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

Gerry Adams v Leo Varadkar Debate on Morning Ireland (25/1/2011).

Options
  • 25-01-2011 10:16am
    #1
    Het-Field
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,350 ✭✭✭


    Did anybody else listen to this debate ?

    Adams seems to want to renege on our commitments to the IMF/EU. He also seems intent on forfeiting their financial help, even with an unmanagable debt. I also noticed that we wants to close down a swath of banks, while merging AIB & BOI into a super bank, which would be virtually in public ownership.

    I would suggest all those who are considering voting for Sinn Fein to take a long hard listen to the debate. It was 2007 all over again.


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    astrofool
    Registered Users Posts: 16,480 ✭✭✭✭astrofool


    So I guess bank raids on all of our european neighbours so that we can pay for the public service and social welfare, is the answer.


  • Options
    #3
    Balmed Out
    Registered Users Posts: 4,714 ✭✭✭Balmed Out


    No, but please tell more. As annoying as I find Leo I cant but hope he let people see sinn feins economic "policies" for what they are and managed to hold Gerry down to something while he tried to fill out another change of mind form.


  • Options
    #4
    johngalway
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,271 ✭✭✭✭johngalway


    astrofool wrote: »
    So I guess bank raids on all of our european neighbours so that we can pay for the public service and social welfare, is the answer.

    We'll all have to do our bit, everyone start saving up empty cornflakes and washing powder boxes :pac:


  • Options
    #5
    jimmyendless
    Registered Users Posts: 619 ✭✭✭jimmyendless


    Het-Field wrote: »
    Did anybody else listen to this debate ?

    Adams seems to want to renege on our commitments to the IMF/EU. He also seems intent on forfeiting their financial help, even with an unmanagable debt. I also noticed that we wants to close down a swath of banks, while merging AIB & BOI into a super bank, which would be virtually in public ownership.

    I would suggest all those who are considering voting for Sinn Fein to take a long hard listen to the debate. It was 2007 all over again.

    What happened in 2007?


  • Options
    #6
    kmick
    Registered Users Posts: 3,375 ✭✭✭kmick


    Gerry started well enough but to be fair the interviewer pressed him and eventually he fell apart.
    Synopsis of their plan
    1. No money for banks. Default on senior bond debt.
    2. Renege on deal with EU/IMF etc
    3. Sort out our public finances (-20bn) but no public service job cuts.
    4. Go to bond market end of next year. He reckons by then even though their plan is a 6 year plan that we will be able to borrow at less than IMF/EU rate.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    mike65
    Closed Accounts Posts: 88,978 ✭✭✭✭mike65


    Adams solution would have the impovrishing impact of one of those Soviet 5 year plans.

    I'm happy to hear Adams on the airwaves as everytime he does his party damage by scaring anyone who might be considering them as worthy of a transfer vote.


  • Options
    #8
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    kmick wrote: »
    Gerry started well enough but to be fair the interviewer pressed him and eventually he fell apart.
    Synopsis of their plan
    1. No money for banks.

    Result - banks finally collapse. Do we get back the money we've already put in? No. Do the promissory notes the government have put in fall due and actually need to be paid? Yes.

    Amount notionally saved? The somewhere between €10bn and €25bn still earmarked for the banks.

    Cost? Collapse of banks, shutting down the Irish economy, actual payment of promissory notes worth €31bn.
    Default on senior bond debt.

    Amount notionally saved? Approximately €20bn, assuming full default - but only required because the banks are being shut down.

    Cost? Somewhere between 4 and 10 years out of the bond markets, increased borrowing costs for longer.
    2. Renege on deal with EU/IMF etc

    Amount notionally saved? At most, difference in interest between EU/IMF rates and "usual" Irish market rates before the crisis - about €6.6bn.

    Cost? Difference in interest between EU/IMF rates and actual Irish market rates - about €11bn.
    3. Sort out our public finances (-20bn) but no public service job cuts.

    Riiight.
    4. Go to bond market end of next year. He reckons by then even though their plan is a 6 year plan that we will be able to borrow at less than IMF/EU rate.

    Riiight.

    That's not an economic plan - it's a piece of populist nonsense. However, we can see from discussions in these forums and elsewhere that it is likely to be popular.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • Options
    #9
    AdMMM
    Registered Users Posts: 9,472 ✭✭✭AdMMM


    What Gerry is saying would have made sense BEFORE we put billions into the likes of Anglo. Now it's just nonsense!


  • Options
    #10
    Rosahane
    Registered Users Posts: 1,398 ✭✭✭Rosahane


    kmick wrote: »
    Gerry started well enough but to be fair the interviewer pressed him and eventually he fell apart.
    Synopsis of their plan
    1. No money for banks. Default on senior bond debt.
    2. Renege on deal with EU/IMF etc
    3. Sort out our public finances (-20bn) but no public service job cuts.
    4. Go to bond market end of next year. He reckons by then even though their plan is a 6 year plan that we will be able to borrow at less than IMF/EU rate.


    When pressed on the public finance shortfall he essentially kept on the waffling on about the banks and Anglo. It seemed to me as if he didn't understand the issue!


  • Options
    #11
    P. Breathnach
    Registered Users Posts: 12,089 ✭✭✭✭P. Breathnach


    Rosahane wrote: »
    When pressed on the public finance shortfall he essentially kept on the waffling on about the banks and Anglo. It seemed to me as if he didn't understand the issue!

    Perhaps he might bring in ideas linked to his Stormont experience: demand that Westminster put in more funding.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    serfboard
    Registered Users Posts: 4,676 ✭✭✭serfboard


    Heard a bit of the debate this morning - while Gerry started well enough, he was soon exposed - it was like the debate with Michael McDowell all over again.

    Gerry might be/have been an astute political thinker in regard to "the national question" but IMO he seems to be completely clueless when it comes to even basic economics. I think his economic policies could be best described as ill-thought-out cloud-cuckoo-land populism.

    Which is a pity, because I like some of what Sinn Fein say about social justice.

    I think it was put to him this morning that he can go on bleating about what he's going to do because he knows they won't get into Government and won't have to actually carry out their policies.

    Leo is a fairly accomplised media performer, but he comes across to me as being a bit too arrogant.


  • Options
    #13
    Rosahane
    Registered Users Posts: 1,398 ✭✭✭Rosahane


    Something else from this morning. I think Gerry may actually be a closet Blueshirt:cool:

    Listen to his pronunciation of "Fine Gael"

    He calls then "fine" not "fiana" This is what the people from an old Blueshirt background call the party:eek:


  • Options
    #14
    Amazotheamazing
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,048 ✭✭✭Amazotheamazing


    Did Doherty (on Prime Time) just admit SF have a plan that would last about year before the banks failed and we went bankrupt?

    The plan is to go back to the Bond market after a year...

    Trying to raise 80% of the money in taxes, wtf are they going to tax?


  • Options
    #15
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 90,889 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    Scofflaw wrote: »
    That's not an economic plan - it's a piece of populist nonsense. However, we can see from discussions in these forums and elsewhere that it is likely to be popular.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw
    unfortunatley a large section of the electorate believed the FF populist nonsence when we needed an economic plan.

    SF are anti EU.
    If we ever leave the EU then we can kiss goodbye to the US multinationals, they are based here because we are in the EU otherwise they would be based somewhere cheaper.

    If we ever leave the Euro then we won't be able to pay our existing debts since they are in hard currencies.


    SF can say whatevery they want because they know it's unlikely that any of their policies will ever be enacted.


  • Options
    #16
    d'Oracle
    Registered Users Posts: 7,025 ✭✭✭d'Oracle


    serfboard wrote: »

    Leo is a fairly accomplised media performer, but he comes across to me as being a bit too arrogant.

    Understatement of the century.
    Unfortunately I believe he knows his stuff too and isn't afraid to say it.
    To anyone.
    Even his party leader.

    Which is a good thing.
    I dislike him but I would see him as a strong candidate for a ministry should they get in.


  • Options
    #17
    PeterIanStaker
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,072 ✭✭✭PeterIanStaker


    I'm glad that Grizzly keeps digging himself a hole every time he's on air. Compared to him, Kenny's the next Keynes. :pac:


  • Options
    #18
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 90,889 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    serfboard wrote: »
    Which is a pity, because I like some of what Sinn Fein say about social justice.

    I think it was put to him this morning that he can go on bleating about what he's going to do because he knows they won't get into Government and won't have to actually carry out their policies.
    I would have more respect for a government uses someone elses good idea than tries to put their spin on it.

    I despise the political football over the adoption act where at one stage the bill was held up because it didn't provide for the adoption of married persons under the age of 18 by the same person who later had a bill passed incresing the marriage age to 18. Or the whole career of CJ who opposed stuff on the basis that's what the oposition is for.

    We need a government of consensus / national unity that can use good ideas wherever they come from.


    It would be very easy to make a comment about "social justice" and i've no idea if it's more than a crowd pleaser but you don't have to buy the cow if you just want some milk.


Advertisement