one of them the other day (She was a pretty one, I've got my weaknesses) and the level of delusion and the frankly vacant look in her eye really made me question the sentience of these kinds of protestors. Its like a hive mind takes over, impervious to reason, and everything is subjected to a wierd and inchoate dogma that only makes sense so long as you actively reject reality.

    In short, a weird movement, with no discernible aims, who are entirely irrelevant in Irish political discourse.

    At least the Christian fundamentalist with his loudspeaker and his homophobic rants is actually aware of how irrelevant he is.


  • #6
    20Cent
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,942 ✭✭✭20Cent


    If it wasn't for ODS there would be no visible sign of protest against the unfair and unreasonable burden being placed on Irish people due to this crisis, they are providing a valuable service even if it just for that reason.
    I think they create a visceral angry reaction in some because it is a reminder of how beat down and powerless most of the population feel.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    20Cent
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,942 ✭✭✭20Cent


    Denerick wrote: »
    I know someone who works in the Central Bank and he says all his work buddies piss their hole laughing at these goons camped out in front.

    I walk past the camp everyday and they remind me of those far right Christian fundamentalists with their loudspeakers and their long readings from the old testament. I got chatting to one of them the other day (She was a pretty one, I've got my weaknesses) and the level of delusion and the frankly vacant look in her eye really made me question the sentience of these kinds of protestors. Its like a hive mind takes over, impervious to reason, and everything is subjected to a wierd and inchoate dogma that only makes sense so long as you actively reject reality.

    In short, a weird movement, with no discernible aims, who are entirely irrelevant in Irish political discourse.

    At least the Christian fundamentalist with his loudspeaker and his homophobic rants is actually aware of how irrelevant he is.

    Maybe if your friend and his buddies working in the central bank did their jobs properly there wouldn't need to be protesters outside. If I had to pass a reminder of the massive failure of my workplace everyday I doubt I'd be laughing.


  • #8
    RichardAnd
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,099 ✭✭✭RichardAnd


    Denerick wrote: »
    I know someone who works in the Central Bank and he says all his work buddies piss their hole laughing at these goons camped out in front.

    I walk past the camp everyday and they remind me of those far right Christian fundamentalists with their loudspeakers and their long readings from the old testament. I got chatting to one of them the other day (She was a pretty one, I've got my weaknesses) and the level of delusion and the frankly vacant look in her eye really made me question the sentience of these kinds of protestors. Its like a hive mind takes over, impervious to reason, and everything is subjected to a wierd and inchoate dogma that only makes sense so long as you actively reject reality.

    In short, a weird movement, with no discernible aims, who are entirely irrelevant in Irish political discourse.

    At least the Christian fundamentalist with his loudspeaker and his homophobic rants is actually aware of how irrelevant he is.


    Stories like this actually upset me because them demonstrate just how broken the spirit of the Irish people is. We've just become a coterie of cynical begrudgers that seem to enjoy bad news because it adds to the library of whining subjects.


  • #9
    Good loser
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,262 ✭✭✭Good loser


    RichardAnd wrote: »
    Stories like this actually upset me because them demonstrate just how broken the spirit of the Irish people is. We've just become a coterie of cynical begrudgers that seem to enjoy bad news because it adds to the library of whining subjects.

    You've turned logic on its head there.

    Surely the 'whining subjects' are the campers.

    Denerick is not a bit dispirited -what annoys him (a little) are the protesting begrudgers.


  • #10
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,798 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    So then he thinks it's right that every Irish citizen, including people who are too young to have had any involvement in the mess "we all caused", as you say, are being forced to pay failed speculators who chose to take a risk of their own free will by buying bonds in Anglo and knew exactly what they were getting into when they did?

    Wow, what a strange outlook on life.

    I suppose if I went into Paddy Power in the morning and bet €100,000 on the wrong horse, I would have the right to ask for that money back from the exchequer then?


  • #11
    krd
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,455 ✭✭✭krd


    The purpose of Occupy Dame Street is to not really have a coherent purpose.

    If it did have a coherent agenda - then the forces, and lick spittles, of big capital and reaction would have something to latch onto, and attack, and destroy.


    Keeping it vague helps it grow and gather steam. The right wingers have nothing to get a purchase on.

    Have a good laugh now - fat banker boys. Snort in derision. Chortle til your ribs hurt around your fat bellies. Tell sneering jokes to your fat girlfriends about how you humiliated someone on the protest.

    The Occupy Dame Street crowd are the "peace and love" brigade. They don't believe in violence or bloodshed. They think if we all hold hands, sing kumbaya, and smell flowers everything will be okay.

    They're not carnivores.

    They don't realise, that sometimes, when you want to make black pudding, you have to take a pig by its' legs, string it up and slash it's throat open. Some people don't have the stomach for that kind of thing. Raising a terrified dumb creature, by its legs, seeing it struggle to avoid its fate - that horrible squealing sound - imagine it in a D4 accent. The look of shock and terror, as it sees its blood rushing into the bucket below - the way it loses conciousness, and twitches and jerks, in a grotesque parody of the living. Not everyone would have a taste for that sort of thing.


    Personally, I don't believe in any of this non-violent stuff. When George W Bush, had his troubles with Iraq, did he sit outside the Iraqi embassy smoking marijuana and hold hands with some vegetarian chicks?

    He did not.

    Because he was not a fool.

    Instead he went into Iraq and butchered thousands of people.

    Occupy Dame Street will get nowhere.

    Bankers only laugh at this kind of thing. Can you imagine trying to stop Hitler with a "sit down and hold hands"

    To achieve results you have to take a leaf from George W Bush's book - and butchery it the only language these people (and I use the word "people" in loosest sense) understand.

    Dame Street doe not need to be occupied - Dame street needs to be butchered.

    If you work in finance, I would like you to continue to laugh at these people, and antagonising them. It will make life easier from some of us when the time comes.


    Keep laughing and sneering. Drive the people you've been screwing crazy. Keep pushing.......Keep pushing..........


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,798 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    I think it's important to mention that the worldwide occupy movement isn't simply protesting at "income inequality". There are two very specific demands which continue to surface whenever participants are interviewed:

    1: Get corporate money out of politics. One man, one vote, nothing more, nothing less.

    2: End corruption in the financial sector and come down HARD on white collar crime, deception, Anglo style stuff.

    For me personally, I have nothing against rich people. The people I oppose are those who got rich by cheating and screwing others. The golden circle and their cronies, for example.

    The Occupy movement isn't as simple as "rich = bad". It's more like "Rich is ok provided you earned it and you didn't steal it or gain it through corruption or political favouritism".

    Certainly in the US, the influence of corporations over the ordinary citizenry in dictating government policy is blindingly obvious, and that is what drives the Occupy movement over there.


  • #13
    RichardAnd
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,099 ✭✭✭RichardAnd


    Good loser wrote: »
    You've turned logic on its head there.

    Surely the 'whining subjects' are the campers.

    Denerick is not a bit dispirited -what annoys him (a little) are the protesting begrudgers.


    There're not whining by my definition of the term. To me, whinging implies complaining for the sake of it without taking any action to set it right. It's what children do when their toys are taken away.

    The protesters aren't whining, they're making their opposition to something clear. That's quite different.

    I find it interesting that you use the term begrudger to describe the people outside the central bank. Just what are they begrudging?


  • #14
    edanto
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,809 ✭✭✭edanto


    Denerick wrote: »
    Its like a hive mind takes over, impervious to reason, and everything is subjected to a wierd and inchoate dogma that only makes sense so long as you actively reject reality.

    It's actually like you're describing the lazy and corrupt regulation inside the government and central bank that got us into this mess.

    What would your friend in the central bank think about that?

    And you're wrong about the ODS protesters, sure the variety of their demands shows their differences well.


  • #15
    McTigs
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,032 ✭✭✭McTigs


    antoobrien wrote: »
    I suggest you go read the article in the Sunday Independent from Ronald Quinlan. Whether you like it or agree with it I think he's hit the nail very firmly on the head.
    That article is a big pile of arse. Of my friends, family or people i know it relates to about one in twenty.

    Granted those one in twenty fit the bill pretty well for what he's talking about and all the cliches were there..... decking, X5s, New York, kids kitted out in Ralph Lauren, designer kitchens. But it's only about one in twenty, if not less.

    Does it apply to me? No it doesn't. I lived whithin my means, didn't lend any money to anyone, didn't borrow any money i couldn't pay back..... and i reckon i'm most people.

    If idiots like Ronan Quinlan (who was talking up the property market in 2008) think they are codding anyone with cliche infested drivel like that in rags like SI, good luck to them...... but really they aren't.


  • #16
    antoobrien
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,106 ✭✭✭antoobrien


    McTigs wrote: »
    Does it apply to me? No it doesn't. I lived whithin my means, didn't lend any money to anyone, didn't borrow any money i couldn't pay back..... and i reckon i'm most people.

    Does it apply to me either - no in that I lived within my means.


    Do I know people that some part of that articles describes fairly accurately - yes I'd put it at over 100 friends/acquaintances or neighbours - before we get into the parts of the population of Galway and Dublin that I know of (but don't know).
    hatrickpatrick wrote: »
    So then he thinks it's right that every Irish citizen, including people who are too young to have had any involvement in the mess "we all caused", as you say, are being forced to pay failed speculators who chose to take a risk of their own free will by buying bonds in Anglo and knew exactly what they were getting into when they did?

    I'm not idiotic enough to think that the celtic tiger passed me by because I was in education not in employment or I was too young (you were getting child benefit - a lot more than was being given out when I a kid too I might add . I was one of the first 2 leaving cert classes to get free fees, something which made my life a hell of a lot easier - and would only have been possible with the celtic tiger.

    People going on about how it's not my fault I didn't benefit etc ad nauseum make me sick - everyone did either through wages or social welfare.


  • #17
    pog it
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,912 ✭✭✭pog it


    FT today has a good way of describing the Occupy Movement: inchoate. But also says it articulates the widely felt disillusionment with capitalism and financial capitalism particularly.

    Does it have to achieve anything more than that for people to believe the movement is worthwhile?


  • #18
    Denerick
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,488 ✭✭✭Denerick


    pog it wrote: »
    FT today has a good way of describing the Occupy Movement: inchoate. But also says it articulates the widely felt disillusionment with capitalism and financial capitalism particularly.

    I knew I should have added a 'TM DENERICK' to the bottom of my post yesterday. I suppose it was only a matter of time before the Financial Times started stealing my prose.


  • #19
    Denerick
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,488 ✭✭✭Denerick


    20Cent wrote: »
    Maybe if your friend and his buddies working in the central bank did their jobs properly there wouldn't need to be protesters outside. If I had to pass a reminder of the massive failure of my workplace everyday I doubt I'd be laughing.

    There doesn't need to be protestors outside now either. If you people were so popular you would have won more than a pitiful six seats in the last election. The fact is you're irrelevant, the Irish public see's you as irrelevant, and you will continue to be irrelevant so long as your warped far left ideology makes a virtue in denying reality.


  • #20
    Denerick
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,488 ✭✭✭Denerick


    20Cent wrote: »
    If it wasn't for ODS there would be no visible sign of protest against the unfair and unreasonable burden being placed on Irish people due to this crisis, they are providing a valuable service even if it just for that reason.

    It is a sign of the weakness of their ideas that they rely on publicity stunts - such as an 'occupation' - rather than, you know, winning elections, changing opinions, or creating persuasive arguments.
    I think they create a visceral angry reaction in some because it is a reminder of how beat down and powerless most of the population feel.

    To be honest I laughed my ass off when I read that. If you only understood the level of derision with which I hold these people... It is borne not of anger, but instead by the inherent stupidity of what it is they are doing and how they look when they do what they do. Its a great big Monty Python sketch, thats all. Get over yourself!


  • #21
    20Cent
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,942 ✭✭✭20Cent


    Denerick wrote: »
    There doesn't need to be protestors outside now either. If you people were so popular you would have won more than a pitiful six seats in the last election. The fact is you're irrelevant, the Irish public see's you as irrelevant, and you will continue to be irrelevant so long as your warped far left ideology makes a virtue in denying reality.

    You people? Six seats what are you talking about? You think its left wing???
    Its purposely staying non partisan.


  • Advertisement
  • #22
    Denerick
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,488 ✭✭✭Denerick


    20Cent wrote: »
    You people? Six seats what are you talking about? You think its left wing???
    Its purposely staying non partisan.

    And the humour keeps flowing effortlessly.

    This is an appendix of the ULA. Perhaps not in name or organisation, but almost certainly in deed and ideas.


  • #23
    20Cent
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,942 ✭✭✭20Cent


    Another great thing about the Occupy movement is how it has exposed the Ringers. That is the cheerleaders for the establishment and the Status Quo.

    This guy explain is better than I can.

    http://youtu.be/i9zkQcLi4Yo


  • #24
    Denerick
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,488 ✭✭✭Denerick


    20Cent wrote: »
    Another great thing about the Occupy movement is how it has exposed the Ringers. That is the cheerleaders for the establishment and the Status Quo.

    This guy explain is better than I can.

    http://youtu.be/i9zkQcLi4Yo

    That guy is a complete dufus.

    People like me aren't cheerleaders for 'the establishment and the Status Quo'. I'm a social democrat who votes for the green party and is vaguely associated with that party. I just happen to believe political participation should be grounded on reason and the rational exchange of ideas, not mirth inducing publicity stunts.


  • #25
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    Denerick wrote: »
    That guy is a complete dufus.

    People like me aren't cheerleaders for 'the establishment and the Status Quo'. I'm a social democrat who votes for the green party and is vaguely associated with that party. I just happen to believe political participation should be grounded on reason and the rational exchange of ideas, not mirth inducing publicity stunts.

    But what exactly did the Green Party achieve by participating in our dysfunctional political process bar their own extinction? All they will be remembered for is the carbon tax and for propping up Cowen's government long after it should have folded.
    I am old enough to remember when the Green Party was dismissed as nothing but tree huggers and bike riding, organic food eating, veg growing, do - gooders - yet that was exactly the time when they had a strong and growing grass roots which they were able, eventually, to turn into a political movement. Ultimately, that very engagement in traditional politics destroyed them.

    If our political processes were grounded in reason and the rational exchange of ideas rather then on a cabinet (if even that!) of 15 people making binding decisions behind closed doors based on the advice of lobby groups, those perceived as the financial movers and shakers and career civil servants with guaranteed job for life and fat pensions awaiting followed by TDs being compelled to support their party due to the overuse of the whip system which has reduced our parliament to nothing but an overpaid talking shop there would be no need for an Occupy movement.


  • #26
    WalterMitty
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,582 ✭✭✭WalterMitty


    People are free to vote for parties that will represent them . If no party represents them then start one. People died in Arab countries over past few years just to get a vote or right to start a party. Western democracy isnt perfect but its better than 90% of world and is a work in progres.


  • #27
    pog it
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,912 ✭✭✭pog it


    Denerick wrote: »
    I knew I should have added a 'TM DENERICK' to the bottom of my post yesterday. I suppose it was only a matter of time before the Financial Times started stealing my prose.

    Haha that was funny! I hadn't seen your post either but see it now... inchoate it is then :D


  • #28
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    WalterMitty wrote: »
    People are free to vote for parties that will represent them . If no party represents them then start one. People died in Arab countries over past few years just to get a vote or right to start a party. Western democracy isnt perfect but its better than 90% of world and is a work in progres.

    So do you think what we currently have in Ireland is a functioning democracy?

    If you do - that's fine. You will see no need for a shot to be fired across the bows of our political masters.

    If you do not - if, indeed, you see is as having been hijacked and become so detached from everyday people that it needs to be changed from the outside - then the Occupy movement is one aspect of that call for change.

    For some people in the country our political situation would seem to have much in common with the Arab Spring. There, a small elite of insiders controlled the mechanisms of government for their personal gain disfranchising the people.

    Here, a small elite has, and continues, to control the mechanisms of government for its own personal gain but allows the people the semblance of participation in the process via a GE every 5 years or so. What we end up with is 150 TDs bound by the whip system to follow party lines and a cabinet who makes decisions behind closed doors.

    For democracy to progress - it needs to be monitored and fought for. That is exactly what the Occupy movement is trying to do - exercise their democratic right to protest and call on the government to be accountable.

    I may not agree with all of their statements. I may believe some of their demands are not viable. I utterly agree that they have the right to free speech and to call our government to account. That, to me, is democracy.


  • #29
    edanto
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,809 ✭✭✭edanto


    Denerick wrote: »
    If you people were so popular you would have won more than a pitiful six seats in the last election.

    Denerick, I think you could do with a chilling out a bit on the insults. Whilst you may think 6 TDs is a small accomplishment in this Dail, I'd wager you were rather pleased with the same number of Green TDs in the last Dail. Despite the temptation, no-one has yet insulted your political preferences as being irrelevant based on a low number of current TDs. Be nice.

    Your more important mistake is to conflate Occupy with an unspecified group of 6 TDs. Can I presume that you are talking about the ULA independents? It's a bit of a tenuous link, since I'm a supporter of one of the other independents and I'm also a supporter of Occupy.


  • #30
    Godge
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21,727 ✭✭✭✭Godge


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    So do you think what we currently have in Ireland is a functioning democracy?

    If you do - that's fine. You will see no need for a shot to be fired across the bows of our political masters.

    If you do not - if, indeed, you see is as having been hijacked and become so detached from everyday people that it needs to be changed from the outside - then the Occupy movement is one aspect of that call for change.

    For some people in the country our political situation would seem to have much in common with the Arab Spring. There, a small elite of insiders controlled the mechanisms of government for their personal gain disfranchising the people.

    Here, a small elite has, and continues, to control the mechanisms of government for its own personal gain but allows the people the semblance of participation in the process via a GE every 5 years or so. What we end up with is 150 TDs bound by the whip system to follow party lines and a cabinet who makes decisions behind closed doors.

    For democracy to progress - it needs to be monitored and fought for. That is exactly what the Occupy movement is trying to do - exercise their democratic right to protest and call on the government to be accountable.

    I may not agree with all of their statements. I may believe some of their demands are not viable. I utterly agree that they have the right to free speech and to call our government to account. That, to me, is democracy.


    We had a free and fair election only a few months ago. That is democracy. There should be a huge burden of proof on anyone that wishes to set aside the democratically expressed wish of the electorate for a FG and Labour coalition and a small minority representation of the parties of the extreme left. Just because some people don't like the outcome of the election doesn't mean it should be overturned in a few months, it is not like we are living in the modern equivalent of the USSR.

    BTW, passed ODS today and spotted a number of ULA posters inside the barricade. Maybe they are being collected for fires to keep warm or maybe it is an alternative ULA.

    P.S. Any ODS supporter ready to answer my question from about three weeks ago as to which oil reserves they wish us to take back and from whom?


  • Advertisement
  • #31
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    [QUOTE=Godge;76000878]We had a free and fair election only a few months ago. That is democracy. There should be a huge burden of proof on anyone that wishes to set aside the democratically expressed wish of the electorate for a FG and Labour coalition and a small minority representation of the parties of the extreme left. Just because some people don't like the outcome of the election doesn't mean it should be overturned in a few months, it is not like we are living in the modern equivalent of the USSR.

    [/QUOTE]

    We had an election in which two political parties campaigned on specific policies. Once elected they failed to implement those policies but instead reverted to those very policies of the previous government which they had promised the electorate would be changed. The majority of the electorate voted for the policies promised by FG/LP - they did not get what they voted for. Plain and simple.

    I don't see being elected on a specific mandate for a change in policy and once in power retaining the policies you campaigned against as fair or democratic. I see that as cynical misrepresentation.


  • #32
    Tadeo Dazzling Fax
    Posts: 0 CMod ✭✭✭✭ Tadeo Dazzling Fax


    Denerick wrote: »
    That guy is a complete dufus.
    .

    ease up on the personal stuff there please, you can make your point without it


  • #33
    antoobrien
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,106 ✭✭✭antoobrien


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    We had an election in which two political parties campaigned on specific policies. Once elected they failed to implement those policies but instead reverted to those very policies of the previous government which they had promised the electorate would be changed. The majority of the electorate voted for the policies promised by FG/LP - they did not get what they voted for. Plain and simple.


    So lets see, your argument is that because they've found somethings impossible (for whatever reason) to do they should be kicked out? They were elected for a 5 year term, give them a chance FFS.

    Btw some of the things they "promised" were extremely naive and shouldn't have been promised at all. Anybody that can find and read an exchequer statement (not all that hard either) can see that.


  • #34
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    antoobrien wrote: »
    So lets see, your argument is that because they've found somethings impossible (for whatever reason) to do they should be kicked out? They were elected for a 5 year term, give them a chance FFS.

    Btw some of the things they "promised" were extremely naive and shouldn't have been promised at all. Anybody that can find and read an exchequer statement (not all that hard either) can see that.

    I want a system where the electorate are treated like adults - capable of making informed decisions when presented with the facts. Not as children to be courted with shiny unrealistic promises.

    What would be the point of kicking them out? - there is no viable alternative party waiting in the wings - and that is the real tragedy in Irish politics. We have gone from FF/PD to FF/GP to FG/LP with absolutely no change in policy.

    Jazuz - they may as well all amalgamate and declare a one party system. :p


  • #35
    Godge
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21,727 ✭✭✭✭Godge


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    We had an election in which two political parties campaigned on specific policies. Once elected they failed to implement those policies but instead reverted to those very policies of the previous government which they had promised the electorate would be changed. The majority of the electorate voted for the policies promised by FG/LP - they did not get what they voted for. Plain and simple.

    I don't see being elected on a specific mandate for a change in policy and once in power retaining the policies you campaigned against as fair or democratic. I see that as cynical misrepresentation.

    (1) They said throughout the election campaign that they were stuck with the IMF because FF had brought them in - which part of that did you miss? Until we get the ability to borrow on our own, lots of policy options are off the table.
    (2) The last budget was different to one that FF would bring in. Less of the taxes on employment such as increases in income taxes and cuts in income tax reliefs and more of increases in capital taxes (CGT and CAT) and property taxes. Very much a classical left-wing agenda by the way.


  • #36
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,798 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    antoobrien wrote: »
    So lets see, your argument is that because they've found somethings impossible (for whatever reason) to do they should be kicked out? They were elected for a 5 year term, give them a chance FFS.

    "Found some things impossible"? More like "knew perfectly well that they were lying in order to trick people into voting for them". Yes, they should indeed be penalized harshly for that. This is everything that's wrong with "Democracy" as we know it. I don't elect them to do their own thing, I elect them to implement the policies I voted for.
    Btw some of the things they "promised" were extremely naive and shouldn't have been promised at all.

    Naive, or dishonest? Either way, there should be a penalty for doing so. That would discourage future deliberate dishonesty ok, "mistakes".
    Anybody that can find and read an exchequer statement (not all that hard either) can see that.

    Correct. Consequences?
    If I lie through my teeth in a job interview (which is essentially what an election is), I can expect to be turfed out as soon as it's discovered that my credentials were fabricated.


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    Godge
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21,727 ✭✭✭✭Godge


    hatrickpatrick wrote: »
    "Found some things impossible"? More like "knew perfectly well that they were lying in order to trick people into voting for them". Yes, they should indeed be penalized harshly for that. This is everything that's wrong with "Democracy" as we know it. I don't elect them to do their own thing, I elect them to implement the policies I voted for.



    Naive, or dishonest? Either way, there should be a penalty for doing so. That would discourage future deliberate dishonesty ok, "mistakes".



    Correct. Consequences?
    If I lie through my teeth in a job interview (which is essentially what an election is), I can expect to be turfed out as soon as it's discovered that my credentials were fabricated.


    Look anyone that voted for FG and Labour in the expectation that they could wave a magic wand and solve the country's problems without severe cutbacks and hardship for everyone was a fool. The only bigger fools were those who believed the SF and ULA analysis of the way to get out of our economic difficulties.


  • #38
    Spokes of Glory
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 175 ✭✭Spokes of Glory


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    For democracy to progress - it needs to be monitored and fought for. That is exactly what the Occupy movement is trying to do - exercise their democratic right to protest and call on the government to be accountable.

    I may not agree with all of their statements. I may believe some of their demands are not viable. I utterly agree that they have the right to free speech and to call our government to account. That, to me, is democracy.

    No quibbles with any of that, no matter how ill-thought through or half-baked I believe some of their ideas are.

    What I do object to however is their seeming belief that they are somehow the self-appointed speakers for the masses in this country, this "99%" which are not the elite, ie me and everybody I know. They don't. If they want to campaign, protest and conduct their actions as a minority leftish wing offshoot, that's absolutely fine by me. I just wish they'd get rid of this notion that they are somehow representative of the majority of taxpayers in the country and therefore have an umbrella of popular support.

    Spokes


  • #39
    Sleepy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,488 ✭✭✭✭Sleepy


    I just don't see the point in the "movement" tbh.

    The only way genuinely radical changes will be made would be in a bloody revolution. Any other changes will be re-organisation of the chairs on the titanic tbh. And while I'd love a shot at the architecture for a fairer, more egalitarian society (based on smaller government, less corruption, and a level playing field from which reward would be gained through merit rather than birth or status), I know I'm in an insignificant minority: most Irish people don't give a fvck once they've enough cash to go to the pub and cheer on either an English or Scottish football club, an Irish rugby club or national team in any sport. Those that do give a fvck tend to be of the "we can tax our way out of recession by scaring away all those evil rich people" persuasion.

    No, I'm not happy about having to indirectly pay Seanie's gambling losses, nor am I happy that my taxes are providing Messers Cowen, Ahern and their ilk with a life of luxury but, revolution aside, there's sweet fvck all we can do about it. Our economic sovereignty was given away by the last government (one we collectively elected for almost 2 decades!) and, tbh, I think it's unfair to blame the current crowd for the decisions of the IMF and EU.

    The alternatives they face to austerity are simply too terrifying: cut off from all credit the country would descend into chaos in a matter of days thanks to our PS unions and quasi-at-best-criminal underclass. Making a song and dance on Dame Street can only serve the state in one useful fashion imho: giving the welfare office an excuse to cut off your job-seekers allowance on the basis that you're not actively seeking work.


  • #40
    Sleepy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,488 ✭✭✭✭Sleepy


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    I want a system where the electorate are treated like adults - capable of making informed decisions when presented with the facts.
    If we could achieve a country where the electorate are deserving of being treated like adults, your wishes would come true quickly enough ;)


  • #41
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    Godge wrote: »
    (1) They said throughout the election campaign that they were stuck with the IMF because FF had brought them in - which part of that did you miss? Until we get the ability to borrow on our own, lots of policy options are off the table.

    Just by way of example - from the FG Manifesto http://www.finegael2011.com/pdf/Fine%20Gael%20Manifesto%20low-res.pdf
    Second, because we will never fix the deficit unless we get the economy growing. The Government has no jobs plan. Its only strategy is to pump tens of billions of Euros into the banks, cut the deficit largely through job-destroying tax increases, and hope for the best. Yet no country has ever taxed or cut itself back to recovery.

    Increasing indirect taxes such as VAT, implementing new taxes such as Property, extending road tax to off the road cars = increase in taxation.
    There is no mention here of the IMF - it is a clear statement that FG will change tactics. They didn't.

    (2) The last budget was different to one that FF would bring in. Less of the taxes on employment such as increases in income taxes and cuts in income tax reliefs and more of increases in capital taxes (CGT and CAT) and property taxes. Very much a classical left-wing agenda by the way.[/QUOTE]

    I had a read of my left wing agenda and I can't find ANYTHING about having the terraced house and the 5 bedroom, detached with conservatory paying the same amount of property tax being a socialist ideal. Neither is there any mention of equality in society being served by appointing party insiders to over the pay cap salary jobs while cutting the money to loan parents. Nor is there a word about how not increasing the top rate of tax will lessen the divide between the haves and the have nots...

    I think you may have mistaken the Soviet (jobs for the Politburo) agenda for a left-wing one. Common mistake ;).


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    Godge
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21,727 ✭✭✭✭Godge


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    Just by way of example - from the FG Manifesto http://www.finegael2011.com/pdf/Fine%20Gael%20Manifesto%20low-res.pdf



    Increasing indirect taxes such as VAT, implementing new taxes such as Property, extending road tax to off the road cars = increase in taxation.
    There is no mention here of the IMF - it is a clear statement that FG will change tactics. They didn't.

    (2) The last budget was different to one that FF would bring in. Less of the taxes on employment such as increases in income taxes and cuts in income tax reliefs and more of increases in capital taxes (CGT and CAT) and property taxes. Very much a classical left-wing agenda by the way.

    I had a read of my left wing agenda and I can't find ANYTHING about having the terraced house and the 5 bedroom, detached with conservatory paying the same amount of property tax being a socialist ideal. Neither is there any mention of equality in society being served by appointing party insiders to over the pay cap salary jobs while cutting the money to loan parents. Nor is there a word about how not increasing the top rate of tax will lessen the divide between the haves and the have nots...

    I think you may have mistaken the Soviet (jobs for the Politburo) agenda for a left-wing one. Common mistake ;).[/QUOTE]


    "job-destroying" tax increases are what Fine Gael are against. It was one of the reasons I voted for them - no increases in income tax. If you have a budget deficit that you must increase taxes to close yet you want to encourage people to work, then you increase all other taxes other than taxes on income - property taxes and household charges (a form of wealth tax), increases in capital taxes (another form of wealth tax), increases in DIRT (another form of wealth tax) motor tax (another form of wealth tax) and consumption taxes.

    Really poor people on very low incomes do not own cars, houses, buy luxury items or have huge savings or share portfolios. They will be spared all of the above taxes. I really don't get why people are calling this a right-wing budget. All of the above measures are classical European left-wing devices to raise taxation on the wealthy classes while protecting the working man. For a true socialist (and Ireland has very few of these) a flat property tax is better than no property tax.

    The lone parents payment agenda is about encouraging people back into the workforce. It is also about bringing our social welfare system in line with entitlements in the rest of Europe. We cannot have a situation where both our rates and our range of entitlements are far wider than those elsewhere.


  • #43
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    Godge wrote: »
    I had a read of my left wing agenda and I can't find ANYTHING about having the terraced house and the 5 bedroom, detached with conservatory paying the same amount of property tax being a socialist ideal. Neither is there any mention of equality in society being served by appointing party insiders to over the pay cap salary jobs while cutting the money to loan parents. Nor is there a word about how not increasing the top rate of tax will lessen the divide between the haves and the have nots...

    I think you may have mistaken the Soviet (jobs for the Politburo) agenda for a left-wing one. Common mistake ;).


    "job-destroying" tax increases are what Fine Gael are against. It was one of the reasons I voted for them - no increases in income tax. If you have a budget deficit that you must increase taxes to close yet you want to encourage people to work, then you increase all other taxes other than taxes on income - property taxes and household charges (a form of wealth tax), increases in capital taxes (another form of wealth tax), increases in DIRT (another form of wealth tax) motor tax (another form of wealth tax) and consumption taxes.

    Really poor people on very low incomes do not own cars, houses, buy luxury items or have huge savings or share portfolios. They will be spared all of the above taxes. I really don't get why people are calling this a right-wing budget. All of the above measures are classical European left-wing devices to raise taxation on the wealthy classes while protecting the working man. For a true socialist (and Ireland has very few of these) a flat property tax is better than no property tax.

    The lone parents payment agenda is about encouraging people back into the workforce. It is also about bringing our social welfare system in line with entitlements in the rest of Europe. We cannot have a situation where both our rates and our range of entitlements are far wider than those elsewhere.[/QUOTE]

    I certainly never called it a right wing budget, but equally wouldn't call it left wing.
    It is practically indistinguishable from what FF would have done in the same position. That is my point - we really only have the one political party in this country. It is slightly right of centre in some things and slightly left in others but generally hovers around the middle -so essentially we keep electing the same government.

    Hardly a recipe for a strong and functioning democracy.


  • #44
    Godge
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21,727 ✭✭✭✭Godge


    [QUOTE=Bannasidhe;76002695.

    I certainly never called it a right wing budget, but equally wouldn't call it left wing.
    It is practically indistinguishable from what FF would have done in the same position. That is my point - we really only have the one political party in this country. It is slightly right of centre in some things and slightly left in others but generally hovers around the middle -so essentially we keep electing the same government.

    Hardly a recipe for a strong and functioning democracy.[/QUOTE]


    But if that is what people want and what people keep voting for, then it is a strong and functioning democracy.

    I have heard people go on and on for forty years about the need for a right/left realignment in Irish politics. They seem to have missed the message that the Irish people seem to want something in the middle as they keep voting for it. And what is wrong with the democratically expressed wish of the Irish people?

    And if the government is getting it so wrong since the election, why hasn't the ODS got 20,000 people camping out on Dame St? Instead it looked like there are only about two inhabitants any time I passed.


  • #45
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    Godge wrote: »
    But if that is what people want and what people keep voting for, then it is a strong and functioning democracy.

    I have heard people go on and on for forty years about the need for a right/left realignment in Irish politics. They seem to have missed the message that the Irish people seem to want something in the middle as they keep voting for it. And what is wrong with the democratically expressed wish of the Irish people?

    And if the government is getting it so wrong since the election, why hasn't the ODS got 20,000 people camping out on Dame St? Instead it looked like there are only about two inhabitants any time I passed.

    Who else will we vote for?

    I have voted in every single election, referendum etc since I turned 18 back in the early 80s. I consider it my duty as a citizen and take it very seriously. Yet, Every single GE I am stood there in the booth looking at this slip of paper that I would be hard pressed to insert into the ideological differences between the mainstream candidates. So - do I vote for an independent? What can they achieve unless the party with the majority needs a few extra seats to form a government and then its parish pump deals á la Gregory, Lowry, Healy-Rae etc. Not a very satisfactory situation to be honest.


  • #46
    Godge
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21,727 ✭✭✭✭Godge


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    Who else will we vote for?

    I have voted in every single election, referendum etc since I turned 18 back in the early 80s. I consider it my duty as a citizen and take it very seriously. Yet, Every single GE I am stood there in the booth looking at this slip of paper that I would be hard pressed to insert into the ideological differences between the mainstream candidates. So - do I vote for an independent? What can they achieve unless the party with the majority needs a few extra seats to form a government and then its parish pump deals á la Gregory, Lowry, Healy-Rae etc. Not a very satisfactory situation to be honest.


    Since you turned 18 back in the 80s, the following parties have put up candidates in different parts of the country to varying degrees of success:

    The Green Party.
    Progressive Democrats.
    Democratic Left.
    The Socialist Party.
    People before Profit Alliance.
    Christian Solidarity Party.
    The Socialist Workers Party.
    Sinn Fein.
    Workers Party.
    Workers and Unemployed Action Group.

    While some have achieved minor success, most have faded eventually and made little impact on domestic policies (possible exceptions of PDs for their influence in a number of governments and Sinn Fein for their contributions in another jurisdiction). The point is, if any of these parties had made a sustained impact, they would have had candidates all over the country. They didn't so they didn't, so to speak, but most constituencies have had a chance to vote for one or more of these over that time. Unless you have spent all of your voting life somewhere like Cork North-West, that is true of you too.

    Comes back to my point (and if you go further back in history, to Clann na Poblachta etc.) the Irish people want variation around the middle, they don't want extremes.


  • #47
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    Godge wrote: »
    Since you turned 18 back in the 80s, the following parties have put up candidates in different parts of the country to varying degrees of success:

    The Green Party.
    Progressive Democrats.
    Democratic Left.
    The Socialist Party.
    People before Profit Alliance.
    Christian Solidarity Party.
    The Socialist Workers Party.
    Sinn Fein.
    Workers Party.
    Workers and Unemployed Action Group.

    While some have achieved minor success, most have faded eventually and made little impact on domestic policies (possible exceptions of PDs for their influence in a number of governments and Sinn Fein for their contributions in another jurisdiction). The point is, if any of these parties had made a sustained impact, they would have had candidates all over the country. They didn't so they didn't, so to speak, but most constituencies have had a chance to vote for one or more of these over that time. Unless you have spent all of your voting life somewhere like Cork North-West, that is true of you too.

    Comes back to my point (and if you go further back in history, to Clann na Poblachta etc.) the Irish people want variation around the middle, they don't want extremes.

    I am not advocating extremes - but saying we lack variation.

    Do you believe our political process actually works?


  • #48
    edanto
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,809 ✭✭✭edanto


    Just to jump in with an answer to that question (even though this thread has gone well off topic)... obviously our political process works for some people and doesn't work for others.

    Whether or not Occupy will be able to make any kind of impact on Irish politics remains to be seen. Personally, I think the best we can hope for is that some of those involved in Occupy go on to support or become successful candidates in the next few elections - under whichever flag suits their beliefs best.


  • #49
    hmmm
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,205 ✭✭✭✭hmmm


    I like how some people want an "adult" political process, yet others are raging because they voted for parties that they feel didn't tell them 100% the truth. It shouldn't come as a shock to an adult to find out that political parties (and humans) don't always tell the truth - if they did, most politicians would never be elected.

    Sinn Fein has promised us a pain free solution to the problem. Why didn't 100% of the electorate vote for them?


  • #50
    hmmm
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,205 ✭✭✭✭hmmm


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    I am not advocating extremes - but saying we lack variation.
    You can't find a single political group between the PDs and the Socialist Party to represent your views?


  • #51
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    hmmm wrote: »
    You can't find a single political group between the PDs and the Socialist Party to represent your views?

    I can't find any appreciable difference between the parties who hover between those two not very extremes of the political spectrum in Ireland - no.

    What are the real differences between FG/FF/LP - not in terms of their 'policies' (which turn out not to be worth the glossy paper they were printed on) but in terms of what they actually do when in power? I haven't included the PDs or GP as both are essentially defunct but would if they were still viable parties.

    We could have FF/LP or FG/LP or even, gasp, FG/FF - it would still be the same bloody government with the same bloody policies.

    Cannot comment on the Socialist Party, SF etc as they have never formed part of a government.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement