[Pride Fighter]

Originally Posted by BFDCH.

apologies if I was wrong on that point- listened to a lot of rants from a nerd friend of mine who was adamant that we had one of the leading telecoms infrastructures in the world before privatisation and that there is now no investment.

A secure home base seems to have helped ESB expand overseas- haven't they been involved in powerstation projects abroad?

Your friend was right. The Dargan Report of 1979 found that for the previous 60 years Irish telecommunications was saddled with underinvestment, and old lines. You'd have to wait a year for a phone then.

Following the criticisms of that report the IDA lobbied government to improve the networks, in order to aid SME's create jobs with a world class telecommunications network. The lobbying paid off and by 1987 the network was completely modernised from analogue to digital technology. Only one year later, Telecom Eireann went into profit for the first ever time. By 1999 when it was privatised, TE became highly profitable, debt free, and in control of one of Europes best telecommunications networks. According to the research of Dassler, Parker and Saal, between 1978 and 1998, telecommunications performance, productivity and efficiency in Ireland surpassed every single European country in that timeperiod.

It was private companies that underinvested since 1999 and asset stripped Eircom for a quick buck.

In short, privatisation does not work.

[K-9]

Originally Posted by Pride Fighter

Your friend was right. The Dargan Report of 1979 found that for the previous 60 years Irish telecommunications was saddled with underinvestment, and old lines. You'd have to wait a year for a phone then.

Following the criticisms of that report the IDA lobbied government to improve the networks, in order to aid SME's create jobs with a world class telecommunications network. The lobbying paid off and by 1987 the network was completely modernised from analogue to digital technology. Only one year later, Telecom Eireann went into profit for the first ever time. By 1999 when it was privatised, TE became highly profitable, debt free, and in control of one of Europes best telecommunications networks. According to the research of Dassler, Parker and Saal, between 1978 and 1998, telecommunications performance, productivity and efficiency in Ireland surpassed every single European country in that timeperiod.

It was private companies that underinvested since 1999 and asset stripped Eircom for a quick buck.

In short, privatisation does not work.

Indeed, I'm old enough to remember the P&T vans and dialing the operater at your local Post Office to get a call out.

I assumed we went from a very outdated system to a very modern one by European standards, which played a part in multinationals coming here. Governments could point to how tech savvy we were.

I don't know if it is true to say privatisation doesn't work though. I am finding it hard to find examples where it has worked in Ireland and the UK. I'd say if you privatised after a huge state investment, it would work. After the P&T, the new owners could leech of the state investment.

[Pride Fighter]

Originally Posted by K-9

Indeed, I'm old enough to remember the P&T vans and dialing the operater at your local Post Office to get a call out.

I assumed we went from a very outdated system to a very modern one by European standards, which played a part in multinationals coming here. Governments could point to how tech savvy we were.

I don't know if it is true to say privatisation doesn't work though. I am finding it hard to find examples where it has worked in Ireland and the UK. I'd say if you privatised after a huge state investment, it would work. After the P&T, the new owners could leech of the state investment.

Well Telecom Eireann was privatised after 20 years of big investment and is proof it did not work. Obviously it can vary by sector to sector, and company by company. If TE was sold to Siemens or Nokia or a large Nordic or European telecommunications company it may have done well. Instead a vulture capitalist group took it over Valentia and subsequently Babcock and Brown. They borrowed to take it over and piled the debt onto the previously debt free company when the state owned it.

I am not defending SF per se. I am just defending semi-states and state enterprises.

[Richard Hillman]

My biggest fears are that they will increase taxes for hardworking people and pander to and enlarge the underclasses.

I also fear a United Ireland.

[Nodin]

Originally Posted by Richard Hillman

............ and pander to and enlarge the underclasses.

.........

Do please expand.

[Monty Burnz]

Originally Posted by dpe

Actually, the areas they suggest for state ownership aren't that controversial. There's a good argument for state ownership of the telecoms network, even if you leave the retail side to the market. Ditto fuel and even insurance could have a state minimum with added value provided by the market.

So we need to run a loss-making state enterprise in competition with private companies in these areas? Because on a level playing pitch, private companies will absolutely destroy state-sector competitors. And I speak as someone who has worked in the state sector.

[Lars1916]

Originally Posted by Richard Hillman

My biggest fears are that they will increase taxes for hardworking people and pander to and enlarge the underclasses.

I also fear a United Ireland.

My biggest fear is, that you believe everything, the FF/FG propaganda machinery is telling you

[recedite]

Originally Posted by Fenian Army

Sinn Féins ultimate aim is to end British rule in Ireland, reunite the terrortory and construct a real republic....

I hope that slip isn't freudian
Is armed rebellion followed by the installation of a marxist govt. still on the agenda? And is the democratically elected govt. of the 26 counties still not seen as a legitimate authority?

[fasttalkerchat]

Originally Posted by recedite

I hope that slip isn't freudian
Is armed rebellion followed by the installation of a marxist govt. still on the agenda? And is the democratically elected govt. of the 26 counties still not seen as a legitimate authority?

The 26 county government was elected by 2/3 of the population so it would be replaced by an elected parliament obviously.

[recedite]

Originally Posted by fasttalkerchat

The 26 county government was elected by 2/3 of the population so it would be replaced by an elected parliament obviously.

And in the meantime, who is the provisional authority?

[fasttalkerchat]

Originally Posted by recedite

And in the meantime, who is the provisional authority?

Since SF take their seats in the dail you could confer that as a recognition of the dail's authority over that specific area.

[thecommietommy]

Originally Posted by recedite

I hope that slip isn't freudian
Is armed rebellion followed by the installation of a marxist govt. still on the agenda? And is the democratically elected govt. of the 26 counties still not seen as a legitimate authority?

That's was the ambition of Pat Rabbitte, Eammon Gilmore and believe it or not Eoghan Harris one time !!!! Serious, when they were in Offical Sinn Fein the Workers Party

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Offical_Sinn_Fein

[dpe]

Originally Posted by Monty Burnz

So we need to run a loss-making state enterprise in competition with private companies in these areas? Because on a level playing pitch, private companies will absolutely destroy state-sector competitors. And I speak as someone who has worked in the state sector.

No, state insurance would be for example compulsory third-party car insurance; easy to administer (as part of car tax), and it culls the problem of uninsured drivers at a stroke (well it does if you use a DVLA style database). The private sector can do all the value add it wants.

Fuel, not so much on the distribution side, but if oil is discovered in the Atlantic, nationalised ownership isn't controversial at all.

[[Jackass]]

A monologue, based on the comedy styling’s of the Sinn Fein Economic Policy.

2. Economy

Sinn Féin believes people should be put at the heart of an economy. An economy should serve society, not the other way round. We believe a successful economy redistributes wealth via the tax and welfare systems. It sees employment, education and training as a right. And it takes into account all the activity that is not currently measured by modern economies, such as housework, child rearing, caring and volunteering. Not recognised in GDP calculations because they are not "producing" anything, and therefore can not generate wealth or be taxed, this is important from a simple Economics stand point - does not mean these aren't important functions.
Detailed, intensive economic policy is available on the Sinn Féin website in various pre-budget submissions, alternative economic papers and job creation documents. Our position on bank bondholders (restructure banking debts) are reiterated across the Sinn Féin website.
The following are the key Sinn Féin economic policies

• Economies should be ran counter-cyclical. Governments’ should save in the good times (booms) so they can spend in the bad (recessions). We oppose moves from Europe to constitutionally limit national budgets, as this is a fiscal determinant that should be available to sovereign decision-makers. Very good in theory. BUT there will never be a boom if expansionary measures are reigned in as soon as there is a sign of growth, and a recession isn't going to go away just because you have put money aside to pay inflated social welfare amounts in a welfare state and pay for activities that produce no Economic growth.
  
• The tax and social welfare systems should be redistributive. Income taxes should be fair and progressive. Governments should not rely on indirect flat taxes like consumption taxes. Welfare should be protected government spending and should be based on achieving a decent living standard for recipients while offering support to assist people re-entering the workforce. Our current income tax model is the perfect model of a progressive tax system, which can be found in any Economics text book. But you're probably hoping the people who read this don't know that, and think it sounds good. "Flat taxes" such as VAT are Economic rent on production in a functioning Economic system and are crucial to maintain services etc. in a prospering Economy. Remove taxes > ??? > increase welfare > ??? = Profit. Hard to believe such basic Economic principles are ignored by a major party in this country. Putting welfare as protected Government spending will decrease the labour force significantly, reducing income tax returns massively, after eliminating things like VAT and also looking to increase welfare to give a comfortable life, the very foundation of this Economic policy is flawed beyond belief.
  
• The state should provide essential services to the economy (nationalised/state services). There should be a state bank, a state insurance company, state fuel company, state IT company (telephone/broadband etc), state health system, state transport and state schools & universities. Sinn Féin does support private enterprise as being essential to an economy, but we also recognise the hugely important part the state has to play in economic success.This sounds great. So eliminate all private sector efficiency and ingenuity, and replace it with a number of bureaucratic, state sponsored monopolies, and increase the public sector wage expenses ten fold, whilst producing very little of tangible Economic value they will pay for it. There must be a massive funding plan for all of this lower down in the list...i'm excited to see what it is!
  
• We caution against a reliance on foreign direct investment over the growth of indigenous (homegrown) industry. We're not an 'isolationist' party. We recognise the importance of trade and investment. However we do dispute the reliance of the 26-County economy in particular on foreign direct investment to create jobs. The indigenous sector has at times seen its support sacrificed to appease multinational companies based here. We want to redress this imbalance. Wait, WHAT??!!?? So you also want to drive out the foreign investment in this Economy that produces billions into our Economy in terms of wages paid to Irish staff, tax returns from a free and open market! This would mean pushing out 10% of employers in Ireland, and nearly 50% of the value of our economy, and what will replace it? Irish companies will spring up? But you also are opposed to European funding of the Irish Economy, and we're already running a budget deficit of about 3.5 billion a year, and this is BEFORE you inflate welfare and public service expenditure, eliminate flat taxes and deflate the Irish Economy by driving out investors, and take budgetary measures sure to slash income tax returns also!! So the state bank will fund these Irish enterprises? Before I ask how the state intends to pay a single civil servants wages next month, how is the state bank going to replace up to 20 billion per year we have received from Foreign Direct Investment into our Economy??
  
• We support the protection of wages and income. We do not believe in a race-to-the-bottom to improve Ireland's 'competitiveness'. We have strong policies on workers' rights. Workers are the heart of an economy and should be treated as such, not just as a means to a profit. We believe in absolute entitlement to join a trade union and collectively bargain. Sinn Féin policy on workers rights is based on the republican concept of equality as outlined in the 1916 Proclamation and the Democratic Programme. So, state takes on massive chunk of employment bill in Ireland, we force out the multinationals, we somehow replace them with Irish companies, THEN, when we have the Irish companies, we cripple our export market by driving up wages to uncompetitive levels around the rest of Europe, and the world? More Government income slashed. This must be the most genus funding idea ever coming up, they've re-written Economic theory, I can't wait to learn their secret!!
  
• We support the establishment of a 'high-pay' commission, which would ensure the gap between the highest and lower earners in a society did not exceed a specific rate.

Wait...what?? That's it?? End list???? Your last point is to try and curtail the rewards for ingenuity and Economic productivity by taxing 100% of wages above a certain level to rise the welfare of the earners at the lowest level, thereby ensuring that after any Economic prosperity what so ever, more people will move into the bracket of better off on welfare than working and paying taxes?? But.....but....what about paying for everything you talked about? This is just more policy ensuring Economic implosion!!![/QUOTE]

Ladies and Gentlemen, Comedy supplied by Sinn Feinn Economic Policy - picked apart to pieces by a first year Economics student. This is the level of expertise we're dealing with from Sinn Fein.

I thank you.

[recedite]

Originally Posted by [Jackass]

Your last point is to try and curtail the rewards for ingenuity and Economic productivity

I'd imagine the politicians and bankers, who produce nothing and show no ingenuity, would be prime targets for the wage restraint as proposed by SF.
Your assertion that care workers who have no taxable income "are not producing anything" is very wrong. Just as wrong as your assumption that bankers and politicians on huge incomes must be "producing something".