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.

‘OCCUPY Wall Street’ protestors on Dame Street

1…89111314…25

Comments

  • #302
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users Posts: 17,797 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    Ben Hadad wrote: »
    Any problems incurred by individuals were all done in free market under no duress. The state should look after the rest, but I have never heard of a state having to help inhabitants who got into debt due to investment decisions.

    Indeed.
    Let's stop repaying the idiots who bought Anglo bonds then, instead of taking money out of my pocket and your pocket to do it.


  • #303
    Godge
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21,727 ✭✭✭✭Godge


    hatrickpatrick wrote: »
    Secondly, I ask again why the right in general bashes people who protest against white collar crime.


    There you go again stereotyping people you disagree with. :rolleyes:


    .


    I have selected just two quotes from your long post to illustrate my point. Are you the kettle or the pot?

    I am economically right-wing but I believe white-collar crims should be severely punished, so I don't like being stereotyped. You are asking people to join your protest but at the same time you are attacking them for their beliefs.


  • #304
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users Posts: 17,797 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    Godge wrote: »
    I have selected just two quotes from your long post to illustrate my point. Are you the kettle or the pot?

    Sorry but did you read the post from hmmm?
    He accused me of "stereotyping those I disagree with" and then went on about me being "the usual suspects from the left". I was ironically drawing attention to his hypocrisy.
    I am economically right-wing but I believe white-collar crims should be severely punished, so I don't like being stereotyped. You are asking people to join your protest but at the same time you are attacking them for their beliefs.

    I'm socially left wing and economically centrist. I don't like being automatically accused of being a pothead dole scrounger for that, which if you read through this thread and others is the underlying assumption about those who protest.

    Secondly. You're economically right wing you say. Cool. Do you support bailing out banks or should they have been left to deal with it on their own?
    Do you support bailing out taxpayers who get into trouble paying their debts?

    Unless the answer to both of these questions is the same, you're a hypocrite. That's all I'm saying.


  • #305
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users Posts: 17,797 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    Godge and others:
    How do you react to this photograph?

    bank.jpg


  • #306
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    hatrickpatrick wrote: »
    Sorry but did you read the post from hmmm?
    He accused me of "stereotyping those I disagree with" and then went on about me being "the usual suspects from the left". I was ironically drawing attention to his hypocrisy.



    I'm socially left wing and economically centrist. I don't like being automatically accused of being a pothead dole scrounger for that, which if you read through this thread and others is the underlying assumption about those who protest.

    Secondly. You're economically right wing you say. Cool. Do you support bailing out banks or should they have been left to deal with it on their own?
    Do you support bailing out taxpayers who get into trouble paying their debts?

    Unless the answer to both of these questions is the same, you're a hypocrite. That's all I'm saying.

    Less of the personal stuff - the post, not the poster, please.

    moderately,
    Scofflaw


  • Advertisement
  • #307
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users Posts: 17,797 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    Scofflaw wrote: »
    Less of the personal stuff - the post, not the poster, please.

    moderately,
    Scofflaw

    Fair enough, as long as the people stereotyping me get warnings as well. This is a two way street and I'm sick of seeing myself and other protesters being stereotyped and maligned in these threads. It's getting very, very old and if it's going to go on then I'm just going to stop posting. Ye can argue with someone else if you're going to keep coming back to that "usual suspects" BS every time I say anything. :mad:


  • #308
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    hatrickpatrick wrote: »
    Fair enough, as long as the people stereotyping me get warnings as well. This is a two way street and I'm sick of seeing myself and other protesters being stereotyped and maligned in these threads. It's getting very, very old and if it's going to go on then I'm just going to stop posting. Ye can argue with someone else if you're going to keep coming back to that "usual suspects" BS every time I say anything. :mad:

    All that's necessary to refute the "usual suspects" label is to demonstrate that they're not the "usual suspects" - that is, that the protesters are not largely those people to be found at every protest. In the case of the wider Wall St protests, that has been demonstrated - it has not been demonstrated here.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • #309
    meglome
    Registered Users Posts: 7,980 ✭✭✭meglome


    Scofflaw wrote: »
    All that's necessary to refute the "usual suspects" label is to demonstrate that they're not the "usual suspects" - that is, that the protesters are not largely those people to be found at every protest. In the case of the wider Wall St protests, that has been demonstrated - it has not been demonstrated here.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw

    And certainly when I went down there twice on Wednesday it was completely the usual suspects.
    meglome wrote: »
    Wondered down on Wednesday just after lunch. Tried to engage a few people in converstion which proved fruitless. Went around reading the (utter bull****) signs they have stuck up all over. Saw they were promoting Indymedia too which prompted me to leave.

    Went back at about half five to exactly the same results.

    Funnily on two occasions I saw people with dreadlocks from half way down the street and followed there progress straight into the camp. People they knew were welcomed very warmly.

    Am going to go back again next week. So far I'm extremely underwhelmed. Seems to be a group of 'professional' protesters whos aims are for the most part nonsense. I should have taken some pictures of the signs to show just how rubbish it all is. Pity really as the protests in other countries seem to have a point.


  • #310
    Godge
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21,727 ✭✭✭✭Godge


    hatrickpatrick wrote: »
    Secondly. You're economically right wing you say. Cool. Do you support bailing out banks or should they have been left to deal with it on their own?
    Do you support bailing out taxpayers who get into trouble paying their debts?

    Unless the answer to both of these questions is the same, you're a hypocrite. That's all I'm saying.


    In general, you should win and lose by your investment decisions, that is the foundation of the capitalist system. So, in general, I believe that banks should be left to deal with their problems on their own, unless there are systemic risks.

    The wrong decision was taken on 30 September 2008, but the decision was made and that is done. The Government should have abandoned Anglo and the smaller banks at the time and moved to nationalise Bank of Ireland and AIB as their failure would create systemic risks.

    As for mortgage holders, there is no systemic risk, just like there was no systemic risk in the collapse of Irish Nationwide. Irish Nationwide and Anglo should have been left go bust, similarly, no bailout should be made to taxpayers who have trouble paying their debts. That is what a reformed bankruptcy law should deal with.

    Sorry I don't fit the stereotype and have nuanced views.:)


  • #311
    Spiritofthekop
    Registered Users Posts: 436 ✭✭Spiritofthekop


    Well is there any more news on this debt forgive me stuff??...Is someone or the rest of you common folk going to help me pay for my neg equity house & cardboard apartments that I bought?... The apartments are falling apart and I dont want them anymore!!!

    I need to upgrade my BMW to 2012 its got a reg of 2008 & I'm so embarrassed about it!!


  • Advertisement
  • #312
    20Cent
    Registered Users Posts: 8,934 ✭✭✭20Cent


    Spiritofthekop wrote: »
    Well is there any more news on this debt forgive me stuff??...Is someone going to help me pay for my house & cardboard apartments that I bought?... The apartments are falling apart and I dont want them anymore!!!

    I need to upgrade my BMW to 2012 its got a reg of 2008 & I'm so embarrassed about it!!

    If you are part of the 1% yes.
    Everybody else No.

    Thats the problem.
    Thats what the protests are about.


  • #313
    nesf
    Registered Users Posts: 27,645 ✭✭✭✭nesf


    hatrickpatrick wrote: »
    The list of workshops above is indeed "left" oriented but that's because (no offense) the "right" for some reason attacks protest movements and instead advises people to bend over whenever oppression is around the corner.

    Really, why do you bother posting if all you're going to contribute is nonsense?


  • #314
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • #315
    Sand
    Registered Users Posts: 12,471 ✭✭✭✭Sand


    @hattrickpatrick
    Godge and others:
    How do you react to this photograph?

    I hit google...
    Origins: One sketchy news account is seemingly all that documents the saga of Roy Brown,
    The article does not mention factors such as prior convictions which may have affected Brown's sentence. (In Louisiana, the crime of first degree robbery — the taking of something of value when the offender does not have a weapon, but leads the victim to believe that he does have one — carries a minimum sentence of 3 years to a maximum of 40 years.)
    Mitigating factors in Allen's sentencing were the fact that the fraud was already underway when he became CEO of TBW in 2003, and that Allen was one of six persons who received credit on their sentences for cooperating with investigators and testifying against Farkas, the mastermind of the fraud scheme.

    If you're trying to make the claim that white collar crime gets relatively lenient treatment - as far as the US goes, Bernie Madoff got 150 fricking years for a crime that didnt involve any threats or violence of any sort. In the Roy Brown case the bank employee was confronted by a man threatening to use a gun. I dont know if you get threatened by gunmen on a daily basis but that would be fairly frightening.

    People tend to take a dimmer view of crimes that involve violence, the threat of violence or even the fear of violence. This of course gives a competitive advantage to white collar criminals - as they rarely have to use violence to accomplish their crimes. "Working class" criminals on the other hand tend to come at you with a knife or the threat of a knife.

    In Ireland of course, its different. Its been proven in courts of law that so long as a white collar criminal doesnt believe he is breaking the law then he cant break the law. Just find a lawyer, pay them enough to tell you what you want to hear, and youre good.

    For the record, Farkas - the "mastermind" of the fraud scheme - received a 30 year sentence. Twice what Roy Brown received, despite never threatening or using violence in the manner that Mr Brown did. Browns plight is tragic, but for the true tragedy of it to be painted it requires selective editing...underplaying the impact on the victim of Mr Browns crime ("Man the **** up bank teller!!!") and overplaying the role of Allen in the fraud. We - the uninvolved majority - do not know or really identify with Mr Browns victim so of course we are more sympathetic to Mr Brown than we would be if we considered how frightening even a minor mugging is. To its victim at least.


  • #316
    ei.sdraob
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭ei.sdraob


    A question for resident Marxists

    In context of Ireland what what income threshold puts one in the top 1% (how many K a year)

    links to official statistics would be appreciated, none of that wishy washy communist rhetoric please


  • #317
    Slydice
    Registered Users Posts: 10,501 ✭✭✭✭Slydice


    ei.sdraob wrote: »
    A question for resident Marxists

    In context of Ireland what what income threshold puts one in the top 1% (how many K a year)

    links to official statistics would be appreciated, none of that wishy washy communist rhetoric please
    are marxists the only ones allowed to answer your question?


  • #318
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users Posts: 17,797 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    ei.sdraob wrote: »
    A question for resident Marxists

    In context of Ireland what what income threshold puts one in the top 1% (how many K a year)

    links to official statistics would be appreciated, none of that wishy washy communist rhetoric please

    To me (again this is just my own personal opinion) the phrase "1%" doesn't represent an income level or wealth level at all. It's a social status. It's the elite group of people in our society who are treated better than everyone else by those in power. Be they Bungling bank managers who get bailed out by innocent citizens, the Golden Circle whose anonymity was preserved by the government, the bondholders, the white collar criminals to whom a blind eye is turned, those who are allowed to make secret, corrupt decisions because they're doing so in a manner which is beneficial to the government, the people at the top of the phone hacking scandal in the UK who ended up being EMPLOYED by the government, the politicians who walk away with golden handshakes, the people who resign in disgrace only to be given a quiet reward of a quango position or some such several months later, the cronies and civil servants who retire quietly into directorships and other high positions sorted out for them by their friends in high places...

    The list goes on, and on, and on.

    Basically, to me, the 1% are the "some animals which are more equal than others" in our society. The vested interests and cronies who come before everyone else in terms of who government policy is designed to benefit most.


  • #319
    LaBaguette
    Registered Users Posts: 189 ✭✭LaBaguette


    I passed by the camp this afternoon, and there was a lad making a speech. After a bit of Danesque Bunreach-weaving, he went on to say that "Ireland is a wealthy country" (ah, sounds interesting !) ".. we have trillions of dollars of gas reserves !". Ah, too bad.


  • #320
    hmmm
    Registered Users Posts: 11,205 ✭✭✭✭hmmm


    hatrickpatrick wrote: »
    To me (again this is just my own personal opinion) the phrase "1%" doesn't represent an income level or wealth level at all. It's a social status. It's the elite group of people in our society who are treated better than everyone else by those in power.
    As a matter of interest, in your mind does this include union leaders, the social partners and public sector workers? Because they are treated better than almost anyone else in Irish society.


  • #321
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users Posts: 17,797 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    hmmm wrote: »
    As a matter of interest, in your mind does this include union leaders, the social partners and public sector workers? Because they are treated better than almost anyone else in Irish society.

    Yes, to a certain extent. They're not as bad in a lot of ways, primarily because sacrifices ARE being demanded of them, pay cuts, staff reductions, etc.

    I have yet to hear a demand from the government that banks reduce their staff to ease the cost of running them to the Irish public (remember, we're paying for them at the moment). Executive pay in those failed has been capped, but capped at still insanely high levels, levels which the vast majority of people could never aspire to. I'm not objecting to successful people being rich - I'm objecting to failed companies bailed out by the taxpayer still enjoying so many crazy perks and so much waste.

    The banks for example should have been severely punished for what they've done. Whatever happened to that proposal to tax bonuses at close to 100% to prevent them being paid out in failed institutions? When are the Golden Circle going to be held accountable?

    What sets the public sector apart from the other vested interests I've named is that the Public Sector hasn't, for the most part, been directly responsible for downright criminality. What happened in Anglo Irish with regard to hidden loans, on the other hand...


  • Advertisement
  • #322
    PeadarCo
    Registered Users Posts: 1,915 ✭✭✭PeadarCo


    hatrickpatrick wrote: »

    The banks for example should have been severely punished for what they've done. Whatever happened to that proposal to tax bonuses at close to 100% to prevent them being paid out in failed institutions? .

    The whole idea of bonuses is that they are meant to align the managers goals with the owners goals. Obviously they were being rewarded for the wrong things but bonuses on their own aren't bad providing they are awarded for the correct things.

    But on the topic of this protest what can it achieve that the general election (that gave us a government with the biggest majority in the history of the state) didn't. Why didn't the protesters stand for election then? Or if some of them did were they not rejected by the majority of people?


  • #323
    ei.sdraob
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭ei.sdraob


    Slydice wrote: »
    are marxists the only ones allowed to answer your question?

    Any stats are welcome :)


  • #324
    Voltex
    Registered Users Posts: 1,580 ✭✭✭Voltex


    Every economy needs as a basic pre-requestite a functioning banking system...and tbh..modern banking even at its simplest is a complex business that requirres highly competent people at lots of different levels. We wont have this without adequete renumerations.


  • #325
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    Voltex wrote: »
    Every economy needs as a basic pre-requestite a functioning banking system...and tbh..modern banking even at its simplest is a complex business that requirres highly competent people at lots of different levels. We wont have this without adequete renumerations.

    And, apparently, adequate supervision.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • #326
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • #327
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users Posts: 17,797 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    PeadarCo wrote: »
    The whole idea of bonuses is that they are meant to align the managers goals with the owners goals. Obviously they were being rewarded for the wrong things but bonuses on their own aren't bad providing they are awarded for the correct things.

    anglo is a dead bank though. AIB and BOI f*cked up so bad they almost met the same fate. In my view we shouldn't be paying anyone who worked at the top of those banks during the boom a single penny, they should not only have been kicked out, but many brought to court for their corruption. I refer you again to the Golden Circle and to Seanie's behavior. When are those people going to be held accountable?

    How many people who managed these three banks are still working in them and being paid by you and me? They should be queuing up for the dole like so many others have to as a direct consequence of their corruption and incompetence.

    How about a new slogan for Ireland?
    "Ireland: Where corruption is rewarded with golden handshakes and the bill for incompetence is footed by the general population!"

    Or even better:
    "Invest in an Irish financial institution today, you're 100% guaranteed to get your money back no matter what, if that institution makes a pig's breakfast of everything no problem, we'll just take money from hard working Irish people to make up for the shortfall". :mad:
    But on the topic of this protest what can it achieve that the general election (that gave us a government with the biggest majority in the history of the state) didn't. Why didn't the protesters stand for election then? Or if some of them did were they not rejected by the majority of people?

    The political system is a complete joke. It's becoming very obvious that you can't change anything from within it.

    The party system needs serious reform. It's not democratic at the moment. I'll give you two examples, one Irish and one English:

    Electin promises were made over the Roscommon hospital, by Enda Kenny and by a local TD (I think he was called Fingleton but I'm open to correction on that)

    Enda Kenny blatantly renaged on that commitment.
    Fingleton kept his promise - and was thrown out of the party for it.

    In England, it would appear that a huge proportion of the population wants a referendum on EU membership. But MPs are facing a "three line whip" - basically meaning that they all have to vote down the proposal or lose their party membership and any offices they hold.

    Can't you see what an utter disgrace that is? Where's the representation there? Where's the democracy? Who are you representing as a member of a parliament, the public who elected you or the party you belong to?

    That whole system is fundamentally broken. George Lee discovered as much when he went in.

    And there's another point to bear in mind, one which absolutely terrifies me as a young person with a huge interest in politics and in activism:

    Cowen, Lenihan, hell even people like Haughey - when they were my age (early twenties) do you think they were corrupt individuals? Would it not be reasonable to assume that some of them, at least, were just as idealistic as I am in their youth? That some of them honestly went in to politics to serve the Irish people and the Irish state? I do, personally. I can't fathom that so many people in FF were born selfish and corrupt. There had to be people in there who went into it with good intentions.

    So how do you think it's possible to go from having a moral conscience to writing a blank cheque to a dirty bank because your friends' money is on the line? How do you go from wanting to serve your country to meeting up with directors of that bank over golf and casually signing over the nation's wealth to it? How do you go from believing in being a strong leader, to making your decisions from the Dail bar with a round of drinks in your hand?

    The conclusion I've come to is that the political system itself somehow corrupts people over time. It takes good citizens and spits them back out as cronies.

    I'm a radical reformist as I've said before in this thread. I don't hide that, in fact I'm proud of it. I don't believe in fixing a broken system or tweaking it. believe the best chance we have of success is to completely scrap it altogether and design a new one.

    To give you an analogy, I could keep patching, defragging and rebooting my 11 year old windows 2000 desktop computer, but it would still be outdated, slow, and glitchy. That's because it's not a surface problem which needs repairing, it's more that the entire thing is completely and utterly banjaxed beyond repair and needs replacement.
    Alternatively I could throw it in the bin and look into a brand new computer and operating system to do my work on.

    Sure, there would be a couple of weeks where I'd have no computer at all and that would be very hard. But surely it'd be better than getting rid of the blue screen of death, while a nagging voice in the back of my head says "you do realize it'll just crash again in a couple of days, right?"

    Which do you think is the better option?


  • #328
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users Posts: 17,797 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    Clearly the people who WERE banking executives during the boom couldn't aspire to it either.
    Why are you ignoring the fact that we're rewarding stupidity and incompetence? These banks FAILED. They had to be bailed out by the taxpayer. They shouldn't be enjoying any kind of prosperity at all, the vast majority of the profit they make should be going back to the taxpayer to repay the debts we took on when we saved those banks, not into the pockets of the people who screwed it up in the first place.

    Isn't that what the free market is all about? If I worked at Amazon as a software engineer and I put a piece of code up which allowed most of the servers to crash and gave hackers access to the entire user database and all the personal information contained within, wouldn't you agree that there'd have to be some penalty for that? I'd consider myself extremely lucky if I wasn't fired over it, never mind continuing to get a six figure salary paid for by the paying members of the site - the very people I've just screwed over?


  • #329
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users Posts: 17,797 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    Voltex wrote: »
    Every economy needs as a basic pre-requestite a functioning banking system...

    Why is this? Why don't we redesign the economic model so that they're not necessary?

    What about Credit Unions for instance?


  • #330
    ei.sdraob
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭ei.sdraob


    Well I asked, but since mathematics (or facts based on reality) is not strong point of redistributionists, here is a parallel thread with some facts


  • Advertisement
  • #331
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users Posts: 17,797 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    ei.sdraob wrote: »
    Well I asked, but since mathematics (or facts based on reality) is not strong point of redistributionists, here is a parallel thread with some facts

    If that's aimed at me it's irrelevant, I am not a redistributionist.

    I am merely incensed that the people who created the crisis are still living in luxury while the ordinary citizen foots the bill for their corruption, incompetence, or in most cases both.

    I want to see some justice here.


Advertisement