Taxi Drivers for No - Workers turn against Lisbon

free to prosper · 27-09-2009 12:36pm #1

A non-politically aligned group of taxi drivers - across all the taxi organisations, has been formed to get other taxi drivers to campaign against lisbon.

Here is their website: Taxi Drivers for No

Taxi Drivers for No poster:

Their Leaflet:

Taxi Drivers for No initiator and leader is Clem Hackett, a taxi driver from Limerick.

The posters are already out in Dublin, Dundalk and Cork as well as smaller posters in Limerick, Galway, Waterford and the West.

Taximen are a pivotal section of society, with huge influence.

This is showing the government that they mean business.

ei.sdraob · 27-09-2009 12:44pm

"aligned to the Democratic Alliance campaign group"

tis says down the bottom of the leaflet

who are they?

if i see on of these leaflets/signs on a taxi they can count on not getting any money from me

taxi drivers talking politics makes for the most unpleasant of jouneys

/

turgon · 27-09-2009 12:48pm

1. Lisbon gives the EU the power to tax us. (art 311)
2. Gives the EU full control of immigration policy (art 79 and 76) and allows Turkish entry.
3. Halves Ireland’s vote at the EU Council of Ministers
4. EU Court decisions mean lower wages and worse conditions.

1 - not really
2 - Turkey can come in under Nice
3 - The big big Coir lie being spread again
4 - I dont see any proof of this

Anyway, just the same old crap from someone who feels it would be cool to be all "anti-establishment" and on the No side and for some reason they tied this in with them being Taxi drivers. Perhaps if they spent less time making up lies and more on working, their fears of being underpaid might disappear? Just a thought.

thebigcheese22 · 27-09-2009 12:51pm

I think taxi-men should concentrate on not ripping off their remaining customers rather than talking about a legal Treaty that they have no clue about

Daftendirekt · 27-09-2009 1:24pm

Just a note on article 311, because I was slightly puzzled by this the first time I read it.

The article in question explains that EU will be financed by 'own resources', and that it can establish 'new categories of own resources.' This has been misinterpreted to mean that the EU can force new taxes on member states.

Everybody knows by now, that direct taxation is not an EU competence. But that doesn't necessarily exclude other forms of taxation. So for anyone wondering what the text means by 'own resources', I found this explanation. It seems to generally refer to customs duties on imports from outside the union, and a levy on the VAT base of member states.

And just for funsies, here's the Lisbon article vs the Nice article, from lisbonexposed.org:

Lisbon Text wrote:

article 311 (ex Article 269 TEC) The Union shall provide itself with the means necessary to attain its objectives and carry through its policies. Without prejudice to other revenue, the budget shall be financed wholly from own resources. The Council, acting in accordance with a special legislative procedure, shall unanimously and after consulting the European Parliament adopt a decision laying down the provisions relating to the system of own resources of the Union. In this context it may establish new categories of own resources or abolish an existing category. That decision shall not enter into force until it is approved by the Member States in accordance with their respective constitutional requirements. The Council, acting by means of regulations in accordance with a special legislative procedure, shall lay down implementing measures for the Union's own resources system in so far as this is provided for in the decision adopted on the basis of the third paragraph. The Council shall act after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament.

Nice Text wrote:

Article 269 Nice TEC Article 269 Without prejudice to other revenue, the budget shall be financed wholly from own resources. The Council, acting unanimously on a proposal from the Commission and after consulting the European Parliament, shall lay down provisions relating to the system of own resources of the Community, which it shall recommend to the Member States for adoption in accordance with their respective constitutional requirements.

The Lisbon change is basically just a clarification of the rule under Nice.

Scofflaw · 27-09-2009 1:25pm

thebigcheese22 wrote: »

I think taxi-men should concentrate on not ripping off their remaining customers rather than talking about a legal Treaty that they have no clue about

If I needed any extra motivation to vote Yes, this would certainly supply it.

cordially,
Scofflaw

OldJay · 27-09-2009 1:28pm

free to prosper wrote: »

Taximen are a pivotal section of society, with huge influence . . .

. . . on rush-hour traffic.

Wheely · 27-09-2009 1:30pm

One of the worst leaflets on the No side so far. This Clem character obviously has absolutely no idea of anything to do with the Lisbon Treaty. I doubt it'll have much effect.

OldJay · 27-09-2009 1:40pm

Wheely wrote: »

One of the worst leaflets on the No side so far. This Clem character obviously has absolutely no idea of anything to do with the Lisbon Treaty. I doubt it'll have much effect.

Ever had a cabbie give you their expert views on politics etc while you're stuck in the back seat of said taxi?
Its basically that . . . in paper form. Nothing to worry about really.

ei.sdraob · 27-09-2009 1:44pm

Justind wrote: »

Ever had a cabbie give you their expert views on politics etc while you're stuck in the back seat of said taxi?
Its basically that . . . in paper form. Nothing to worry about really.

Except this time we would know how to avoid such cabbies

and give my money to someone who concentrates on the job of safely and cheaply getting me from a to b

/

thebigcheese22 · 27-09-2009 3:12pm

I love the way the title of the thread is 'Workers turn against Lisbon' when the overwhelming majority of unions in Europe, never mind Ireland, are in favour of the Lisbon Treaty. Of course it's still a conspiracy by business to pass Lisbon... Why would unions pass a Treaty that would supposedly screw their own paymasters?! It's like talking to a wall

marco_polo · 27-09-2009 3:20pm

Given the overwhelming popularity of taxi drivers, and the deep respect the citizens of this country have for their deep and considered opinions across a wide range of topics. It is hard to see a way back, from this fatal blow, for the yes campaign.

K-9 · 27-09-2009 3:42pm

marco_polo wrote: »

Given the overwhelming popularity of taxi drivers, and the deep respect the citizens of this country have for their deep and considered opinions across a wide range of topics. It is hard to see a way back, from this fatal blow, for the yes campaign.

Ach, I suppose it is rare enough a group does come out against it, so no harm highlighting it.

Funny thread though.

squod · 27-09-2009 4:00pm

Everyone one here seems excited. Can't say I've met as many yes voters as no voters yet.

ei.sdraob · 27-09-2009 4:21pm

squod wrote: »

Everyone one here seems excited. Can't say I've met as many yes voters as no voters yet.

would that be because some No voters are quite vocal and hysterical at times

squod · 27-09-2009 4:30pm

ei.sdraob wrote: »

would that be because some No voters are quite vocal and hysterical at times

I suspect hysteria is a spin off of both campaigns. Has it not occured to you that I'm hearing more no voters because voting no is the correct thing to do?

oscarBravo · 27-09-2009 4:32pm

squod wrote: »

Has it not occured to you that I'm hearing more no voters because voting no is the correct thing to do?

I'm guessing that if you hear more "no" voters, it's because you keep the company of like-minded individuals. Strange, that.

ei.sdraob · 27-09-2009 4:37pm

squod wrote: »

I suspect hysteria is a spin off of both campaigns. Has it not occured to you that I'm hearing more no voters because voting no is the correct thing to do?

Has it not occurred when every mainstream party, trade unions, large businesses, intellectuals and economists

are support a YES

that maybe voting YES is the correct thing to do

does it not worry you when the NO campaign is run by Taliban like nuts, Sinn Fein, British Eurosceptics, Libertas and Ganley that somethings smells very rotten

View · 27-09-2009 4:37pm

Presumably, these are the taxi drivers that funded the Libertas' multi-million Euro campaigns with their 50 Euro donations

ei.sdraob · 27-09-2009 4:41pm

View wrote: »

Presumably, these are the taxi drivers that funded the Libertas' multi-million Euro campaigns with their 50 Euro donations

did they ever catch that mysterious taxidriver who "donated" to Libertas

€200000 in one go

/

squod · 27-09-2009 4:59pm

ei.sdraob wrote: »

Has it not occurred when every mainstream party, trade unions, large businesses, intellectuals and economists

are support a YES

that maybe voting YES is the correct thing to do

does it not worry you when the NO campaign is run by Taliban like nuts, Sinn Fein, British Eurosceptics, Libertas and Ganley that somethings smells very rotten

Has it not occured to you that the same nut-jobs who ruined this country now want you to vote yes?

prinz · 27-09-2009 5:06pm

squod wrote: »

Has it not occured to you that the same nut-jobs who ruined this country now want you to vote yes?

You do realise that encompasses a massive majority of Irish political, social, economic, religious, intellectual, civic etc society... they're all "nut jobs"?

ei.sdraob · 27-09-2009 5:16pm

prinz wrote: »

You do realise that encompasses a massive majority of Irish political, social, economic, religious, intellectual, civic etc society... they're all "nut jobs"?

including the opposition to the current Green ****ing Failure parties

in the form of FG and Lab
whom more than likely would form the next government
and then there are non political organisations, trade unions and businesses

/

squod · 27-09-2009 5:18pm

prinz wrote: »

You do realise that encompasses a massive majority of Irish political, social, economic, religious, intellectual, civic etc society... they're all "nut jobs"?

So then you're saying that these people are then 'Taliban like nuts' because they voted no previuosly?

Anyone who can screw up a country this badly is the wrong person to take advise from.

ei.sdraob · 27-09-2009 5:19pm

squod wrote: »

So then you're saying that these people are then 'Taliban like nuts' because they voted no previuosly?

Anyone who can screw up a country this badly is the wrong person to take advise from.

what the **** are you talking about?

when talking about 'Taliban like nuts' i am referring to Coir and their backward ways

/

The Volt · 27-09-2009 5:21pm

squod wrote: »

So then you're saying that these people are then 'Taliban like nuts' because they voted no previuosly?

Anyone who can screw up a country this badly is the wrong person to take advise from.

By that logic would a party with the least TD's is the one to take advice from?

marco_polo · 27-09-2009 5:25pm

ei.sdraob wrote: »

what the **** are you talking about?

when talking about 'Taliban like nuts' i am referring to Coir and their backward ways

/

Some people just prefer to reinterpret certain posts into a more suitable format before replying to them. It is chapter one of strawmanning for dummies.

I blame Joe Higgins.

prinz · 27-09-2009 5:25pm

squod wrote: »

So then you're saying that these people are then 'Taliban like nuts' because they voted no previuosly?

Anyone who can screw up a country this badly is the wrong person to take advise from.

Do I believe that a huge overwhelming majority of politicians, business leaders, union leaders, professional leaders, etc etc etc have the best interest of the country in mind? Yes.

Compared to far right extremists and far left professional complainers...

squod · 27-09-2009 5:30pm

prinz wrote: »

Do I believe that a huge overwhelming majority of politicians, business leaders, union leaders, professional leaders, etc etc etc have the best interest of the country in mind? Yes.

Compared to far right extremists and far left professional complainers...

Yeah, I'm sure they mean well. But that doesn't make them right.

prinz · 27-09-2009 5:39pm

squod wrote: »

Yeah, I'm sure they mean well. But that doesn't make them right.

Does it make them wrong?

I'm willing to take a bet on them being right, compared to the types looking for a no vote, people who have no experience whatsoever of running a country or and economy etc.

It is a yes or no question next Friday. It's a black and white decision.

squod · 27-09-2009 5:47pm

Voltwad wrote: »

By that logic would a party with the least TD's is the one to take advice from?

Best person to take advise from is yourself IMO. I just hope you make the right decision from the information you have. I'd like to think that my mind wasn't made up by misinformation or idiots from either side.

Taxi Drivers for No - Workers turn against Lisbon

Comments