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

Why the anger against current government?

Options
1246789

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    View
    Registered Users Posts: 3,872 ✭✭✭View


    Sand wrote: »
    Its in the politicians court to improve the standard of politics in this country.

    No it isn't, it is in the voters' court as they elect the politicians, not the other way around.

    If the electorate choose a poor standard of politicians then those politicians will be representative of the electorates' poor choices.


  • Options
    #93
    LordSutch
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,078 ✭✭✭✭LordSutch


    Talia Modern Football wrote: »
    Why the anger against current government?


    Why? in a nutshell the current government has had to administer the painful & disgustingly awful medicine that has been required to heal a very sick economy (courtesy of the previous administration), namely Brian Cowan's Fianna Fail, hence the (falsely aimed) anger at the New government.

    Thankfully Fianna Fail and their new leadership seem to have shed their old skin and are rebuilding themselves again under the new leadership of Micheál Martin, not that I'd vote for them myself, but at least they have undergone a painful and embarrassing transition into a credible opposition party.


  • Options
    #94
    bbam
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,410 ✭✭✭bbam


    Talia Modern Football wrote: »
    People can't have their cake and eat it, everybody wants good public services but they don't want to pay higher taxes to provide them. So we don't increase taxes and cut public expenditure but nobody wants to take a salary cut. Ultimately something has to give, we cannot run a low cost economy with low taxes and world class public services. Again this comes down to people realising that they need to readjust their expectations.

    People aren't stupid either..
    MN companies are on the radio constantly spouting that they aren't here for the low corporate tax but rather for the skilled workforce.... Fine, they should be contributing more to the country through increased Corporate tax.

    "people" in general aren't against tax increases, most are against tax increases that further erode the lives of the middle/low earners. Those on high wages could pay more tax, a third tax band as we had before would be very progressive

    We are already paying "World Class" wages in certain public sectors yet we're not getting world class services... Either the services need to be provided or the salaries dropped to match...

    I would dearly love to see a report on the spend of the money that was raided from the pension funds.. apparently for job creation. Apart from emigration I've seen no real attempt to recover sustainable jobs.
    And there is the addition knock on effect that we are now told that there isn't sufficient funds remaining to provide pensions - so we have to provide for ourselves... Raid the pension fund - No tangible results - And now we have to make up the shortfall in pensions ourselves.. Nice work there lads.

    Jobless figures are being manipulated by Tus, Jobs Bridge and such ponzy schemes.. Where no real lasting benefit is realised, but rather a churning of the long term unemployed through the schemes to beat down the statistics rather than tackle the problem.. Where the hell is the work activation measure in bringing potentially skilled people out to sweep the streets and pick litter - there are already sufficient council workers to do this - and now the councils are getting a similar scheme of long term unemployed workers out to be demeaned by sweeping streets and litter picking to be entitled for their payments - at the end they will have learned no skills. I see a local tus worker who is a skilled carpenter , out sweeping our local town streets - its hardly labour activation ! And a 4 week "computer" course might teach him how to use donedeal but it isn't training him to work in IT.

    Personally I'd be thinking of exemptions such as the equine industry happily lap up.. Can we justify this tax free status for what is essentially a business controlled by the already rich.

    What we saw at the last election was essentially a "change of jersey" in the dail. One set of schmoozers was replaced by another. There to make appointments for their cronies (which they said the wouldn't do). There to take advantage of tax breaks (which they had campaigned against). There to bow down to the paymasters in Europe (which they said they wouldn't do)..
    Didn't Enda Kenny in opposition complain that the last government wasn't being liberal enough in their spending/policies - but now blames everything on their spending/policies ??
    FG speak of the years of FF cronyism, shocking dealings and corruption. When the truth is more the fact that FG weren't in power is the only reason they didn't george themselves at the trough of power and excess. If they had been in power during the boom years they would have availed of the very same opportunities of corruption..

    The anger isn't about who they are... but the fact that they are no different than those they blame for all the woes of the country - after being elected on a ticket of political change.


  • Options
    #95
    Zubeneschamali
    Registered Users Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    LordSutch wrote: »
    at least they have undergone a painful and embarrassing transition into a credible opposition party.

    Yes, it's wonderful to see them shed their links with the past, and unite under the man who was:

    Minister for Education and Science (1997–2000)
    Minister for Health and Children (2000–04)
    Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment (2004–08)
    Minister for Foreign Affairs (2008–11)

    under Bertie and then Cowen's leadership. A breath of fresh air!


  • Options
    #96
    v638sg7k1a92bx
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭v638sg7k1a92bx


    LordSutch wrote: »
    Thankfully Fianna Fail and their new leadership seem to have shed their old skin and are rebuilding themselves again under the new leadership of Micheál Martin, not that I'd vote for them myself, but at least they have undergone a painful and embarrassing transition into a credible opposition party.

    This is obviously a wind up.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    sarumite
    Registered Users Posts: 2,909 ✭✭✭sarumite


    Godge wrote: »
    http://www.audgen.gov.ie/documents/vfmreports/68_Central_Gov_Pensions.pdf


    Here is the report.

    First my mistake from recollection, it actually does take account of the pension-related pay deduction otherwise known as the pension levy


    "Overall, the examination found that, based on the cost of one year’s additional service, the pension provision for an average public servant will cost around 9% of pay after account is taken of contributions made including the new pension related deduction introduced in 2009. The gross cost is on average 20% under this method"

    So the state is funding the pension at 9% of salary, not out of line with decent employers in the private sector.

    I still haven't had time to read the report, however reading your extract it appears the authors erroneously included the pension levy as a pension contribution when it was in fact a pay cut. If we correct for their mistake in their calculation would that put the real figure closer to something like 16.5% (assuming they mistakenly assumed the employee was contributing an average of 7.5%)?


  • Options
    #98
    golfball37
    Registered Users Posts: 4,516 ✭✭✭golfball37


    My hatred of this govt is nothing to do with cuts or taxes. They are doing the best they can with the hand they were dealt in that regard, of course they could do better but shur we all could.

    My dislike stems from the promise of a new type of Politics and when James Reilly was put on the parapet he was backed without question, the Labour party even hung one of their own to save him. In any civilised country a man with his track record would fall on his sword but not in Eire.


  • Options
    #99
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users Posts: 17,797 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    It's not just the economy though. There's a perception that the government are colluding with and protecting the people who've screwed us over, and they're doing absolutely nothing to refute that.


  • Options
    #100
    wolfpawnat
    Registered Users Posts: 6,124 ✭✭✭wolfpawnat


    hatrickpatrick wrote: »
    It's not just the economy though. There's a perception that the government are colluding with and protecting the people who've screwed us over, and they're doing absolutely nothing to refute that.

    Exactly, if they were tried and put to jail, people would be more accepting of these austerity measures.


  • Options
    #101
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users Posts: 17,797 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    wolfpawnat wrote: »
    Exactly, if they were tried and put to jail, people would be more accepting of these austerity measures.

    I wouldn't even demand that they be jailed as that's a matter for the courts, but for the DPP to grant immunity to Anglo's CFO, for Michael Noonan to stand idly by and abstain when he could have taken a moral stand against a pay rise for an executive in a bailed out bank, and for the department of finance to reuse to release legal advice which could aid the investigation are, to me, strong indicators of a high level of collusion.

    I'm sure individual justifications can always be found but you must admit, when one steps back and takes all of these things together, a very ugly picture emerges, of people who should rightfully be punished for their actions being shielded, protected, and quietly let off without even a slap on the wrist.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    Mr.Micro
    Registered Users Posts: 5,336 ✭✭✭Mr.Micro


    LordSutch wrote: »

    Thankfully Fianna Fail and their new leadership seem to have shed their old skin and are rebuilding themselves again under the new leadership of Micheál Martin, not that I'd vote for them myself, but at least they have undergone a painful and embarrassing transition into a credible opposition party.

    Have you seen the FF bench in the Dail? I would love to know what is new or changed about FF. Willie O Dea is still..... Willie or Dea, Martin is still the same. Its still the same FF skin, just a bit thicker. :D


  • Options
    #103
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    "Why the anger against current government?"
    I believe it is because people don't like being told that they HAVE to live within their means and pay their way. The current Government has a very hard job to do and are doing their best. They don't always get things right, but they are trying. When people are asked for their input, they stay at home moaning on Internet Forums, instead of going out and giving the Government guidance they seek. There are without doubt, many families that are struggling, but there are many more that are doing ok. Young families always struggle, but things always level out as the children get older. These are the ones that need the most help.


  • Options
    #104
    Godge
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21,727 ✭✭✭✭Godge


    bbam wrote: »
    People aren't stupid either..
    MN companies are on the radio constantly spouting that they aren't here for the low corporate tax but rather for the skilled workforce.... Fine, they should be contributing more to the country through increased Corporate tax.

    "people" in general aren't against tax increases, most are against tax increases that further erode the lives of the middle/low earners. Those on high wages could pay more tax, a third tax band as we had before would be very progressive

    .


    I would think people are stupid.

    For example, we have one of the most progressive tax systems in the world yet we have people constantly going on about taxing higher earners even more. It defies logic. We are losing the brightest and the best to emigration and that most highly educated workforce won't hang around too long to be taxed to the hilt.

    The biggest gap between us and other countries in relation to income tax is that we hardly tax people up to a level of €35,000 while other countries take a significant amount of tax from this cohort. It hardly helps that our social welfare rates are so high that taxing this group would act as a further disincentive to work.


  • Options
    #105
    RainMaker
    Closed Accounts Posts: 459 ✭✭RainMaker


    Maybe people are just realizing that what is called democracy in this country is actually a sham.

    You replace one shower of gombeen idiots, and all you get is another.

    They make promises then do the opposite, then hire some PR firm to convince everybody that things are somehow better than everybody knows they are e.g. Latest unemployment figures.

    The primary school behaviour that passes as political debate in the Dail.

    The whip system, the dysfunctional Seanad...


    The fact is they got elected based on lies, and have used that "mandate" to continue on failed policies that were never, ever in a million years going to work...

    The back-slapping, handshaking culture of self-congratulations every time some private company announces new jobs - mostly completely unconnected to the govt, but who's always there to make the announcements and try to take credit?

    The whole political class should be banned from ever even running for election again for the simple reason they are only concerned with being politicians.
    I thought it was funny during the abortion debates how many politicians had to vote based on their personal and religious beliefs, but had no problems inflicting misery and suffering on families across the country with their budgetary policies.
    I take some pleasure in knowing that if some of them are as religious as they like to portray and indeed if heaven/hell do exist, then a lot of those same religious politicians will be burning in hell for eternity for the suffering they have caused, while trying to convince is it's good for us!


  • Options
    #106
    v638sg7k1a92bx
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭v638sg7k1a92bx


    wolfpawnat wrote: »
    Exactly, if they were tried and put to jail, people would be more accepting of these austerity measures.

    Government gave people the opportunity to introduce new legislation via the House of Oireachtas Inquiries referendum which would have given the government additional powers to address exactly what people have been bitching about re "The Banks" and the people decided to vote no.


  • Options
    #107
    Knob Longman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 326 ✭✭Knob Longman


    They are nothing compared to the last lot.


  • Options
    #108
    skirt_hunter
    Site Banned Posts: 9 ✭skirt_hunter


    RainMaker wrote: »
    Maybe people are just realizing that what is called democracy in this country is actually a sham.

    You replace one shower of gombeen idiots, and all you get is another.

    They make promises then do the opposite, then hire some PR firm to convince everybody that things are somehow better than everybody knows they are e.g. Latest unemployment figures.

    The primary school behaviour that passes as political debate in the Dail.

    The whip system, the dysfunctional Seanad...


    The fact is they got elected based on lies, and have used that "mandate" to continue on failed policies that were never, ever in a million years going to work...

    The back-slapping, handshaking culture of self-congratulations every time some private company announces new jobs - mostly completely unconnected to the govt, but who's always there to make the announcements and try to take credit?

    The whole political class should be banned from ever even running for election again for the simple reason they are only concerned with being politicians.
    I thought it was funny during the abortion debates how many politicians had to vote based on their personal and religious beliefs, but had no problems inflicting misery and suffering on families across the country with their budgetary policies.
    I take some pleasure in knowing that if some of them are as religious as they like to portray and indeed if heaven/hell do exist, then a lot of those same religious politicians will be burning in hell for eternity for the suffering they have caused, while trying to convince is it's good for us!


    austerity is not a choice , some people like to believe it is , 2002 - 2007 was a fantasy based on bubble revenues , were still spending too much based on the reduction in revenue


  • Options
    #109
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users Posts: 17,797 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    Talia Modern Football wrote: »
    Government gave people the opportunity to introduce new legislation via the House of Oireachtas Inquiries referendum which would have given the government additional powers to address exactly what people have been bitching about re "The Banks" and the people decided to vote no.

    Who said anything about the Oireachtas? I'm talking about using the existing legal system, not setting up enquiries which would in all probability be as utterly useless as Mahon and Moriarty - naming the culprits and then having no powers whatsoever to actually punish them, and effectively granting them immunity because evidence used in a tribunal cannot then be used in a criminal trial. Absolute farce.

    There's plenty the government could be doing within the existing system in order to achieve some semblance of justice for the Irish people.
    They could be drafting new laws against any such rotten and corrupt behavior in the future, if it's found that those responsible for the banking crisis technically didn't break any laws.
    They shouldn't be withholding evidence which could assist in the investigation (Exhibit A and Exhibit B.)
    They shouldn't be refusing to release evidence which could prove that the ECB overstepped its legal boundaries in order to force us into a bailout.
    They shouldn't be abstaining from votes which decide whether or not to increase the pay to executives of taxpayer rescued failed banks.
    The DPP shouldn't be granting immunity to senior Anglo executives such as its CFO, who almost certainly knew exactly what was going on and at the very least didn't speak up about it, and in all probability took some part in it himself.
    They should have more Gardai working on the case considering how central it is to any hope of the Irish people getting any kind of justice out of all this.
    They shouldn't be forcing uninvolved taxpayers to bail out any more failed businesses despite them allegedly being private companies with responsibility for their own decisions. What's the justification for robbing all of us to bail out Quinn but not doing the same to bail out struggling homeowners? Either both are legitimate or neither, either we're bailing out people who made mistakes or we're not - we shouldn't be basing those decisions on whether or not someone is an important person in Irish society or not, or the effect on other financial institutions which again are private companies responsible for their own f*ck ups. This last example is possibly the one which angers me the most. There's absolutely no justification for it whatsoever and it's an obvious and direct slap in the face to those who don't move in such exalted circles as politicians and financial executives. :mad:

    Really, there's just so much evidence pointing towards high level collusion that I'm genuinely very surprised that so many people are so "meh" about it. This entire saga is proof if any was needed that some people's wellbeing is considered more important than others depending on where they are on the elite's ladder, and that is not the type of society I'm willing to live in.

    None of the above has anything to do with waving a magic wand to solve the recession. They are separate issues, and this one is every bit as important.


  • Options
    #110
    Sand
    Registered Users Posts: 12,472 ✭✭✭✭Sand


    :rolleyes:
    View wrote: »
    No it isn't, it is in the voters' court as they elect the politicians, not the other way around.

    If the electorate choose a poor standard of politicians then those politicians will be representative of the electorates' poor choices.

    Not picking on you View, but that's a bit of circular view. A rather frustrating one too.Let see what I've learned about self described grown up adult voters views in Ireland.

    1-Politicians lie. Everyone knows this.
    2-Its not politicians fault they lie. Its the voters fault.
    3-If voters vote against politicians because they lied in their manifestos, the voters are fickle children who aren't mature enough to stay the course.
    4-If voters *dont* vote against politicians because they lied, they get the government they deserve - i.e. near habitually dishonest and corrupt parties like Fianna Fail.
    5-If voters decide to vote for an honest government -HA!- Fooled you, see #1
    6-If voters decides not to vote for a dishonest government - they get the government they deserve. Again.

    So the voters are *always* at fault, no matter who they vote for, and the politicians are *never* at fault, and the voters are simultaneously at fault for both voting for dishonest politicians and voting against dishonest politicians.

    I get it now. Its a pretty Orwellian, and I do believe the great man did remark that “There are some ideas so wrong that only a very intelligent person could believe in them.”

    But seriously - get over the 1950s Catholic guilt complex. Just because you've been wronged does not mean that you deserved to be wronged. Just because the voters were lied to does not mean they deserved to be lied to. Fine Gael and other parties routinely lie in their manifestos and the voters will hold them to account for it. Thats good right? All you people arguing the Irish voter ought to punish poor standards of politicians ought to be particularly cheered by Labours hammering. Gilmore is a particularly dishonest politician, even by Irish standards, and his party is taking a hammering in the polls. Good right? No, bad apparently, those fickle Irish voters not having the maturity to support their openly lying politicians unquestioningly.

    The only support I'm seeing for pathological dishonesty and poor standards in Irish politics in this thread is coming from the so called mature/adult voters who are totally okay with manifestos being a pack of lies.


  • Options
    #111
    Zubeneschamali
    Registered Users Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    Sand wrote: »
    Fine Gael and other parties routinely lie in their manifestos and the voters will hold them to account for it.

    By Voting for Fianna Fáil again! Hurray! Put up the Galway races tent once more!

    Or... you could read a manifesto using your critical faculties.

    None of the cuts or tax rises the government have made are a surprise to me. The surprise is that they didn't raise income tax and cut core social welfare: they actually kept some promises.

    I wish they hadn't, the idiots.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #112
    Sand
    Registered Users Posts: 12,472 ✭✭✭✭Sand


    Zubeneschamali wrote: »
    By Voting for Fianna Fáil again! Hurray! Put up the Galway races tent once more!

    Or... you could read a manifesto using your critical faculties.

    None of the cuts or tax rises the government have made are a surprise to me. The surprise is that they didn't raise income tax and cut core social welfare: they actually kept some promises.

    I wish they hadn't, the idiots.

    Why bother? It's full of lies. All manifestos are lies. Because all politicians lie. Or so I'm told. You *might* catch the factual lies if you had say, a fully staffed team of hundreds of fact checkers and complete access to the civil service records (and not even TDs do) but how do you catch lies about the intent to empower the Dail? And even if you did catch a factual lie - so what? Shure mature, adult voters already know the manifesto is lies.

    You might as well vote for the same party your granddaddy voted for according to the self described adult, mature voters. As good a reason as any.

    Honestly - I have to laugh seeing the same people who decry the poor standards of Irish politics endorsing exactly the same views that led to those poor standards - except they tell themselves they're smart enough to decry the poor standards of the rest of us. A coping strategy I suppose.


  • Options
    #113
    Zubeneschamali
    Registered Users Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    Sand wrote: »
    Why bother? It's full of lies.

    Yes, but there are bits of truth in there, and you can work out who to vote for, who will run the country best.

    Or you could just for for FF like your Dad did.


  • Options
    #114
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users Posts: 17,797 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    Zubeneschamali wrote: »
    By Voting for Fianna Fáil again! Hurray! Put up the Galway races tent once more!

    Or... you could read a manifesto using your critical faculties.

    None of the cuts or tax rises the government have made are a surprise to me. The surprise is that they didn't raise income tax and cut core social welfare: they actually kept some promises.

    I wish they hadn't, the idiots.

    Or how about wishing they hadn't made those promises in the first place? :confused:

    It's pretty simple, don't make promises you either don't intend to or are unlikely to be able to keep. If every party was forced to adhere to this, we would be able to choose the best of a bad lot (which is all Irish politics is at the moment) knowing exactly how bad each one is.

    How anyone can defend dishonesty because it's the only way to get elected is beyond me. Is it ok for me to lie about my position in order to get a loan, because it's the only way I'll be able to get a loan ahead of someone else? Is it ok for me to lie in court because if I tell the truth I'll get a conviction?

    The "It's ok for politicians to lie because how else will they get elected" viewpoint is such an insane fallacy I'm never really sure where to start.


  • Options
    #115
    Zubeneschamali
    Registered Users Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    hatrickpatrick wrote: »
    Or how about wishing they hadn't made those promises in the first place? :confused:

    I wish Enda Kenny had come out and promised to eat the firstborn child in every family if he was elected.

    We would still have had to vote for him, but everyone would be glad he didn't keep his stupid promises.


  • Options
    #116
    View
    Registered Users Posts: 3,872 ✭✭✭View


    Sand wrote: »
    :rolleyes:

    Not picking on you View, but that's a bit of circular view. A rather frustrating one too.Let see what I've learned about self described grown up adult voters views in Ireland.

    1-Politicians lie. Everyone knows this.
    2-Its not politicians fault they lie. Its the voters fault.
    3-If voters vote against politicians because they lied in their manifestos, the voters are fickle children who aren't mature enough to stay the course.
    4-If voters *dont* vote against politicians because they lied, they get the government they deserve - i.e. near habitually dishonest and corrupt parties like Fianna Fail.
    5-If voters decide to vote for an honest government -HA!- Fooled you, see #1
    6-If voters decides not to vote for a dishonest government - they get the government they deserve. Again.

    So the voters are *always* at fault, no matter who they vote for, and the politicians are *never* at fault, and the voters are simultaneously at fault for both voting for dishonest politicians and voting against dishonest politicians.

    I get it now.

    No, you clearly don't get it.

    It is like this:
    1) We are a democracy,
    2) It is the responsibility US, the citizens of a democracy to make our democracy work for us - not "the politicians", "the Troika" or "someone somewhere"
    3) To vote we must be adults and - a prerequisite - have grown up enough to take responbility for our own actions and inactions,
    4) Any voter is free to set up a political party (subject to fairly minor conditions) and advocate for what they believe,
    5) We, the voters, are free to elect whomever we want and whatever political party we choose, including any new ones,
    6) We, the voters, are NOT obliged to vote for existing political parties OR politicians we feel have failed to deliver,
    7) If we, the voters, give a single party an overall majority, it gets the opportunity to attempt to deliver on its manifesto,
    8) If we, the voters, do not then the parties elected to represent the diverse views in our society have to reach a compromise on what they can deliver,
    9) In both cases (7 & 8), such delivery is obviously subject to constraints, financial being the most obvious but others such as legal, politcal and - probably most important - time (as the legislative process is a slow one) being critcal factors.
    10) Come the next election, we, the voters, get the opportunity to give those parties (or party) in power, the opportunity to continue their legislative efforts OR, if we so choose, to pass the opportunity to either opposition parties (or party) OR to new parties (that have not been represented in the Oireachtas before)
    11) Obviously, if we, the voters, don't use our opportunities wisely, we get to live with the consequences of our poor choices. Equally, obviously, if we continuously make wise choices, we will transforrm our society - which will take time since change comes slowly.

    Change is NOT going to come about if we throw our hands up in despair - no one (else) "owes" us a better form of society than the one we have. If we want one, it is up to us, the voters, to effect the change needed to change our society.


  • Options
    #117
    View
    Registered Users Posts: 3,872 ✭✭✭View


    hatrickpatrick wrote: »
    Or how about wishing they hadn't made those promises in the first place? :confused:

    It's pretty simple, don't make promises you either don't intend to or are unlikely to be able to keep.

    An interesting idea but you do realise that even the larger parties can't be certain they'll be able to keep their promises since that depends on they number of votes they get and their coalition partners (presuming a coalition), not to mention economic circumstances? And that the smaller parties have even less certainty about this than the larger ones?

    Logically, none of the parties would be able to produce any form of manifesto.

    That would turn our elections even more into political "beauty contests" where no one is elected on anything other than the personal "likability" of the candidate. At which point, a voter may have a "choice" but it is largely an irrelevant one since you might as well use a lottery as an election to select TDs at that stage.


  • Options
    #118
    Horrid Henry
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 100 ✭✭Horrid Henry


    Voters are to blame.

    A politician who told the truth and introduced appropriate policies wouldn't get re-elected.


  • Options
    #119
    Loafing Oaf
    Registered Users Posts: 16,008 ✭✭✭✭Loafing Oaf


    View wrote: »
    An interesting idea but you do realise that even the larger parties can't be certain they'll be able to keep their promises since that depends on they number of votes they get and their coalition partners (presuming a coalition), not to mention economic circumstances?

    But the point about Labour's promises is that they were phrased in such a way that they appeared to override these considerations. If Gilmore had said Labour would oppose cuts in child benefit, or resist FG efforts to do it, his position might be defensible in a jesuitical sense, but he said they would 'not agree' to such cuts. I wish some interviewer would pin him down on this.


  • Options
    #120
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users Posts: 17,797 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    Zubeneschamali wrote: »
    I wish Enda Kenny had come out and promised to eat the firstborn child in every family if he was elected.

    We would still have had to vote for him, but everyone would be glad he didn't keep his stupid promises.

    Why would we have "had to vote for him" exactly?
    Politics should be based on voting for those who espouse policies one approves of - that is completely impossible if these policies can be completely misrepresented and turned on their head as soon as the election is over.

    It's akin to buying a TV which was advertised as being widescreen but subsequently opening the box and finding that it wasn't - except in that case you can return the TV and ask for a new one, which is something we can't do with politicians.

    Better analogy, considering the government is supposed to be working for the public: Imagine if you hired someone based on an entirely made up and falsified CV, and then weren't able to do anything about it until their five year contract was up? I'm fairly sure in that case you would have legitimate grounds for dismissal.

    Why the tolerance for politicians misrepresenting their intentions when we don't tolerate it in other walks of life?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #121
    Zubeneschamali
    Registered Users Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    hatrickpatrick wrote: »
    Why would we have "had to vote for him" exactly?

    Because FF had to go.


Advertisement