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 all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
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

Fiscal Treaty Referendum.....How will you vote?

1…34689…38

Comments

  • #252
    RandomName2
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,570 ✭✭✭RandomName2


    FreudianSlippers wrote: »
    We've never had the same referendum twice AFAIK, so it's highly unlikely it will happen on this one.

    semantics aside: Divorce, Nice, Lisbon

    (can't step in the same river twice, eh?)


  • #253
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    RandomName2 wrote: »
    semantics aside: Divorce, Nice, Lisbon

    (can't step in the same river twice, eh?)

    I don't think one can set semantics aside in constitutional matters - still, it makes no difference, because running exactly the same referendum twice was ruled on at Lisbon, and is not constitutionally or legally a problem.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • #254
    Wild Bill
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,129 ✭✭✭Wild Bill


    Great news from both Greece and France tonight!

    At least in those two countries the folk with some backbone outnumber the cowardly huddled middle-class sinecurists :D


  • #255
    carveone
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,276 ✭✭✭carveone


    Adieu Sarko.... I see Eamonn Gilmore was in France for the result. He said something briefly on the news that the result doesn't mean a change in the treaty - possible additions on growth, which is what others here have said. I can't imagine the result affecting the referendum in any way...

    Somewhat alarming that the neo Nazis have made rather significant advances in Greece although not altogether unexpected.


  • #256
    milkymoo24
    Closed Accounts Posts: 28 ✭milkymoo24


    another Soviet Union, another Yugoslavia, and another Hitler as EU president.. have we learned nothiing.This should,be called the Fiasco Treaty.... resounding NO...I vow a hunger strike if YES gets the vote!!!!! We want out of europe all together!! Oh, and as for Germany, just last week they asked the UK for a loan of 100 MIllion Euro (No media will run it cos it would be anarchy cos if the Germans are screwed, we are even worse off!!, They also have a stock of swiss franks on standby the past year for when the euro crashes.... which means our savings and wages will be monopoly money soon. If you agree with this then please sign this petition to get Ireland fixed using same tactics as Iceland http://www.petitiononline.ie/petitio...to-europe/1471


  • #257
    milkymoo24
    Closed Accounts Posts: 28 ✭milkymoo24


    And any governemt that has to use scare tactics and threats via media to get the YES vote cannot be trusted! And the folk out there voting YES should hang their heads in untter shame... not to bring up the past but why fight for centuries for independent from England, one country, to then hand it over the Germany and France... talk about Out of the frying pan, into the fire, cop on for yourselves people, VOTE NO!!!


  • #258
    meglome
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,980 ✭✭✭meglome


    milkymoo24 wrote: »
    another Soviet Union, another Yugoslavia, and another Hitler as EU president.. have we learned nothiing.This should,be called the Fiasco Treaty.... resounding NO...I vow a hunger strike if YES gets the vote!!!!! We want out of europe all together!! Oh, and as for Germany, just last week they asked the UK for a loan of 100 MIllion Euro (No media will run it cos it would be anarchy cos if the Germans are screwed, we are even worse off!!, They also have a stock of swiss franks on standby the past year for when the euro crashes.... which means our savings and wages will be monopoly money soon. If you agree with this then please sign this petition to get Ireland fixed using same tactics as Iceland http://www.petitiononline.ie/petitio...to-europe/1471

    I got warned (fairly) in the last week about doing something similar but holy sweet jebus this is total nonsense.


  • #259
    milkymoo24
    Closed Accounts Posts: 28 ✭milkymoo24


    what is nonsense may I ask???


  • #260
    carveone
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,276 ✭✭✭carveone


    milkymoo24 wrote: »
    what is nonsense may I ask???

    Hunger strike. Go nuts. I feel hungry now.


  • #261
    milkymoo24
    Closed Accounts Posts: 28 ✭milkymoo24


    haha... me too!!! BUT, I dont think it will come to that, outta europe we needa get fast and no one will be starving themselves... stay within europe, and families all over Ireland will be starving every day with this IMF debt eating into our hardworking peoples taxes!!


  • Advertisement
  • #262
    kilkee1998
    Registered Users Posts: 1 ✭kilkee1998


    We need to grow up and start to live within our means. Successive governments did not care how much the overspent , so long as they were re-elected.
    If we balance our day to day spending we can then tackle the problem of bailing out the banks because we will be in a stronger position to do a deal with the EU/IMF.


  • #263
    carveone
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,276 ✭✭✭carveone


    kilkee1998 wrote: »
    We need to grow up and start to live within our means. Successive governments did not care how much the overspent , so long as they were re-elected.

    That was my initial reaction too. Why would be want the government to access to more funding to fund another bailout? Does that mean when it comes to reelection they could draw down a pile of money and make things looks rosier for a bit? Isn't piles of money what got us here in the first place?

    Unfortunately it's not that simple. Without access to bailout funds, it makes our economic position look less stable, thus making it more likely we'd have a very expensive time accessing market funding. Conversely, access to bailout funds means that our return to the market is more likely and thus we're less likely to need access to the ESM. In essence the whole thing is about making sure we don't need access to emergency funding that exists solely to make nervous people less so. (Scoff is better at this than I am)

    Yes, it's a bit twisted but that's life!

    Edit: I'll add that a deficit cannot be adjusted to zero overnight without incredible jarring pain for an economy. Like a car running out of road - you need to take the bushes, not the wall. The paintwork gets wrecked and there's a lot of dents but it's better than the alternative.


  • #264
    milkymoo24
    Closed Accounts Posts: 28 ✭milkymoo24


    kilkee1998 wrote: »
    We need to grow up and start to live within our means. Successive governments did not care how much the overspent , so long as they were re-elected.
    If we balance our day to day spending we can then tackle the problem of bailing out the backs because we will be in a stronger position to do a deal with the EU/IMF.
    Very true, we all got caught up in Celtic Tiger, even though it was nothing more than a false economy! Bertie had us all thinking we were all upper classes with credit cards n loans on tap!!! I myself am still in debt and unemployed from those times, but the real issue is, why pay back a debt for rogue developers, bankers and bondholders... thats where most of that IMF loan went! And giving more power to France and Germany is basically making us more unstable.... we have little say, might as well let the UK take the whole of Ireland back if thats d case, and I never thought I would say that!!!! If we do recover from recession, and someone else doesnt, were in the same boat again bailing them out them, its called a vicious circle and aint gonna work. END OFF! We need to pull out like the UK, pay our dues, and worry about ourselves! The Euro is dead money, that dream is over and people need to wake up to that!!! There is NO SOLUTION! And ur right, we do need to grow up, and grow some balls, and say NO MORE, why are more average people getting sent to court every week for stealing clothes and food n chemist supplies, just to keep the family cared for and a roof over their heads, treated like common dirt in social welfare offices, while the comfortable working upper classes think the YES vote is great COS they never felt this recession... The gangsters that kicked off the whole crisis with greed get to keep their D4 mansions, countless foreign properties and still getting bonuses and pension, and security and private mercs drving them around! Yes sir, indeed we need to grow up, we might have made mistakes and lived beyond our means, who wouldnt with difffernt banks trying to pawn off all types of creditcards and loans like they were dvd rentals... we all got carried away, but least we are suffering for them now, and paying our dues back, ya hear daily about middle aged women with families in court for credit union/bank arrears less than a months wage getting a bollocking off an over-paid greedy upper class judge over a few euros, while these B*%$terds running this country are swanning around, claiming expenses still, claiming an absurd wage, and using fear tactics to get the working class to pay back THEIR loans, the rich looks after their own. Thats the bottom line.....:P


  • #265
    K-9
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 43,311 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    milkymoo24 wrote: »
    another Soviet Union, another Yugoslavia, and another Hitler as EU president.. have we learned nothiing.This should,be called the Fiasco Treaty.... resounding NO...I vow a hunger strike if YES gets the vote!!!!! We want out of europe all together!! Oh, and as for Germany, just last week they asked the UK for a loan of 100 MIllion Euro (No media will run it cos it would be anarchy cos if the Germans are screwed, we are even worse off!!, They also have a stock of swiss franks on standby the past year for when the euro crashes.... which means our savings and wages will be monopoly money soon. If you agree with this then please sign this petition to get Ireland fixed using same tactics as Iceland http://www.petitiononline.ie/petitio...to-europe/1471

    Please take a read of the charter here: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056544394
    When offering fact, please offer relevant linkage, or at least source. Simply saying "a quick search on google...." is often, but not always, enough. If you do not do this upon posting, then please be willing to do so on request.

    Rumours and conspiracy theories don't qualify as sources as this is a politics discussion board.

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • #266
    milkymoo24
    Closed Accounts Posts: 28 ✭milkymoo24


    Do you mean you would like to see the website for the petition????


  • #267
    FreudianSlippers
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,397 ✭✭✭✭FreudianSlippers


    RandomName2 wrote: »
    semantics aside: Divorce, Nice, Lisbon

    (can't step in the same river twice, eh?)
    The wordings were different and posed different questions regarding the same subject.


  • #268
    Shiny Cactus
    Registered Users Posts: 40 ✭Shiny Cactus


    I see what both sides (Yes/No) are doing and is mainly only scaring the vote into the people, we'll be in the pockets of germany or its the only way to improve the economy.
    All sides are idiots when trying to improve the country even before the recession, I' am a "leftist" I guess to put a tag on myself but the left parties are as bad as the right or centre with no true plans for recovery.
    Anyway, I like to vote no but that's just anger and my real fears for the future of Ireland, but to vote yes means to hold position and reduce the debt until a proper revolutionary idea can come to the forefront.

    A vote for Yes or No means no results anyway, and boycotting is worthless.


  • #269
    C14N
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,656 ✭✭✭C14N


    milkymoo24 wrote: »
    And any governemt that has to use scare tactics and threats via media to get the YES vote cannot be trusted! And the folk out there voting YES should hang their heads in untter shame... not to bring up the past but why fight for centuries for independent from England, one country, to then hand it over the Germany and France... talk about Out of the frying pan, into the fire, cop on for yourselves people, VOTE NO!!!

    Right, because calling it the "Austerity Treaty", putting up posters declaring the treaty will lead to "5, 10, 20 years of austerity" and saying "vote no to Household and Water taxes" isn't using scare tactics at all is it?

    Why fight for independence from England? Did you learn at all about the English regime in Ireland? It was brutal. Ireland was kept in poverty, we were a third world country. People love using phrases like "Dev/Collins/whoever would roll in their grave if we do so and so", I think they'd roll over in their graves if they knew we were comparing our first world problems to what our ancestors from a century ago had to face. You take it one step further and even say that was only the frying pan compared to Europe's "fire". I really think you need to get a grip on reality because it sounds like you think we will literally be sent to forced labour camps to work honourably for the glory of the great and mighty Angela Merkel.


  • #270
    RandomName2
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,570 ✭✭✭RandomName2


    C14N wrote: »
    Right, because calling it the "Austerity Treaty", putting up posters declaring the treaty will lead to "5, 10, 20 years of austerity" and saying "vote no to Household and Water taxes" isn't using scare tactics at all is it?

    I am no fan of the 'Austerity Treaty' line. Austerity is a matter of economic circumstance rather than sovereignty. However, 'vote no to Water Taxes, etc'' isn't actually scare mongering per se. Just kinda disingenuous.
    C14N wrote: »
    Why fight for independence from England? Did you learn at all about the English regime in Ireland? It was brutal. Ireland was kept in poverty, we were a third world country. People love using phrases like "Dev/Collins/whoever would roll in their grave if we do so and so", I think they'd roll over in their graves if they knew we were comparing our first world problems to what our ancestors from a century ago had to face. You take it one step further and even say that was only the frying pan compared to Europe's "fire". I really think you need to get a grip on reality because it sounds like you think we will literally be sent to forced labour camps to work honourably for the glory of the great and mighty Angela Merkel.

    Now you're doing exactly the same thing!

    Sure you should vote yes; you should be happy not to be having to eat a blighted potato and digging for turf with your bear hands - where would you be if it weren't for Europe, etc. ("What have the Romans ever done for us?" argument CAN actually be used in relation to the UK as well by the way :pac:)

    Enough of the affectation.


  • Advertisement
  • #271
    C14N
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,656 ✭✭✭C14N


    RandomName2 wrote: »
    Now you're doing exactly the same thing!

    Sure you should vote yes; you should be happy not to be having to eat a blighted potato and digging for turf with your bear hands - where would you be if it weren't for Europe, etc. ("What have the Romans ever done for us?" argument CAN actually be used in relation to the UK as well by the way :pac:)

    Enough of the affectation.

    What are you talking about? That's not what I'm saying at all and I'm not sure how you pulled that stuff out of my post. I don't think I said anything to the effect of "we only have all this because of Europe" or that we should be grateful and do exactly what they tell us. I didn't even advocate the Yes vote in that post.

    What I did say is that no matter what happens, our problems are very trivial compared to what our ancestors faced and that the poster I was replying to seemed to have these unsupported crackpot theories about how we would go back to that if we vote yes, going so far as to say "stay within europe, and families all over Ireland will be starving every day". All I was doing was putting down this hyperbole.


  • #272
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    RandomName2 wrote: »
    I am no fan of the 'Austerity Treaty' line. Austerity is a matter of economic circumstance rather than sovereignty. However, 'vote no to Water Taxes, etc'' isn't actually scare mongering per se. Just kinda disingenuous.

    I'm not sure "disingenuous" really covers a situation where doing as suggested (voting No) will have at best no effect on the supposed motivating factor, and carries a very high chance of making things worse.

    What would the household charge be if we had to balance our budget overnight?

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • #273
    Ozymandius2011
    Registered Users Posts: 1,149 ✭✭✭Ozymandius2011


    The delay in ratification by the German parliament suggests to me that renegotiation might be possible. A two-thirds majority is required in the Bundestag as part of the ratification process. The german Social Democrats are making similar demands to Hollande about the need for a growth agenda. Perhaps a no vote here would encourage a shift in the Treaty away from austerity and towards growth.


  • #274
    beeftotheheels
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,675 ✭✭✭beeftotheheels


    Ozymandius2011 wrote: »
    The delay in ratification by the German parliament suggests to me that renegotiation might be possible. A two-thirds majority is required in the Bundestag as part of the ratification process. The german Social Democrats are making similar demands to Hollande about the need for a growth agenda. Perhaps a no vote here would encourage a shift in the Treaty away from austerity and towards growth.

    Actually not true. A majority of the Bundestag can ratify the treaty, the 2/3 majority is required because the Germans intend to hard wire the treaty into their constitution (unlike us).

    Whether Hollande and others want to tag on a growth agenda is by the by, and will probably be done by a protocol to the existing treaty or under existing rules.

    Look at Greece. There is plan A which is the current programme. There is Plan B which is to let the MS look out for themselves outside of the euro. All voting no would achieve is to turf us out of the plan A scenario, it could not create a plan C which allows us to continue as we are without complying with the rules.


  • #275
    bryaner
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,181 ✭✭✭bryaner


    I'm suffering serious brain freeze on this one..


  • #276
    Ozymandius2011
    Registered Users Posts: 1,149 ✭✭✭Ozymandius2011


    beeftotheheels wrote: »
    A majority of the Bundestag can ratify the treaty, the 2/3 majority is required because the Germans intend to hard wire the treaty into their constitution (unlike us)
    That's what I meant.


  • Advertisement
  • #277
    electrictrad
    Registered Users Posts: 367 ✭✭electrictrad


    OK, my two cents...

    I think the treaty puts us in a vunerable position. It constricts how we can spend, and puts us at a disadvantage compared to other nations.

    Also, as far as I'm aware, the treaty will go on regardless of whether we approve or not. Is it not an ideal way for France and Germany to gain yet more control over our finances, albeit indirectly?

    I actually think it'll do us major long-term damage, and it is another loss of control to Europe, this time actual financial control.

    So there. I'm voting No. And that's why.


  • #278
    beeftotheheels
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,675 ✭✭✭beeftotheheels


    electrictrad wrote: »
    It constricts how we can spend, and puts us at a disadvantage compared to other nations.

    No it doesn't. Existing rules constrict what we can spend, the treaty makes no changes to this. Our debt pile restricts what we can spend, the treaty makes no changes to this.

    You cannot vote no to allowing the Gov ratify a treaty based on not understanding what the treaty actually does or does not do.

    The rules are already there in the six-pack. The deficit is there. The debt is there. A no vote will not change any of this. All it will do is cut us off from ESM funding should we require it.


  • #279
    FreudianSlippers
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,397 ✭✭✭✭FreudianSlippers


    beeftotheheels wrote: »
    No it doesn't. Existing rules constrict what we can spend, the treaty makes no changes to this. Our debt pile restricts what we can spend, the treaty makes no changes to this.

    Plus it doesn't immediately apply to us (as far as external control), it only applies should we break the debt to GDP ratio set in the future.

    I've yet to hear any coherent line on why a set debt to GDP ratio is a bad thing?


  • #280
    FreudianSlippers
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,397 ✭✭✭✭FreudianSlippers


    electrictrad wrote: »
    It constricts how we can spend, and puts us at a disadvantage compared to other nations.

    Nope, all it says is that where a Member State has government debt that exceeds the reference level (a deficit-to-GDP ratio of 3% and a debt-to-GDP ratio of 60%), they shall reduce it at an average rate of a twentieth per annum. These countries are in what is called the EU Excessive Deficit Procedure - what happens then is that WE submit to the Council and Commission our plan to reduce this amount by the set twentieth per annum.

    That is hardly putting any sovereign power regarding our budget in the hands of the EU - in fact, they set out the guidelines for countries that are in the EDP and each Member State adjusts their budget accordingly. There is no provision that I have seen that allows the EU (or any part or group therein) to walk into a country and "take over" their budget or impose constraints on how money is spent.

    There is a huge difference between saying what you can spend and how you can spend it.


  • #281
    Vita nova
    Registered Users Posts: 748 ✭✭✭Vita nova


    electrictrad wrote: »
    OK, my two cents...
    I think the treaty puts us in a vunerable position.
    We’re already in a very vulnerable position and voting no is more likely to put us in an even more vulnerable position. We won’t have access to the ESM fund and our cost of borrowing will probably be even higher, after all, Moody’s have said a no would impact negatively on Ireland’s credit rating and that normally increases borrowing costs.
    It constricts how we can spend, and puts us at a disadvantage compared to other nations.
    It’s how we spent that put us in the vulnerable position in the first place; more control and oversight is not necessarily a bad thing.
    Less constriction in spending can put you at a short-term advantage relative to other countries but it has a way of biting you in the arse in the long term – look around.
    Also, as far as I'm aware, the treaty will go on regardless of whether we approve or not.
    Exactly, it’s not like an EU treaty, the train goes on without us should we vote no (assuming enough countries vote yes).
    Is it not an ideal way for France and Germany to gain yet more control over our finances, albeit indirectly?
    Too much paranoia for my liking. By the way, there are 27 members of the EU and 17 members of the Eurozone.
    I actually think it'll do us major long-term damage, and it is another loss of control to Europe, this time actual financial control.
    The intention is for countries to put in place measures that prevent long-term damage to themselves. Furthermore, we are part of the EU and Eurozone and have obligations to other members to act in a manner which does not mess up the financial system for the rest -something which has not happened under the existing set-up.
    So there. I'm voting No. And that's why.
    It's not too late; reconsider!


  • Advertisement
  • #282
    goat2
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,939 ✭✭✭goat2


    i have been listning to fine gael going on about this, last night on vb i cant think what her name is the blone lady she did not put across any good points as a matter of fact i would say that she does not have a clue about the whole thing,
    so for that reason i cannot see why we should be voting atall, just put this thing back for a few months until they get their act together,
    not one of them has spoken anything assuring on this


  • #283
    Jack_Plumber
    Registered Users Posts: 38 ✭Jack_Plumber


    I have not decided which way I will vote yet.

    An important issue for me is whether the adoption of this Fiscal Compact would have prevented the excesses by Bertie Aherne/Brian Cowen/Brian Lenihan/Financial Regulator etc that have caused the mess that is now drowning the Irish people?


  • #284
    FreudianSlippers
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,397 ✭✭✭✭FreudianSlippers


    Jack_Plumber wrote: »
    I have not decided which way I will vote yet.

    An important issue for me is whether the adoption of this Fiscal Compact would have prevented the excesses by Bertie Aherne/Brian Cowen/Brian Lenihan/Financial Regulator etc that have caused the mess that is now drowning the Irish people?
    In a round-a-bout way; yes. If our government went on a spending rampage again and we exceeded a deficit-to-GDP ratio of 3% and a debt-to-GDP ratio of 60% then our government would have to account for this spending before it got out of hand. The issue is that in boom times these things are raised but nobody cares.

    We need a silent alarm which will tell us all to stop spending when we don't want to.


  • #285
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    Jack_Plumber wrote: »
    I have not decided which way I will vote yet.

    An important issue for me is whether the adoption of this Fiscal Compact would have prevented the excesses by Bertie Aherne/Brian Cowen/Brian Lenihan/Financial Regulator etc that have caused the mess that is now drowning the Irish people?

    The fiscal limits in the Treaty would not do so by themselves, but the Treaty is only part of what's being done. The peer review system and the increased financial sector oversight would have provided a better early warning of what was happening. Improving structural deficit monitoring should also help highlight such issues in advance, and some of the mechanisms being put in place in Ireland as part of the Treaty obligations should also help.

    However, at the end of the day, Ireland is a sovereign nation, and no amount of warnings or peer review from Europe or from within Ireland can prevent our government from making a mess if that's what they really want to do, and what people want them to do for them.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • #286
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    FreudianSlippers wrote: »
    In a round-a-bout way; yes. If our government went on a spending rampage again and we exceeded a deficit-to-GDP ratio of 3% and a debt-to-GDP ratio of 60% then our government would have to account for this spending before it got out of hand. The issue is that in boom times these things are raised but nobody cares.

    We need a silent alarm which will tell us all to stop spending when we don't want to.

    Was it not the Germans firing cheap money around that allowed the spending spree here in the first place?
    How are we guaranteed that they won't do the same again and ignore the rules when it suits them, they and the other large members having been doing up to now, have they not?


  • #287
    beeftotheheels
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,675 ✭✭✭beeftotheheels


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    Was it not the Germans firing cheap money around that allowed the spending spree here in the first place?
    How are we guaranteed that they won't do the same again and ignore the rules when it suits them, they and the other large members having been doing up to now, have they not?

    Because that is a very important part of the change from the SGP. Previously, if you broke the rules, you needed a majority to enforce the sanctions. Now, if you break the rules, the sanctions are automatic and only a majority can block them.

    This means that if, in 10 years time, Germany is the one breaking the rules, the new treaty makes it a hell of a lot harder for them to avoid the consequences of breaking the rules, consequences which were way too easy for them to avoid under the original SGP.


  • #288
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    Was it not the Germans firing cheap money around that allowed the spending spree here in the first place?

    It was more a global loosening of credit, together with the virtual death of prudential lending rules here. There doesn't ever seem to have been much German (or even eurozone) money in the Irish domestic banks, as far as can be seen from their balance sheets.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • #289
    recedite
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,992 ✭✭✭✭recedite


    Scofflaw wrote: »
    There doesn't ever seem to have been much German (or even eurozone) money in the Irish domestic banks, as far as can be seen from their balance sheets.

    Well it sure as hell didn't come from ordinary people's deposits.


  • #290
    Jeff the Yank
    Registered Users Posts: 27 ✭Jeff the Yank


    Dear Mr Kenny,

    This treaty should not be ratified.

    There is no reason you should abdicate your responsibility to the Irish people and hand the reigns of economic control to the unelected bureaucrats and bankers in Brussels. You are needlessly lessening the status of the very people you claim to represent. There are so many things you could do rather than kowtow to the economic experiments of the Euro-Elite and their lackeys. Instead, you could enact better legislation than this patched together EU response could ever manage.

    You could take the reins of Ireland's economy back and start creating the banking legislation that will save Ireland from future lapses into the economic morass we currently enjoy and build towards steady job growth and a renewed Ireland. You could create a real and powerful Irish agency to regulate banking. Give that agency a budget big enough to do the job and give it teeth so banks will not only cooperate but will be forced to act responsibly.

    Please stop waiting for the bankers to fix things for you. Fix it yourself and save what’s left of Irish sovereignty.

    Don’t let the EU force a second referendum vote when you lose this first one. Instead, get us back on the Punt so we can start a cycle of devaluation to bring growth and job building back to our island. Stop this idiotic idea of growth through austerity and realize that all the leading economists say you SPEND your way out of recession not cut. Austerity is needlessly painful and does not work.

    “One answer — an answer that makes more sense than almost anyone in Europe is willing to admit — would be to break up the euro, Europe’s common currency. Europe wouldn’t be in this fix if Greece still had its drachma, Spain its peseta, Ireland its punt, and so on, because Greece and Spain would have what they now lack: a quick way to restore cost-competitiveness and boost exports, namely devaluation.

    As a counterpoint to Ireland’s sad story, consider the case of Iceland, which was ground zero for the financial crisis but was able to respond by devaluing its currency, the krona (and also had the courage to let its banks fail and default on their debts). Sure enough, Iceland is experiencing the recovery Ireland was supposed to have, but hasn’t.”

    From...

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/07/opinion/krugman-those-revolting-europeans.html


  • #291
    SHOVELLER
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,640 ✭✭✭SHOVELLER


    As an aside the No side are not doing themselves any favours hanging up posters at eye level.


  • Advertisement
  • #292
    RandomName2
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,570 ✭✭✭RandomName2


    Hold on,

    We can agree to enter the fiscal compact (provided it comes into force) at any time in the future, but we cannot apparently leave it if we sign (even if we leave the Euro!)

    There are already mechanisms to deal with states in the EU that are financially reckless. The EU has in the past threatened, and indeed posed fines on member states for their budgetary fecklessness.

    The Fiscal Compact would install a penalisation system into the national constitution (or equivalent level). The manner in which this system is implemented is up to the member state, but it must fit a manner as suggested by the Commission.

    Fiscal Compact members must submit their budgetary plans to one another (although we have infamously had this already happen here).

    Members who are in budgetary deficit will be monitored and their actions supervised by the Commission.

    ----

    The Commission meanwhile has seemingly outlined separate ideas to

    "require eurozone countries to present their draft budgets at the same time each year. The Commission could then issue an opinion on them, if necessary, and ask governments to revise them in line with their eurozone obligations.

    The second would enhance surveillance for eurozone countries being supported by financial assistance or that are threatened by serious financial instability"

    Whole thing is a bit creepy imo. :pac:


  • #293
    Wild Bill
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,129 ✭✭✭Wild Bill


    SHOVELLER wrote: »
    As an aside the No side are not doing themselves any favours hanging up posters at eye level.

    Can't afford ladders. Austerity thingy.


  • #294
    RandomName2
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,570 ✭✭✭RandomName2


    Wild Bill wrote: »
    Can't afford ladders. Austerity thingy.

    They're socialist. They believe we should all be on the same level. :D


  • #295
    Wild Bill
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,129 ✭✭✭Wild Bill


    RandomName2 wrote: »
    They're socialist. They believe we should all be on the same level. :D

    You don't have to be a Socialist to realise this treaty is daft though :cool:


  • #296
    beeftotheheels
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,675 ✭✭✭beeftotheheels


    RandomName2 wrote: »
    Hold on,

    We can agree to enter the fiscal compact (provided it comes into force) at any time in the future, but we cannot apparently leave it if we sign (even if we leave the Euro!)

    Rubbish. The Oireachtas can leave it at any time even without leaving the euro. However, the substantive provisions are already in the six-pack. Which already binds us, and which we can only stop binding us if we leave the EU. So the bit we're voting on we can undo. Only we're really not voting on all that much.
    RandomName2 wrote: »
    There are already mechanisms to deal with states in the EU that are financially reckless. The EU has in the past threatened, and indeed posed fines on member states for their budgetary fecklessness.

    Exactly. These are the substantive provisions and we're not voting on these.
    RandomName2 wrote: »
    The Fiscal Compact would install a penalisation system into the national constitution (or equivalent level). The manner in which this system is implemented is up to the member state, but it must fit a manner as suggested by the Commission.

    It has been agreed that an Act of the Oireachtas is sufficient for us because our constitution is a f***ing nightmare to change compared to every one elses.
    RandomName2 wrote: »
    Fiscal Compact members must submit their budgetary plans to one another (although we have infamously had this already happen here).

    Members who are in budgetary deficit will be monitored and their actions supervised by the Commission.

    As you noted, this part is already happening and our vote cannot change it at all.


  • #297
    meglome
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,980 ✭✭✭meglome


    recedite wrote: »
    Well it sure as hell didn't come from ordinary people's deposits.

    So if it didn't come from the Eurozone banks, that's the only other place you can think of? How about the US or the UK?


  • #298
    meglome
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,980 ✭✭✭meglome


    I'm not an economist but this article is mostly crap.
    Jeff the Yank wrote: »
    There is no reason you should abdicate your responsibility to the Irish people and hand the reigns of economic control to the unelected bureaucrats and bankers in Brussels.

    Funny I don't seem to recall those specific provisions of the treaty.
    Fix it yourself and save what’s left of Irish sovereignty.

    Jebus wept.
    Don’t let the EU force a second referendum vote when you lose this first one.

    Can't seem to recall ever being forced to have any referendum or rerun. And why the hell would Europe need us to rerun this one, it only needs twelve signatures and we can be bypassed.
    Stop this idiotic idea of growth through austerity and realize that all the leading economists say you SPEND your way out of recession not cut

    We're borrowing one third of all government spending and he thinks we can just spend our way out of it. Jebus.
    “One answer — an answer that makes more sense than almost anyone in Europe is willing to admit — would be to break up the euro, Europe’s common currency. Europe wouldn’t be in this fix if Greece still had its drachma, Spain its peseta, Ireland its punt, and so on, because Greece and Spain would have what they now lack: a quick way to restore cost-competitiveness and boost exports, namely devaluation.

    The markets are circling us like vultures but his solutions is to leave the safety net of the Euro. Jebus.
    As a counterpoint to Ireland’s sad story, consider the case of Iceland, which was ground zero for the financial crisis but was able to respond by devaluing its currency, the krona (and also had the courage to let its banks fail and default on their debts). Sure enough, Iceland is experiencing the recovery Ireland was supposed to have, but hasn’t.”

    Any other countries not in the same situation as Ireland that he'd like to compare us to.


    Crap.. crap... crap.


  • #299
    Jeff the Yank
    Registered Users Posts: 27 ✭Jeff the Yank


    You don't remember the forced re-vote of the Lisbon treaty? Really?

    As for your other enlightened responses please look up Keynesian economics.

    I'll just leave you with a thought. The Euro is not a safety net. Its a lead weight weighing us down in the financial ocean. Eventually we wont be able to tread water anymore.

    I believe he makes a point of Iceland because they were the only country that let their banks collapse. Ireland's collapse and Iceland's were very similar other than Ireland took the completely idiotic tact of bailing out its banks with money it did not have and the obvious difference that Iceland still had control of its own economic destiny. By being able to devalue its own currency it has an automatic release valve for improving exports and creating jobs. We do not.

    The main point stands. Ireland cannot devalue its currency and Germany has no interest in doing anything that doesn't help Germany. The banks simply want the people to pay off all their bad loans and investments and apparently have most of the world leaders either in their back pockets or scared enough to do their bidding. The entire idea of investment risk has been superseded by social financing of Big Banking.

    The Markets and Banks should not be running the country. The People of Ireland should be.

    This other thought is my own. Ireland does not need to trap itself into a treaty with the EU to fix the poor regulation of its banking and investment industry. It also doesn't need to trap itself into a EU treaty that in effect gives more power to the un-elected folks that make up the power structure of the EU. Ireland could very easily create its own laws dictating how to better manage a strong economy and police the out of control nature of Big Banking and the Markets.


  • #300
    ouncer
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,653 ✭✭✭ouncer


    what jeff the yank fails to mention but is probably very relevant is that we run a country less than the economic size of manchester and yet we fail to do so. Our economy is so small its crazy that our politicians can get it so wrong. Anyway the reality is that the No vote is currently running 2:1 against the YES vote so that says enough


  • Advertisement
  • #301
    K-9
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 43,311 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    Jeff the Yank wrote: »
    Dear Mr Kenny,

    This treaty should not be ratified.

    There is no reason you should abdicate your responsibility to the Irish people and hand the reigns of economic control to the unelected bureaucrats and bankers in Brussels. You are needlessly lessening the status of the very people you claim to represent. There are so many things you could do rather than kowtow to the economic experiments of the Euro-Elite and their lackeys. Instead, you could enact better legislation than this patched together EU response could ever manage.

    You could take the reins of Ireland's economy back and start creating the banking legislation that will save Ireland from future lapses into the economic morass we currently enjoy and build towards steady job growth and a renewed Ireland. You could create a real and powerful Irish agency to regulate banking. Give that agency a budget big enough to do the job and give it teeth so banks will not only cooperate but will be forced to act responsibly.

    Please stop waiting for the bankers to fix things for you. Fix it yourself and save what’s left of Irish sovereignty.

    Don’t let the EU force a second referendum vote when you lose this first one. Instead, get us back on the Punt so we can start a cycle of devaluation to bring growth and job building back to our island. Stop this idiotic idea of growth through austerity and realize that all the leading economists say you SPEND your way out of recession not cut. Austerity is needlessly painful and does not work.

    “One answer — an answer that makes more sense than almost anyone in Europe is willing to admit — would be to break up the euro, Europe’s common currency. Europe wouldn’t be in this fix if Greece still had its drachma, Spain its peseta, Ireland its punt, and so on, because Greece and Spain would have what they now lack: a quick way to restore cost-competitiveness and boost exports, namely devaluation.

    As a counterpoint to Ireland’s sad story, consider the case of Iceland, which was ground zero for the financial crisis but was able to respond by devaluing its currency, the krona (and also had the courage to let its banks fail and default on their debts). Sure enough, Iceland is experiencing the recovery Ireland was supposed to have, but hasn’t.”

    From...

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/07/opinion/krugman-those-revolting-europeans.html

    Thread merged with existing "how will you vote" thread". Many of these points have been debated in this thread so fits well here.

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement