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

Ozymandius2011 wrote: »

Meglome the man quoted from the Irish Fisherman's Organisation is hardly a nutcase.

You might want to reread what I said, I didn't say anything about him being a nutcase.

Ozymandius2011 wrote: »

it's contained in the related ESM Treaty, which is interdependent with the Fiscal Compact.

I'm saying I take issue with his interpretation of it.

Ozymandius2011 wrote: »

If we vote Yes we legitimise what I call the Austerity Treaty and thereby weaken Hollande's chances of getting a renegotiation. But if we vote no we strengthen his case for a renegotiation as the legitimacy of the project is called into question. We also potentially win a French ally in renegotiating the Irish bailout to secure a possible write-down/off of debt.

hehe sorry but our little nation won't make a difference to anyone except us. Hollande will do whatever Hollande does, if that benefits us that's great. In the meantime the only certainty we have is what's in the Fiscal compact.

And honestly you can call it the pink fairy treaty if you like. We're having austerity as we borrow one third of all government spending.

meglome wrote: »

EURATS wrote: »

It's to do with waiting to see what we are really dealing with!
Would you walk across the M50 with a blindfold on?

Sorry but you don't get it. What we do know for a fact is what's in the treaty, everything else is speculation and wishful thinking. The contents of the treaty are the only thing we know for sure. You're the one that's walking around blindfolded.





We may know the current contents of the treaty, but not the contents of the final treaty that we will have agreed to in advance if Kenny and crew do enough to scare and confuse people into a yes vote. Now you may be either brainwashed by your leaders or else taking the pïss at this stage. As far as I see it we wait and asses the situation as it unfolds and we move when we know what we are dealing with.

EURATS wrote: »

Accurate figures..where have we heard that before? FFS
€8.5 billion worth of fish since the 70's , 40 years of fishing..€8.5 is pittance over that timeframe.

And mysteriously as Scofflaw points out above the Icelandic fish catch is in the same ballpark. I dunno almost seems like the figures are indeed accurate. Of course you seem determined to refuse to believe them, but that's up to you.

EURATS wrote: »

What the Proof is with regard to the navy?go look it up. A little project for you. Won't be too hard to find. 6 of the total of 8 boats are at end of lifespan. 2, the LE Roisín and LE Niamh are relatively new.

So if I understand this you made a claim but expect me to prove it for you. I'm going to assume you're just making it up unless you have some proof.

EURATS wrote: »

In relation to your bank debt statement, the EU funded our banks..therefore the buck stops with them. It was up to them to police the situation. They police everything else(or intend to).

I've been trying to get this across to you, the figures from our central bank show the EU didn't fund most of the money in our banks. You just keep repeating the myth and then basing your decisions on it. That seems a very foolish approach.

EURATS wrote: »

Neither a yes or a no vote will produce a concrete future. You are deluded and obviously FG if you believe a yes vote will in its current unfinished format secure anything.

So on one hand you're telling me we can vote no and it'll be 'grand' and on the other saying neither a yes or no will provide a concrete future. That's completely contradictory. I've been trying to get across to you that we don't know the future so why would be base our decisions on what we don't know, that would be a stupid thing to do. The Fiscal compact is not 'unfinished', it's a finished treaty. Could new protocols get added or a new treaty negotiated? sure it's possible but it's all in the realms of fantasy and speculation. You can go ahead and vote for a fantasy but I'll stick to what we know and vote Yes now.

Oh and btw I'm not 'FG' I just disagree with you strongly.

EURATS wrote: »

Have a little patience, and tell your buddy Kenny to cool the jets. If he wants to test the water...tell him to try crossing the M50 with a blindfold on(as I mentioned before) and see how he gets on with that.

Ah yes the standard tactic of the no campaign when you put them on the spot, suggest bias. There is no testing the water, it's a nonsense analogy.

EURATS wrote: »

We may know the current contents of the treaty, but not the contents of the final treaty that we will have agreed to in advance if Kenny and crew do enough to scare and confuse people into a yes vote. Now you may be either brainwashed by your leaders or else taking the pïss at this stage. As far as I see it we wait and asses the situation as it unfolds and we move when we know what we are dealing with.

Yes we do indeed know the contents of the treaty, so we can agree on something. You also agree we don't know what will happen in the future. So logically we can only vote on what we know and leave the future to the future. And if a different treaty comes along we can decide the best course of action on that at the time too. Following your logic even if a new one comes along sure we can just hope for the best and maybe another one will come along, since we can just fantasise about what will happen and it'll all be fine.

meglome wrote: »

So nothing to do with the treaty at all then.

In part but more accurately I don't trust the technocrats who wrote it or the bureaucrats asking or telling us to vote Yes.

The treaty is far from transparent, is not standalone and is dependant on other components, and has been presented to us by people I didn't vote for and don't trust.

If I could trust them I would give it some thought.

Look at the history. With Lisbon they promised us jobs. Did we get any?

Now they are promising stability. Do you really believe them?

All this talk of fish.......... one of our beloved Labour TD's, Ann Phelan, wants (wait for it......) CAVIAR on the menu in the Dail. Ann Phelan. http://www.independent.ie/national-news/td-wants-trout-caviar-put-on-the-dail-menu-3109981.html

Next thing they will be tickling their throats so that they can gorge more of the stuff. 'We need access to funds' is the Yes mantra. Sorry - I don't think Caviar is a worthwhile spend for our elected TD's.

Ozymandius2011 wrote: »

Cormac Lucy explained on Marian Finucane this morning that the ESM will have the power to impose higher contributions by the Irish taxpayer to the ESM. The fact that the ESM is unelected, and that its proceedings will be shielded from media and court/parliamentary scrutiny constitutes an erosion of accountability in Irish budgetary policy and could open the door to corruption, including possibile misappropriation of funds. The ESM risks becoming the European Sleaze Mechanism.

I don't see any evidence to support this claim.

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

So if your blanket arguments don't succeed, attack legitimate and rational thought. Fantastic.

Tetchy lot- Can't even accept compliments now.

Scofflaw wrote: »

In fact, the value of Icelandic catches over the last 20 years has been about €300m annually - about €10.5bn over the last 35 years.

It depends on how the catch is valued. Last year for example Iceland's fishing industries total export was €1.6b. Due to the instability of our currency that number understandably jumps up and down quite a lot, but it is certainly rising.

I'm not familiar with the fishing sector in Ireland but it was always my understanding that it was different to Iceland due mostly to the gulf stream.

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

I'm not tetchy... I just don't think the AH-style commentary is necessary here. If the level of discourse from the majority of the 'no' side is limited to talking-points and random nonsense (see the posters which talk about "No to water charges and household taxes" - whatever the feck that has to do with the "Austerity Treaty" :rolleyes:)

I'm here to talk about facts. What the referendum says, what it means for the future and what the treaty is about. I don't want to debunk nonsense shíte from the majority of the 'no' side to see a retort about being too thorough.

I feel sorry for the legitimate and thoughtful "no" posters on this forum like hatrickpatrick tbh. For every thought out and rational post as to why he is voting 'no' there are 10 that are rubbish, based on points that are either irrelevant, far fetched or debunked.

You lost me halfway through the first paragraph.... Sorry.

Scofflaw wrote: »

It is rising, but I suspect that what you're quoting there is the value of all fisheries-related exports, which is somewhat different from the catch figures.

The catch figure probably values the raw monetary value, i.e. price per kg * kg of fish caught. While the export number is the value of the catch when it has been packaged and sold abroad. It does not though include fishing machinery/software exports.

That's part of our higher productivity figure.

Ok.

EURATS wrote: »

Well scofflaw. You are entitled to believe those figures if you so wish. I'm not trying to impose my beliefs and understandings upon you or ram them down your throat. There's a lot of that going on in here with self proclaimed know it all's.
I'm no expert on fisheries and I admit that, but the figures sound punitive.


You still haven't answered the rush for a may31st result!

They set the date ages ago. There is nothing that we can do to change it now other than call for a general election.

Re meglome

If that's what you two FG/labour worshipers want to believe, That's up to yourselves. (with regard to the fish catch. Hopefully somebody in that field will come in an kick
Ur figures to touch. As I said to scoffy, I'm no fisheries expert)

With regard to our navy, are you too lazy to look it up? You seem to have plenty of time on your hands. It is a fact though. Will find it for you later.


With regard to the central bank figures..don't have a laugh. Most worthless entity in the country.

In relation to a yes/no vote, I'm saying there is no rush for a may31st YES vote and only deluded FG/labour people seem to think there is. U being on of them. The poll above says it all(hopefully its an accurate representation of the country as a whole)

Telling kenny to cross the M50 in a blindfold is biased? If you don't get that one then that's ur problem, because that's what he is effectively asking us to do by telling us to vote YES.

Again you are either FG or labour. And you are more than likely on the payroll.

Have a look at the poll above buddy!! U have ur work cut out and well u know it.

golfball37 wrote: »

Pro establishment boys are playing a blinder on this thread I have to say. Liking each others posts, dissecting every persons NO argument with a tooth comb.

Well done lads.

golfball37 wrote: »

Tetchy lot- Can't even accept compliments now.

golfball37 wrote: »

You lost me halfway through the first paragraph.... Sorry.

FreudianSlippers wrote:

So if your blanket arguments don't succeed, attack legitimate and rational thought. Fantastic.

Please contribute to the discussion positively, one line replies like these are frowned on in the forum.