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,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Why the anger against current government?

Options
2456789

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    rodento
    Registered Users Posts: 1,728 ✭✭✭rodento


    Talia Modern Football wrote: »
    Assuming you are an adult and are old enough to vote, did you seriously expect a change of fortunes two years into a new government? All the reasons for not liking the govt seem to be fairly wishy washy to me. A lot of talk on here about reform, new politics, change etc but what exactly do people want? The reasons for not liking the govt from what I read on here seem to be personal gripes more than anything else. As for change and reform, we've had five referendums within two and a half years which is unprecedented in our times. If we compare that to the previous govt who held two referendums since 2001 being the protection of life and Irish citizebship. The rest were all driven by our membership of the EU.

    How can you call it a personal gripe

    We were offered a new kinda of politics and what we got is a Taoiseach who treats us as if we are nothing more than gullible kids

    Take the last referendum, we were told that there would be 20 million savings a year, we were not told how this was calculated nor how much it'd cost to run all the new partisan committees, when the referendum commission questioned the savings, we were told well we know best...

    On the mortgage crisis we are constantly been told there is no evidence of strategic default, but a bank has to take a minister for small business to court in order to be paid

    I could go on but


  • Options
    #33
    titan18
    Registered Users Posts: 11,932 ✭✭✭✭titan18


    Sand wrote: »
    Assuming you are an adult and old enough to vote, did you expect a government to break all of its promises to the voters and remain popular? Perhaps you did - you weren't far off crediting the government for the two weeks of great sunshine we got this summer.

    And for what its worth I think you're misreading rodentos post - he's highlighting that the government promised to undertake business in an honest, fair and transparent way. Not that everything would be solved in two years. People are very clear that the system of governance in Ireland is badly broken: FG were elected with a clear mandate to reform it, to undo the corrosive cynicism in Irish politics.

    First week into power, Enda Kenny was breaching salary caps for his advisors: snouts in the tough.

    FG weren't really, if they were, they wouldn't have had to go into coalition with Labour. If people wanted FG, they'd have got the overall majority.

    There's only so much they can do when they're stuck having to appease another party from walking out of government if they go too far


  • Options
    #34
    nesf
    Registered Users Posts: 27,645 ✭✭✭✭nesf


    Painted Pony wrote: »
    Yes the pension issue is a huge problem. And in fairness to the previous government they did make an issue to address the problem with their pension fund.

    But is is a huge problem and I don't see anyway, especially given the current climate, that this, or any other government can solve it. Funding pensions from the exchequer was / is not a great idea. We can all expect to work for longer than we had thought and / or to get a much reduced pension, if we get one at all.

    And this goes back to the broader question as to how much we could reasonably expect any government to do?

    I'm not saying it's reasonable, just people are annoyed by it. Normally it takes extreme circumstances for the political will to be there for massive structural change, see the political changes during the Great Depression (both good and bad) and in the immediate post-War period in Europe for instance (beginning of the EU, unthinkable 20 years earlier). Our current recession is nowhere near as drastic as either of these.


  • Options
    #35
    spank_inferno
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,892 ✭✭✭spank_inferno


    Reserve judgement till 2016.

    This gov has made more change than FF did since 1997


  • Options
    #36
    v638sg7k1a92bx
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭v638sg7k1a92bx


    Sand wrote: »
    Assuming you are an adult and old enough to vote, did you expect a government to break all of its promises to the voters and remain popular? Perhaps you did - you weren't far off crediting the government for the two weeks of great sunshine we got this summer.

    And for what its worth I think you're misreading rodentos post - he's highlighting that the government promised to undertake business in an honest, fair and transparent way. Not that everything would be solved in two years. People are very clear that the system of governance in Ireland is badly broken: FG were elected with a clear mandate to reform it, to undo the corrosive cynicism in Irish politics.

    First week into power, Enda Kenny was breaching salary caps for his advisors: snouts in the tough.

    Again, more personal gripes and nitpicking. Out of all the fiscal problems that this country has faced in the past five years, your main concern is the salary of one of Enda Kenny's personal advisor's. I never been a blue shirt by any stretch of the imagination but I have to hold my hand up and say that there is no comparison between this government and previous FF governments in terms of "noses in the trough". FF governments had an endemic level of corruption running through the party and yet people are now directing their anger at this govt over petty items such as one advisor's pay and as a result we can see FF creeping back up the polls.

    As for reform, what exactly do people want? Five referendums in 2.5 years with more to follow, if that isn't reform I don't know what is?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    TheDoc
    Registered Users Posts: 23,128 ✭✭✭✭TheDoc


    I think the anger and conflict directed at them, is not due to their complete indeptitude to the task and their mandate, but is more a reflection on the fickle population, and how we love to play the blame game.
    Labour and FG did not during the general election, once, provide ONE tangible plan of action in order to stimulate jobs, or put us back on track.

    Throughout their tenure they have simply played the "well we didn't put us in this mess" anytime their shoddy or piss poor plans are questioned. They made their soundbite promises and requests which the population bought into stupidly.

    Their needs to be some responability on those that voted Labour and FG. My belief is that it was a case of simply voting in "anything other then FF", but we have put people in power that simply have not got the skillset to achieve anything of note. Instead we have given them essentially a free pass to salary bumps, and to put inplace some token legislation so they have their name remembered. Why else would someone like Reilly be badgering on about making Ireland smoke free in 2025, when his HSE budget will be announced shortly to have run hundreds of millions over budget again, requiring another bailout for the HSE.

    I think the anger is well justified, in that they have completely failed their responability and mandate to the population first off, while also being compeltely abject in their positions.

    I appreciate they are a government operating during a recession. But some of their decisions, activities and in alot of cases refusal to debate or discuss some serious issues, is a pretty daming indication of a piss poor effort. Coupled with the fact they keep championing they are our saviours, that we are coming out squeeky clean. Well anyone believing that are in for a massive shock to the system.


  • Options
    #38
    Loafing Oaf
    Registered Users Posts: 16,006 ✭✭✭✭Loafing Oaf


    [QUOTE=TheDoc;86900648They made their soundbite promises and requests which the population bought into stupidly.
    [/QUOTE]

    In fairness, this applies much more to Labour than to FG. Most FG promises were vague waffley things that they can sort of justifiably claim to be making progress on, whereas Labour's were ostensibly watertight commitments on specific policy issues, almost all of which they have royally trashed.

    So re the OP's question, IMO it's the being played for fools that really drives people mad, and Labour are much the guiltier party in this respect. Gilmore's line on this is "Well our pre-election commitments were made on our own behalf, but when you go into coalition you have to make compromises". Does anyone here find this defensible, even on a sort of Clintoneseque level of linguistic evasiveness? When he wagged his finger and said "Labour will not agree to child benefit being cut any more" does that not clearly imply that party would walk out of govt if FG insisted on imposing such cuts?


  • Options
    #39
    v638sg7k1a92bx
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭v638sg7k1a92bx


    Loafing Oaf wrote: »
    In fairness, this applies much more to Labour than to FG. Most FG promises were vague waffley things that they can sort of justifiably claim to be making progress on, whereas Labour's were ostensibly watertight commitments on specific policy issues, almost all of which they have royally trashed.

    So re the OP's question, IMO it's the being played for fools that really drives people mad, and Labour are much the guiltier party in this respect. Gilmore's line on this is "Well our pre-election commitments were made on our own behalf, but when you go into coalition you have to make compromises". Does anyone here find this defensible, even on a sort of Clintoneseque level of linguistic evasiveness? When he wagged his finger and said "Labour will not agree to child benefit being cut any more" does that not clearly imply that party would walk out of govt if FG insisted on imposing such cuts?

    Ok lets take child benefit as another example. Who would have a problem with child benefit being means tested so that the people who need it the most get the most. Why have labour taken this position that everyone is entitled to the same amount of child benefit regardless of their income, just doesn't make sense?
    Same with third level fees. Labour originally introduced free third level education with the intention that it would remove the barriers to entry for people from who effectively couldn't afford to go to third level. This policy didn't change the demographic of people from going to third level and ultimately what has happened is that we are providing free third level education to people who can afford to pay for it, many of which don't have any problem with sending their kids to fee paying secondary schools. We could re-introduce third level fees on a means test basis so that people who don't have the means to pay their fees won't be prevented from attending third level on the basis of their income.


  • Options
    #40
    Idbatterim
    Registered Users Posts: 17,840 ✭✭✭✭Idbatterim


    Ok lets take child benefit as another example. Who would have a problem with child benefit being means tested so that the people who need it the most get the most. Why have labour taken this position that everyone is entitled to the same amount of child benefit regardless of their income, just doesn't make sense?
    Same with third level fees. Labour originally introduced free third level education with the intention that it would remove the barriers to entry for people from who effectively couldn't afford to go to third level. This policy didn't change the demographic of people from going to third level and ultimately what has happened is that we are providing free third level education to people who can afford to pay for it, many of which don't have any problem with sending their kids to fee paying secondary schools. We could re-introduce third level fees on a means test basis so that people who don't have the means to pay their fees won't be prevented from attending third level on the basis of their income.

    The ones that need it the most are the working poor, the ones who have to actually pay for child minding or creche etc. I totally disagree with this, by mean testing it, who do you plan on taking it away from? I mean roughly what income and whatever figure you give, those earning that will already be paying the outrageous marginal rate of tax. This isnt about taxing the "high earners" etc, its targeting anyone who has got off their ass and either a) got a good education or b) worked hard probably a combination of both for the most part. Whats being proposed here is totally the opposite of Germany, Scandinavia, where what you get out is based on what you pay in. Whats being proposed is responsible hard working people, massively subsidising others more than they already do and their education while they pay through the nose for it?

    With regards to third level fees. Forget anyone getting beneficial treatment, put a loan system in place for everyone and end of!

    Ireland has to be one of if not the most cushy countries in the world, everything is handed to you on a plate here if your prepared to put in any sort of bloody effort & if your not, forget expecting the same or near it, standard of living that those who have educated themselves and worked their asses off have...


  • Options
    #41
    v638sg7k1a92bx
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭v638sg7k1a92bx


    Idbatterim wrote: »
    The ones that need it the most are the working poor, the ones who have to actually pay for child minding or creche etc. I totally disagree with this, by mean testing it, who do you plan on taking it away from? I mean roughly what income and whatever figure you give, those earning that will already be paying the outrageous marginal rate of tax. This isnt about taxing the "high earners" etc, its targeting anyone who has got off their ass and either a) got a good education or b) worked hard probably a combination of both for the most part. Whats being proposed here is totally the opposite of Germany, Scandinavia, where what you get out is based on what you pay in. Whats being proposed is responsible hard working people, massively subsidising others more than they already do and their education while they pay through the nose for it?

    With regards to third level fees. Forget anyone getting beneficial treatment, put a loan system in place for everyone and end of!

    Ireland has to be one of if not the most cushy countries in the world, everything is handed to you on a plate here if your prepared to put in any sort of bloody effort & if your not, forget expecting the same or near it, standard of living that those who have educated themselves and worked their asses off have...

    That's what means testing does, you take into account a persons income, expense, size of family etc. BTW, kids are only in creche up to the age of 4 but child benefit is paid until the kids are 18.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    Idbatterim
    Registered Users Posts: 17,840 ✭✭✭✭Idbatterim


    yeah but either way, its proposed to take it away from people who are already taking away too much in my opinion. when I hear means test, I'm sure people are referring to high earners, as what I would to middle income, which would be 80-100k if say family of 3 and its a joint income. The outrageous marginal rate of income tax, quickly reduces a "high salary" down to much more modest territory. See below, it is based on a single PAYE worker... Not sure if there is is one for couples...

    http://www.publicpolicy.ie/where-does-your-tax-go/
    That's what means testing does, you take into account a persons income, expense, size of family etc. BTW, kids are only in creche up to the age of 4 but child benefit is paid until the kids are 18.
    true but that then begs the question, should it be cut in half at say 15 for example and the kid should be told to go out and get a part time job, or the parents just take the hit if they can afford it?


  • Options
    #43
    RichardAnd
    Registered Users Posts: 3,629 ✭✭✭RichardAnd


    I'm not a person taken to hate easily. In the case of the current government, I can not say that I "hate" them, but I do find them irksome to the extent that I have utterly no respect for them. Allow me to outline the reasons behind my feeling as such.

    Firstly, and this alone would be enough for me to feel as I do, I find them to be utterly, totally sycophantic. Be it the EU, the Americans, or some
    multi-national company, the Irish Government never seems to miss the opportunity to lick a few boots. The worst of lot seems to me to be Enda Kenny himself. The man is obsequious in the extreme and whilst he's probably no worse or better than any of his cohorts, there is just some about him than makes me cringe. The best example of this behavior that I can think of is Enda's reception some years ago of the announcement that Dell were to create one hundred or so very esoteric IT jobs in Ireland. Notwithstanding that the said company upped anchor and put nearly two thousand people out of work, Enda still wheeled some corporate spokesperson in front of the cameras for a fawning display.

    The second reason on my list is the perfidious nature of the current government. I'm not so foolish that I believe any statesman to be honest but the current establishment seems to have an acumen, if not an utter gift, for breaking promises. Granted, I never believed much of what was said to begin with but still...

    Lastly, I have to mention one more thing. The current government is politically incompetent. They tried to please everyone and in the end, they have pleased virtually no one. Margret Tatcher is loathed in some parts of the UK but to many others, she is admired. The reason for this is simple; Maggie did not try to please everyone. She kept her power base happy and she didn't even try to please anyone else. That is what made her a strong politician.

    FF tried to please everyone and for a while, they were highly popular but when the chips were down, people turned on them. FG seem to be guilty of the same sin and when the next election comes, they will probably pay the price. As the great man said, it's better to be feared than loved.

    My two cents.


  • Options
    #44
    desaparecidos
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,332 ✭✭✭desaparecidos


    Because people are trying to justify voting FF back in. They seem to want to forget everything FF did and blame it on the current government. FF will be back in next time round, no doubt about it.


  • Options
    #45
    v638sg7k1a92bx
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭v638sg7k1a92bx


    RichardAnd wrote: »
    FF tried to please everyone and for a while, they were highly popular but when the chips were down, people turned on them. FG seem to be guilty of the same sin and when the next election comes, they will probably pay the price. As the great man said, it's better to be feared than loved. My two cents.

    Not sure if I agree re FG pleasing everyone. Property tax, water charges, abortion legislation, Haddington Rd are very unpopular.


  • Options
    #46
    ardmacha
    Registered Users Posts: 7,476 ✭✭✭ardmacha


    nesf wrote: »
    They're making cuts yes, the question is whether they're tackling the structural issues in the economy. Theses are things like, can we continue to fund pensioners at the current rate with our current tax regime going forward (the answer is no, when my/our generation retires we're pretty screwed unless our kids decide to be particularly fecund). Are they tackling (perceived) waste in the public sector? And so on. The cuts they're making tend to be quick fixes, water charges and property taxes aside.

    The present government are responding to the Troika, if in government at present FF would do exactly the same thing. What is lacking is some kind of proposition for what they want the long term structure of the state to look like, what will be the pension system, can everyone go to third level and have most of the cost paid by the taxpayer? With some long term plan they can then move towards that, rather than always choosing expediency. As far as I can see there hasn't been any real analysis of problems such as sustainable pensions, the structure of the publuc service etc, never mind tackling these issues in a long term way. Short term political advantage every time.


  • Options
    #47
    shamrock2004
    Closed Accounts Posts: 603 ✭✭✭shamrock2004


    Deleted User wrote: »
    My anger, I won't speak for everyone, but my anger stems from the fact that they don't represent Ireland. They, the people's representatives. They put party before country. They do not follow the wishes of the people. They are so out of touch with the common man that it's scary.

    I only respect one man in the Dail, Stephen Donnelly. He seems to be truly representative. Frustrated with the process of politics, banging his head off the wall of red tape but wanting the best for everyone.

    I was only saying the same thing to someone over the weekend. I watched him on vincent browne a few times and have listened to him on the marian finucane radio show and he seems puts his arguments across very well.


  • Options
    #48
    Fr Tod Umptious
    Registered Users Posts: 15,003 ✭✭✭✭Fr Tod Umptious


    Talia Modern Football wrote: »
    Not sure if I agree re FG pleasing everyone. Property tax, water charges, abortion legislation, Haddington Rd are very unpopular.

    Abortion - Some are unhappy that it goes too far/others that it does not go too far
    Haddington Rd - Some perceive it hits public servants too hard/ others perceive it doe snot hit them hard enough

    You will never please everyone.


  • Options
    #49
    Zubeneschamali
    Registered Users Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    rodento wrote: »
    We were offered a new kinda of politics and what we got is a Taoiseach who treats us as if we are nothing more than gullible kids

    If you fell for any of that "new kind of politics" guff, then you really are gullible and probably not very old.


  • Options
    #50
    v638sg7k1a92bx
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭v638sg7k1a92bx


    Zubeneschamali wrote: »
    If you fell for any of that "new kind of politics" guff, then you really are gullible and probably not very old.

    Exactly, if we read the posts on here the reasons for their anger is fairly vague to say the least, it's all hope, change, reform, a new kind of politics. One poster above even admits:
    The worst of lot seems to me to be Enda Kenny himself. The man is obsequious in the extreme and whilst he's probably no worse or better than any of his cohorts, there is just some about him than makes me cringe.

    Where do you even start with trying to get through to that type of mentality?


  • Options
    #51
    Skrynesaver
    Registered Users Posts: 1,109 ✭✭✭Skrynesaver


    Talia Modern Football wrote: »
    Again, more personal gripes and nitpicking. Out of all the fiscal problems that this country has faced in the past five years, your main concern is the salary of one of Enda Kenny's personal advisor's. I never been a blue shirt by any stretch of the imagination but I have to hold my hand up and say that there is no comparison between this government and previous FF governments in terms of "noses in the trough". FF governments had an endemic level of corruption running through the party and yet people are now directing their anger at this govt over petty items such as one advisor's pay and as a result we can see FF creeping back up the polls.

    As for reform, what exactly do people want? Five referendums in 2.5 years with more to follow, if that isn't reform I don't know what is?

    Less corrupt than FF isn't the target I'm looking for politics to achieve, the closure of the planning enquires, the perceived bias in the siting of the primary care centres, Phil Hogan's unpunished discriminatory remarks...

    That's off the top of my head, none of those issues require fundamental reform of the institutions, just a reform of attitude, namely the holding of those in office to account for their actions.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    v638sg7k1a92bx
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭v638sg7k1a92bx


    Skrynesaver wrote: »
    Less corrupt than FF isn't the target I'm looking for politics to achieve, the closure of the planning enquires, the perceived bias in the siting of the primary care centres, Phil Hogan's unpunished discriminatory remarks...

    That's off the top of my head, none of those issues require fundamental reform of the institutions, just a reform of attitude, namely the holding of those in office to account for their actions.

    Unfortunately perceived bias and discriminatory remarks do not constitute corruption. If you have any evidence to suggest that there is corruption within government that has not previously bee reported please tell us.


  • Options
    #53
    Skrynesaver
    Registered Users Posts: 1,109 ✭✭✭Skrynesaver


    Talia Modern Football wrote: »
    Unfortunately perceived bias and discriminatory remarks do not constitute corruption. If you have any evidence to suggest that there is corruption within government that has not previously bee reported please tell us.

    You ignore the action of the government as a whole in closing down investigations into planning corruption that could have fingered their own.

    The cure to the perceived bias would have been to relocate the sites rather than sit through the discussion like a cat with half a wing hanging out of its gob, it may be perception, but a perception of arrogance ended the last shower.

    As for discriminatory remarks not being corruption, it is true that they are not, however they are, or should be, as unacceptable coming from Hogan as they were coming from Noel O'Flynn in the previous administration.

    Where have we heard that sort of deflection before though...

    There's a fierce bang of same biological waste product different day about it all.


  • Options
    #54
    Zubeneschamali
    Registered Users Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    Talia Modern Football wrote: »
    Where do you even start with trying to get through to that type of mentality?

    I wouldn't be down on the current Government's performance, but Enda Kenny makes me cringe, too. He's the most superficial, waffly, conviction-free weasel out there, all juvenile point-scoring and deflecting questions. Yuck.


  • Options
    #55
    Sand
    Registered Users Posts: 12,472 ✭✭✭✭Sand


    Talia Modern Football wrote: »
    Again, more personal gripes and nitpicking. Out of all the fiscal problems that this country has faced in the past five years, your main concern is the salary of one of Enda Kenny's personal advisor's. I never been a blue shirt by any stretch of the imagination but I have to hold my hand up and say that there is no comparison between this government and previous FF governments in terms of "noses in the trough". FF governments had an endemic level of corruption running through the party and yet people are now directing their anger at this govt over petty items such as one advisor's pay and as a result we can see FF creeping back up the polls.

    As for reform, what exactly do people want? Five referendums in 2.5 years with more to follow, if that isn't reform I don't know what is?

    I see that having already misinterpreted Rodento's position your're now misinterpreting mine. Keep it up and some might mistake it for wilful on your part.

    The advisor's pay cap salary breach was not a complete list of my issues with this government. Far from it. It was an example of how this government began and continued its reign - when people make arguments they often attempt to explain their position by the use of examples.

    What I was highlighting was that even on a very small issue (advisor salaries) Enda Kenny couldn't set an example and follow the guidelines. It is very, very, very hard to lead from the rear. So it should not be surprising to you that Enda Kenny's popularity takes a dive when he campaigns on the basis of restoring honest, transparent and humble government, demands people face up to fiscal realities and cutbacks but from his very first day in power he demonstrates he doesn't even have the character or courage to tell his advisors they need to follow the rules (which are still very comfortable salaries).

    You could go on and on and on and on with more examples of how this government has engaged in crude hypocrisy, greed, cowardice and incompetence but I get the feeling you wouldn't listen.

    And stop whining about the "resurgence" of Fianna Fail. The people voted for change last election. Fine Gael have delivered more of the same Fianna Fail style government. Why shouldn't people vote for Fianna Fail? Fine Gael have given them no reason whatsoever to vote for them, and "Not Fianna Fail" wont last forever.


  • Options
    #56
    v638sg7k1a92bx
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭v638sg7k1a92bx


    Sand wrote: »
    And stop whining about the "resurgence" of Fianna Fail. The people voted for change last election. Fine Gael have delivered more of the same Fianna Fail style government. Why shouldn't people vote for Fianna Fail? Fine Gael have given them no reason whatsoever to vote for them, and "Not Fianna Fail" wont last forever.

    I've heard it all now. Bring back Bertie, he'll sort it out.


  • Options
    #57
    Sand
    Registered Users Posts: 12,472 ✭✭✭✭Sand


    Yep, wilful.


  • Options
    #58
    v638sg7k1a92bx
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭v638sg7k1a92bx


    Sand wrote: »
    Yep, wilful.

    I knew it was only a matter of time before you showed your true colours.


  • Options
    #59
    Sand
    Registered Users Posts: 12,472 ✭✭✭✭Sand


    I'll give you some credit - you kept it going four pages. If you had started with "Enda Kenny is a great man altogether" it would have fallen apart quickly but you took a slightly reversed approach and did well.


  • Options
    #60
    v638sg7k1a92bx
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭v638sg7k1a92bx


    Sand wrote: »
    I'll give you some credit - you kept it going four pages. If you had started with "Enda Kenny is a great man altogether" it would have fallen apart quickly but you took a slightly reversed approach and did well.

    I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    Horrid Henry
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 100 ✭✭Horrid Henry


    Out the outset I'm declaring that I was a member of the PDs.

    I'm no fan of FG or Labour, but they've done reasonably okay in my view.

    People giving out about the property tax need to get real. Taxes like it are needed and are ridiculously low.

    The government should have introduced far more Draconian cuts and taxes and just blamed it on the Troika. I actually fear that once we regain our economic sovereignty, we'll return to the old gombeenery.


Advertisement