Fiscal Compact Referendum 2012

seamus wrote: »

Just to give an idea of what would be required to achieve this, we would need to indiscriminately cut social welfare payments and public sector wages by 25%, each. That's a saving of €10bn. The other €8bn would be achieved by raising taxes 13.5% across the board (not to 13.5%, but by 13.5%)

That's all? :eek:
Okay I know it's huge in real terms, but it really illustrates how insanely bloated social welfare payments and wages are.

So I've done my reading, I'm voting yes, despite coming across Declan Ganley being mischievous (knowing feck all about the ESM initially made that a very hard to interpret article, which I'm assuming was the intention), does he really believe his own logic or did he just enjoy the Lisbon campaign that much?

And looking at the treaty itself, what's the fuss about? Why would anyone have a real problem with it? Okay someone might think voting no results in a marginally better outcome than yes, but to really take issue? Am I missing something?

And is anyone a fan of the idea of outlawing slogans, sound bites, Paul Murphy's face, and irrelevant argumentation? There's something incredibly morally wrong with tying in the treaty and the household charge etc, I refuse to believe it's not populist and that they don't know better, I don't get why that level of irresponsibility is accepted.

wonderfulname wrote: »

That's all? :eek:
Okay I know it's huge in real terms, but it really illustrates how insanely bloated social welfare payments and wages are.

I guess it depends on what you mean by "bloated". They're certainly generous, but 25% off in both cases could quite literally put people out on the street.

What it is, is an illustration of just how much the Irish Governments from 1997 to 2011 lacked any kind of foresight in fiscal policy, continually spending without worrying about where the rainy day money would come from.

robindch wrote: »

If people accurately understood what it's trying to do, then people would be quite happy to vote for it.

Unfortunately, a sizable portion of the population here is linking the vote to any number of irrelevant issues, amongst which are: (a) dislike of FG or Labour; (b) dislike of the government, whoever they are, or its policies; (c) the household or water charges; (d) thinking that it's linked to "austerity" in some way; (e) dislike of the EU; (f) banking debt and the repayment thereof; (g) a belief that the nation is being "scaremongered" into signing it; (h) the belief that by not signing, there's a "better" deal in the offing; (i) lots more.

To be fair, you could come up with a similar list of irrelevant issues from the Yes side. Dislike of Sinn Fein, Boyd Barret, Murphy, thinking it is linked to growth or jobs in some way etc.
A walk through the Elections and Referendums forum shows garbage from all sides.

Was listening to the last word debate yesterday evening on the way home and was impressed by someone called Nicola Byrne who was the only level head in the whole thing.

I do feel dirty though - I was actually cheering on Michael Martin when he took Nigel Farage to task for his pretend concern for the Irish people.

Sinn Feins whole argument was to vote no and depend on other European countries to bail us out before the economy collapses - it was truly staggering that they call themselves nationalists when their entire policy is to put our future in other peoples hands instead of trying to do something about it ourselves.

unfortunately i cant vote as im only 17, but if i was id vote NO, the way i see it if the GOVERNMENT and BANKS want us to vote yes i wonder who it will benefit the banks. This government is a joke Enda Kenny and Gilmore are like lap dogs in Europe, Bruton said recently if we vote no we will have to vote again this is an utter disgrace, keep doing it until they vote yes. This referendum will mean a balanced busget at the end of each year and how will they make that cuts to the higher class I think not, further cuts to those in middle and lower class. This means more taxes, more cuts and even more hardship for those at the lower end of the social spectrum.

aarond280 wrote: »

unfortunately i cant vote as im only 17, but if i was id vote NO, the way i see it if the GOVERNMENT and BANKS want us to vote yes i wonder who it will benefit the banks.

The banks don't give a fcuk which way we vote as they've already got our money. If you've got a time machine to go back to four years ago then please let us know.

This government is a joke Enda Kenny and Gilmore are like lap dogs in Europe,

That's just a meaningless comment. How are they acting like that and what should they be doing?

Bruton said recently if we vote no we will have to vote again this is an utter disgrace, keep doing it until they vote yes.

Yes he did say that, he then immediately retracted it, you are surely aware of that if you're aware of what he said in the first place.

This referendum will mean a balanced busget at the end of each year

No it doesn't, it means we are supposed to run a budget close to balance, over the entire economic cycle (i.e. you can run deficits in the bad years provided you run surpluses in the good years.) This is just good common sense.
Anyway those limits won't even apply to us for several years after we exit the bailout.

and how will they make that cuts to the higher class I think not, further cuts to those in middle and lower class. This means more taxes, more cuts and even more hardship for those at the lower end of the social spectrum.

All of which are going to have to happen anyway, to paraphrase a former Taoiseach 'we are living away beyond our means'

Thing is, if we vote No then our future in the euro will come into question (although, logically it shouldn't, markets are very nervous for any negative signs in any euro country) and as well as that we will be denying ourselves the possibility of cheap ESM loans in 2014 if the markets are too nervous to lend to us, or won't lend to us except at a crazy interest rate.

This is where the argument that voting No means more austerity comes from. And if we can't borrow at all in 2014 the country will be forced to default.

aarond280 wrote: »

Yes this is one that I think is worth an answer to, of course we need to cut but it always seems to be those who are the lower side of the social spectrum.

This is often said, but I've never seen anyone provide figures to back it up.
Welfare increased massively above inflation in the boom, there have been some minor cuts since but that's all. Our welfare rates are still way above those of countries like the UK and even Germany. Minimum wage cut was reversed, changes to universal social charge benefited the lower paid, income taxes haven't been raised.

Content of Bill
The Bill provides for the insertion of the following subsection after
subsection 9 of Article 29.4 of the Constitution, in order to ratify the
Stability Treaty and enable the Oireachtas to adopt any legislation
necessary in order to implement its provisions:
‘‘10° The State may ratify the Treaty on Stability, Coordination
and Governance in the Economic and Monetary Union
done at Brussels on the 2nd day of March 2012. No provision of
this Constitution invalidates laws enacted, acts done or measures
adopted by the State that are necessitated by the obligations of
the State under that Treaty or prevents laws enacted, acts done
or measures adopted by bodies competent under that Treaty
from having the force of law in the State.’’.

Can someone explain this bit to me? From my reading it's a bad thing and would lead me to vote no.

Is it wrong to be uncomfortable with someone saying that anything they do to fulfill the Treaty can't be unconstitutional?
In a stupidly extreme case, slavery to reduce people on the dole.

Yes wins!
I for one would like to welcome our European Overlords and the presence of multiple multiple mutilating baby clinics.

Republic of Ireland
1937 - 2012
R.I.P.



Our new Flag.


Is this sore winning/losing?
/poe mode disabled.