Any planned protest marches?

Faustino · 19-11-2010 12:48pm

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Ireland doesn't need any support, at least not for many months.
Irish banks need the support.
Do I see an alternative? Yes, I do. Renege on the bank guarantee, let the banks go to the wall and let the bondholders take the hit instead of the Irish taxpayer.
Unless you want to mortgage your future and that of your kids to keeping Roman Abramovich and Swiss bankers in the style they've become accustomed to, that's what needs to be done.

Agreed.. the IMF will only do one thing.. load us with debt and take any wealth the country actually has. It's going to be a complete disaster.

Uriel. · 19-11-2010 12:48pm

Faustino wrote: »

Agreed.. the IMF will only do one thing.. load us with debt and take any wealth the country actually has. It's going to be a complete disaster.

Have you any evidence of this?

Faustino · 19-11-2010 12:50pm

Uriel. wrote: »

If you can't take a difference of opinion without descending to inappropriate language and name calling then it says it all about the type of protest you might lead.

I'm all for difference of opinion and debate.. but not when someone is being condescending and obnoxious about it.

Sort out your tone and i'll be happy to discuss your take on things

Cavehill Red · 19-11-2010 12:52pm

Uriel. wrote: »

Have you any evidence of this?

Here's where the bailout money will be going:

http://order-order.com/2010/10/15/anglo-irish-bondholders-should-take-the-lossesis-the-ecb-forcing-ireland-to-protect-german-investments/

Black Swan · 19-11-2010 12:52pm

Reminder... A few of the above posters have forgotten our charter rule: Attack the post, not the poster.

zig · 19-11-2010 12:53pm

Two groups here, but neither have a bulls notion whats actually going on, they have little understanding of politics or economics, they just wanna "storm d dail n get d mony robbn scum outta pwer"

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Call-for-a-revolution-in-Ireland/116110171774654

http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=153710104661752

HellFireClub · 19-11-2010 12:54pm

Faustino wrote: »

I'm all for difference of opinion and debate.. but not when someone is being condescending and obnoxious about it.

Sort out your tone and i'll be happy to discuss your take on things

Your logic for protesting is completely defective. To my mind, if you are protesting, you are basically saying that you:

(A) Do not want meaningful reform

(B) Want us to keep borrowing to pay for overpaid and obstructive public servants who are afraid of reform.

What have you got to say to that?

Uriel. · 19-11-2010 12:55pm

Faustino wrote: »

I'm all for difference of opinion and debate.. but not when someone is being condescending and obnoxious about it.

Sort out your tone and i'll be happy to discuss your take on things

I am not sure what you mean about my "tone". Protests, worldwide have an all too common habit of descending into violence and destruction of public/private property. We do not need that kind of thing, especially where there will be no positive outcome. End of story really. I am sorry if you find it condescending, but I speak only on what I have seen.

Going around calling people "pr1cks" because they don't have the same opinion as you is very childish and does nothing to lend any credibility to any post or opinion you might air on these boards (or elsewhere).

Faustino · 19-11-2010 12:57pm

Uriel. wrote: »

Have you any evidence of this?

and they only borrowed €7.5bn

In December 2008, the Latvian government was forced to seek an IMF bailout when it could not raise short-term funds. The payback, however, was immense. If Ireland needs similar help, stringent cuts across the board would be inevitable.

Last week, the Sunday Tribune spoke to a number of Latvian journalists about that bailout and how it has affected their country over the past two years.

Known as the 'Baltic Tiger', Latvia's economy grew by 50% between 2004 and 2007. Not unlike Ireland, much of the country's growth was generated by a credit-fuelled property bubble.

Paul Raudseps, economics editor of the Latvian weekly news magazine Ir, recalled: "We had a huge real estate bubble and we were importing more and exporting less. We were borrowing to pay for that deficit and then the global financial crisis hit."

Unlike Ireland, where we have had an across-the-board banking crisis, only one of Latvia's banks, Parex, had to be rescued by the state. The government initially took a 51% stake in the bank before it nationalised it, pouring taxpayers' money into it.

The rest of the country's main banks are Swedish-owned and as a result of Scandinavian banks managing to pull through the global crisis, Latvia was spared a full-scale banking crisis.

The Baltic Tiger breathed its last in a similar manner to the Celtic Tiger. The Latvian economy had peaked in 2007 and the government was already worried about declining tax receipts when the global financial crisis hit towards the end of 2008.

Raudseps explained that 10% of Latvia's GDP was poured into the failed Parex bank and by November 2008, the crisis hit breaking point. The Latvian government was no longer able to borrow money on the bond markets so it was forced to call on a joint EU/IMF financial bailout.

"The total package was €7.5bn. About half of that was put up by the EU Commission, with a further 20-25% from the IMF and the rest was made of bilateral loans," said Raudsepps.

"Overall, the contraction in the economy from its peak in 2008 to the bottom in 2009 was just a little less than 25% of GDP. The government that was in office at the time the EU/IMF deal was done signed an agreement in December 2008 which foresaw a 5% contraction in 2009 but the contraction in that year was actually 18%."

The IMF has become the bogeyman in Irish politics. Any mention of its arrival has been met with commentary about the level of reputational damage it would do to a country that fought so hard for its political and economic sovereignty. So what has the bogeyman actually done to Latvia?

Nathan Greenhalgh is the editor-in-chief of the Baltic Reports news website and he explained that "the IMF has primarily insisted that Latvia continue with deep cuts to meet agreed-upon GDP deficit percentages. It's been a bit of good cop, bad cop with the World Bank praising Latvia's resolve to cut while the IMF insists it isn't doing enough and must cut more.

"The IMF has insisted on cuts, cuts, cuts and it has also pressed Latvia to reform its pension scheme which is unsustainable at current levels."

In the last two years, the austerity measures in Latvia's budgets have seen massive cuts in the health and education sectors. The number of hospitals has been cut from 59 to 42 and 58 schools have been closed down.

Daiga Grube, of the LETA news agency, believes the IMF intervention has focused mostly on guiding Latvia's fiscal policies.

"Pressure from the IMF to consolidate the state's budget helped our politicians to take very hard steps, but we can't be 100% sure that these steps were the best solution for society in general," she said.

On a positive note, Grube said the IMF has saved the Latvian state from bankruptcy and it has been able to keep functioning by continuing to pay pensions, salaries and social welfare payments.

While the IMF bailout has not affected the country's ranking in the World Bank's 'Ease of Doing Business' survey, it has affected investment. According to Latvia's Central Statistics Bureau, the inflow of foreign direct investment, which fuelled the post-Soviet country's growth during the Baltic Tiger boom years, has taken a massive hit and shows little sign of recovering, especially as domestic demand remains in the doldrums.

Since the crisis hit, neighbour Lithuania has managed to attract IBM, Barclay's and Western Union to locate there while Estonia expects an influx of investment after it switches to the euro in January. Latvia has not experienced any such investment in the last two years as cutting the budget deficit has taken priority over everything else on the political and economic agenda.

The unemployment rate tripled, hitting a peak of 22% in January before it fell back to 16% in June.

In March 2009, Valdis Dombrovskis left his role as an MEP in Brussels and returned home as prime minister.

Since, then Dombrovskis has pushed through some of the most draconian measures in Europe to rescue Latvia from bankruptcy.

There have been salary cuts of up to 30% across the public sector, income tax has been increased from 23% to 26%, Vat from 18% to 21%, the number of state agencies has been halved from 76 to 39 and there have been further tax increases on alcohol, cars and property.

Faustino · 19-11-2010 1:00pm

Uriel. wrote: »

I am not sure what you mean about my "tone". Protests, worldwide have an all too common habit of descending into violence and destruction of public/private property. We do not need that kind of thing, especially where there will be no positive outcome. End of story really. I am sorry if you find it condescending, but I speak only on what I have seen.

Going around calling people "pr1cks" because they don't have the same opinion as you is very childish and does nothing to lend any credibility to any post or opinion you might air on these boards (or elsewhere).

Nor does slating someone's first few posts on a board as "rhetoric"

May I ask, are you from Ireland?

namloc1980 · 19-11-2010 1:02pm

Faustino wrote: »

I'm astonished that all this is happening without riots on the street.

What the hell would rioting achieve?? Apart from damaging our image even more, and damaging property and business. Greeks rioted in May against austerity and an IMF-EU bailout. What was the result??.....3 people killed and millions of Euro of damage to property and the economy, and they still got the austerity and bailout.

Rioting is not democracy, it is mob rule. Wrecking our own gaff is just stupid.

Uriel. · 19-11-2010 1:03pm

Faustino wrote: »

and they only borrowed €7.5bn
In December 2008, the Latvian government was forced to seek an IMF bailout when it could not raise short-term funds. The payback, however, was immense. If Ireland needs similar help, stringent cuts across the board would be inevitable.

Last week, the Sunday Tribune spoke to a number of Latvian journalists about that bailout and how it has affected their country over the past two years.

Known as the 'Baltic Tiger', Latvia's economy grew by 50% between 2004 and 2007. Not unlike Ireland, much of the country's growth was generated by a credit-fuelled property bubble.

Paul Raudseps, economics editor of the Latvian weekly news magazine Ir, recalled: "We had a huge real estate bubble and we were importing more and exporting less. We were borrowing to pay for that deficit and then the global financial crisis hit."

Unlike Ireland, where we have had an across-the-board banking crisis, only one of Latvia's banks, Parex, had to be rescued by the state. The government initially took a 51% stake in the bank before it nationalised it, pouring taxpayers' money into it.

The rest of the country's main banks are Swedish-owned and as a result of Scandinavian banks managing to pull through the global crisis, Latvia was spared a full-scale banking crisis.

The Baltic Tiger breathed its last in a similar manner to the Celtic Tiger. The Latvian economy had peaked in 2007 and the government was already worried about declining tax receipts when the global financial crisis hit towards the end of 2008.

Raudseps explained that 10% of Latvia's GDP was poured into the failed Parex bank and by November 2008, the crisis hit breaking point. The Latvian government was no longer able to borrow money on the bond markets so it was forced to call on a joint EU/IMF financial bailout.

"The total package was €7.5bn. About half of that was put up by the EU Commission, with a further 20-25% from the IMF and the rest was made of bilateral loans," said Raudsepps.

"Overall, the contraction in the economy from its peak in 2008 to the bottom in 2009 was just a little less than 25% of GDP. The government that was in office at the time the EU/IMF deal was done signed an agreement in December 2008 which foresaw a 5% contraction in 2009 but the contraction in that year was actually 18%."

The IMF has become the bogeyman in Irish politics. Any mention of its arrival has been met with commentary about the level of reputational damage it would do to a country that fought so hard for its political and economic sovereignty. So what has the bogeyman actually done to Latvia?

Nathan Greenhalgh is the editor-in-chief of the Baltic Reports news website and he explained that "the IMF has primarily insisted that Latvia continue with deep cuts to meet agreed-upon GDP deficit percentages. It's been a bit of good cop, bad cop with the World Bank praising Latvia's resolve to cut while the IMF insists it isn't doing enough and must cut more.

"The IMF has insisted on cuts, cuts, cuts and it has also pressed Latvia to reform its pension scheme which is unsustainable at current levels."

In the last two years, the austerity measures in Latvia's budgets have seen massive cuts in the health and education sectors. The number of hospitals has been cut from 59 to 42 and 58 schools have been closed down.

Daiga Grube, of the LETA news agency, believes the IMF intervention has focused mostly on guiding Latvia's fiscal policies.

"Pressure from the IMF to consolidate the state's budget helped our politicians to take very hard steps, but we can't be 100% sure that these steps were the best solution for society in general," she said.

On a positive note, Grube said the IMF has saved the Latvian state from bankruptcy and it has been able to keep functioning by continuing to pay pensions, salaries and social welfare payments.

While the IMF bailout has not affected the country's ranking in the World Bank's 'Ease of Doing Business' survey, it has affected investment. According to Latvia's Central Statistics Bureau, the inflow of foreign direct investment, which fuelled the post-Soviet country's growth during the Baltic Tiger boom years, has taken a massive hit and shows little sign of recovering, especially as domestic demand remains in the doldrums.

Since the crisis hit, neighbour Lithuania has managed to attract IBM, Barclay's and Western Union to locate there while Estonia expects an influx of investment after it switches to the euro in January. Latvia has not experienced any such investment in the last two years as cutting the budget deficit has taken priority over everything else on the political and economic agenda.

The unemployment rate tripled, hitting a peak of 22% in January before it fell back to 16% in June.

In March 2009, Valdis Dombrovskis left his role as an MEP in Brussels and returned home as prime minister.

Since, then Dombrovskis has pushed through some of the most draconian measures in Europe to rescue Latvia from bankruptcy.

There have been salary cuts of up to 30% across the public sector, income tax has been increased from 23% to 26%, Vat from 18% to 21%, the number of state agencies has been halved from 76 to 39 and there have been further tax increases on alcohol, cars and property.

I am not quite sure how you think this post supports your argument/opinion against the IMF?

If anything this article shows that IMF intervention saved Latvia from becoming bankrupt?

Yes, huge austerity measures had to be put in place, but what choice was there? If IMF funding wasn't provided Latvia would have been bankrupt. With no money available I think you could expect the 30% cut in Salary of public servants to be something of the order of 80 - 100% and a lot more service cuts.

Uriel. · 19-11-2010 1:06pm

Faustino wrote: »

Nor does slating someone's first few posts on a board as "rhetoric"

May I ask, are you from Ireland?

I am not sue what my nationality has to do with anything. But yes I am Irish.

Your posts sounded very much like rhetoric to be honest. And I would hardly call it "slating". I expressed a view that I hoped no protests would be happening this weekend and then I gave reasons for it. I then asked that anyone that does involve themselves in protests not damage property or cause the tax payer anymore money.

You on the other hand have descended to name calling.

Moondust · 19-11-2010 1:09pm

Hi all,

Please sign up to the Today fm petition to speak directly to us, the Irish People, in a State Of The Nation address on national television

http://www.todayfm.com/Shows/Weekdays/Ian-Dempsey-Breakfast-Show/Petition.aspx

Faustino · 19-11-2010 1:09pm

namloc1980 wrote: »

What the hell would rioting achieve?? Apart from damaging our image even more, and damaging property and business. Greeks rioted in May against austerity and an IMF-EU bailout. What was the result??.....3 people killed and millions of Euro of damage to property and the economy, and they still got the austerity and bailout.

Rioting is not democracy, it is mob rule. Wrecking our own gaff is just stupid.

I'm not condoning rioting in any way shape or form, i'm just surprised it's not happening.. the French take to the streets at any sign of a cut.

The Irish just seem to take it lying down which is the most troubling thing.

We said no to Lisbon, we were bullied into voting again.. the threat of us not voting yes was basically what is happening now.

Why shouldn't we take to the streets?

Uriel. · 19-11-2010 1:13pm

Faustino wrote: »

I'm not condoning rioting in any way shape or form, i'm just surprised it's not happening.. the French take to the streets at any sign of a cut.

The Irish just seem to take it lying down which is the most troubling thing.

We said no to Lisbon, we were bullied into voting again.. the threat of us not voting yes was basically what is happening now.

Why shouldn't we take to the streets?

If you could explain what taking to the streets has achieved in France or Greece and you can follow that up with a realistic prediction why taking to the streets would anything (and what would it achieve) then I might consider it.

"Taking to the Streets" will end in violence/rioting and a huge cost to both the taxpayer and business'. Unless there is a guaranteed worthwhile result from doing so then I hardly see the point.

Faustino · 19-11-2010 1:19pm

Uriel. wrote: »

I am not sue what my nationality has to do with anything. But yes I am Irish.

Your posts sounded very much like rhetoric to be honest. And I would hardly call it "slating". I expressed a view that I hoped no protests would be happening this weekend and then I gave reasons for it. I then asked that anyone that does involve themselves in protests not damage property or cause the tax payer anymore money.

You on the other hand have descended to name calling.

Just calling a spade a spade..

I have stated multiple times that any protest should be peaceful yet you keep repeating your wish for a lack of violence?

Uriel. · 19-11-2010 1:23pm

Faustino wrote: »

Just calling a spade a spade..

:rolleyes:

Faustino wrote: »

I have stated multiple times that any protest should be peaceful yet you keep repeating your wish for a lack of violence?

[/QUOTE]

So? Just because you say it "should" be doesn't mean it will be peaceful. If there is a large protest march tomorrow, it is likely to result in some form of violence/destruction of public property.

You have also asked why We (the Irish) haven't responded like the French.

Faustino · 19-11-2010 1:32pm

Uriel. wrote: »

:rolleyes:

Uriel. wrote: »

So? Just because you say it "should" be doesn't mean it will be peaceful. If there is a large protest march tomorrow, it is likely to result in some form of violence/destruction of public property.

You have also asked why We (the Irish) haven't responded like the French.

The French more often than not actually achieve something when they protest.. that's the difference.

snollup · 19-11-2010 2:40pm

Personally I think we should be protesting with a view to getting a change of government. IMO the current government have done nothing bet miss-manage & blatantly lie to the public. Regardless of sho could do better the point is no one will do any worse.

average_runner · 19-11-2010 2:45pm

The goverment has no say in the country anymore, its the IMF and EU that has ran and will continue to run this country for next 10 years!

PISS them off and they hit you twice as a hard back.

Wait and see what will happen to the PS in the year! Actually do feel for them now as can see a 40% cut in their work force with another 10% cut in their wages at least.

Unions can march all they want, but they need to hold their own hands up for this mess along with the rest of the irish people

Slozer · 19-11-2010 2:51pm

Uriel. wrote: »

If you could explain what taking to the streets has achieved in France or Greece and you can follow that up with a realistic prediction why taking to the streets would anything (and what would it achieve) then I might consider it.

"Taking to the Streets" will end in violence/rioting and a huge cost to both the taxpayer and business'. Unless there is a guaranteed worthwhile result from doing so then I hardly see the point.

I listend to Luke Kelly recite For what died the sons of Roisin on the way to work this morning and every word got to me. Our government has sold our country and the founders of our freedom are turning in their graves. Violence is not only the answer it is the only answer.

Uriel. · 19-11-2010 3:16pm

Slozer wrote: »

I listend to Luke Kelly recite For what died the sons of Roisin on the way to work this morning and every word got to me. Our government has sold our country and the founders of our freedom are turning in their graves. Violence is not only the answer it is the only answer.

That's pathetic.

Violence is not the only answer. It's not even an answer.

Uriel. · 19-11-2010 3:18pm

Faustino wrote: »

The French more often than not actually achieve something when they protest.. that's the difference.

What do you hope to achieve right now in this snippet in time?

A new Government? That's on the way... Will it be better? Time will tell.

Stop the IMF from coming in? what then? How do we fund ourselves?

yawnstretch · 19-11-2010 3:23pm

Uriel. wrote: »

Stop the IMF from coming in? what then? How do we fund ourselves?

We don't fund ourselves - we suffer but we don't get out a big f**king loan.

Everything was understandable enough until this move by the government. It's a complete and utter sellout and they will be stepping away from their responsibilites if they hand over decisions to IMF.

We need to suffer and sort this out ourselves. Giving up our rights is not the way forward.

God what a nightmare.

lucianot · 19-11-2010 4:02pm

Not all of the loan comes from the IMF, the EU puts a lot as well. Isn't it?
Sorry if it sounds idiotic, but my idea is that now you can protest to get out of the EU and get a new government in the process. But that is not going to fix anything, not the banking crisis, no the huge mortgages, etc.
Most likely as I Said befora, all the depostis will be lost and Ireland will be isolated, out of the international market and investments.

feicim · 19-11-2010 5:00pm

Uriel. wrote: »

That's pathetic.

Violence is not the only answer. It's not even an answer.

If not for violence than we would still be under british rule (maybe in hindsight that wasn't such a bad thing ).

It was the only answer to getting rid of an unwanted administration.

There is more than one definition of violence, the government is guilty of structural violence.

ixtlan · 19-11-2010 5:52pm

Faustino wrote: »

I'm sorry but what is happening right now is far bigger than any election day.
FF are a bunch of gangsters but that doesn't mean any of the other parties are better equipped to be in government

Hi Faustino,

while respecting your passion, which I say with some condescension, and some seriousness

I have to criticise the above.

If people protest to remove the current government then I understand that. I agree with the desire, though like many others I would worry about the potential for violence. Still, it's a goal. Force an election and punish those politicians who have failed us. I'll leave aside for now the discussion on how much the public went along with the disastrous policies.

However to protest for the sake of protest, against all politicians, saying that the entire system is irrelevant is almost nihilistic.

People like you should be forming political parties that conform to how you want things to work. If you are convincing enough then you may succeed in changing the system. Do not tell me, as most people do, that the system cannot be changed. Democracy may have it's flaws but it's the least worst system of government. I do not want anyone, no matter whether they agree with my views, to be running things without public vote. No dictatorships for me. And preferably no anarchy either.

Ix.

Kevo · 19-11-2010 6:05pm

feicim wrote: »

If not for violence than we would still be under british rule (maybe in hindsight that wasn't such a bad thing ).

It was the only answer to getting rid of an unwanted administration.

There is more than one definition of violence, the government is guilty of structural violence.
structural violence.

Or you could just wait for the next election. It may still be a long way away but even suggesting removing them through force is complete idiocy.

Slozer · 19-11-2010 6:22pm

Uriel. wrote: »

That's pathetic.

Violence is not the only answer. It's not even an answer.

EU leaders perpatrate wars against other soverign states in the name of democracy and freedom while they enslave their people to debt. It is pathetic that we resort to violence but its what we must do to protect our freedoms. Either that or bend over and take it up the ass! (no offence meant to homosexuals)

Any planned protest marches?

Comments