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

A plea to Ganley to enter the Dáil!

Options
124»

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    jimmmy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,539 ✭✭✭jimmmy


    Scofflaw wrote: »
    jimmmy, other posters' personal circumstances are not germane. You've been asked to leave out the snide personal remarks - if you can't, we can easily escalate this.

    moderately,
    Scofflaw

    sorry , and apologies to anyone I may have offended.


  • Options
    #93
    Biggins
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 34,568 ✭✭✭✭Biggins


    jimmmy wrote: »
    sorry , and apologies to anyone I may have offended.

    Good man, nuff said.

    Back on topic, Ganley would be a mistake to let in.
    All he has going for him is some PR (be it good or bad).
    Hell, Paris Hilton has had PR too and spoke up at American election time.
    I still wouldn't invite her either to come and go in the Dail by the front door or the back door! ;)

    :D


  • Options
    #94
    jimmmy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,539 ✭✭✭jimmmy


    Amhran Nua wrote: »
    I don't want this government to spend the money. Saying Ganley or O'Leary aren't right for the job isn't an endorsement of the wahoos we have in power at the moment.

    You said "I wouldn't vote for him to spend it", but yet his track record at earning money and spending money wisely is infinitely better than any of the " wahoos we have in power ", is it not ? The wahoos* we have in power are like the bosses we had in Aer Lingus 30 years ago, are they not? They were great for themselves and great for their employees, but for the rest of us ?

    I think Michael O'Leary deserves great respect, and I would value his opinions on economics. Plus he pays his taxes in Ireland. Not everyone does.

    * wahoos in power : not my term ....some are better than others in our govt....the next few months will tell a lot and decide if our minister for finance is a wahoo or not - for now I will give him the benefit of the doubt. He inherited / stepped in to a crazy situation.


  • Options
    #95
    Amhran Nua
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,124 ✭✭✭Amhran Nua


    jimmmy wrote: »
    You said "I wouldn't vote for him to spend it", but yet his track record at earning money and spending money wisely is infinitely better than any of the " wahoos we have in power ", is it not ?
    Only in terms of making a profit, not in terms of looking after the social good.
    jimmmy wrote: »
    I think Michael O'Leary deserves great respect, and I would value his opinions on economics. Plus he pays his taxes in Ireland. Not everyone does.
    I'd value his opinions on how to run an airline to be honest. Beyond that I'd take it as it comes.
    jimmmy wrote: »
    * wahoos in power : not my term ....some are better than others in our govt....the next few months will tell a lot and decide if our minister for finance is a wahoo or not - for now I will give him the benefit of the doubt. He inherited / stepped in to a crazy situation.
    So what you're saying is you support NAMA? But a minute ago you were comparing the people in charge to Aer Lingus bosses in the 80s, good for nobody but themselves. Which way do you want it now.


  • Options
    #96
    P. Breathnach
    Registered Users Posts: 12,089 ✭✭✭✭P. Breathnach


    jimmmy wrote: »
    sorry , and apologies to anyone I may have offended.

    I wasn't offended. I was irritated that a discussion was being deflected.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    jimmmy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,539 ✭✭✭jimmmy


    Amhran Nua wrote: »
    Only in terms of making a profit .
    if earning money / providing a better service for the public and spending money wisely can be reduced to "Only in terms of making a profit"...were Aer Lingus bosses say 30 years ago interested in making a profit or in terms of looking after the social good ?
    Amhran Nua wrote: »
    not in terms of looking after the social good..

    O'Leary has done more for the social good of the country by lowering air faires and creating employment and paying massive taxes than any of the bossees of the unionised airline that was Aer Lingus 30 years ago.
    Amhran Nua wrote: »
    I'd value his opinions on how to run an airline to be honest. Beyond that I'd take it as it comes..

    I would value his opinion on anything to do with economics to be honest.
    He has experience of how the real world works.
    Amhran Nua wrote: »
    So what you're saying is you support NAMA? .
    I did not mention Nama. Nama would not be necessary if the govt / central bank / regulator had acted properly over the years. Now the banks are in difficulty, if the govt let them go to the wall, foreign bond holders would lose money, our credit rating would go sky high + the govt would not be able to borrow the money for next weeks public servants wages. Plus you would have tens of thousands of unemployed bank people, and a huge knock on effect. Nationalised banks tend not to perform well, so I think either a big loan or NAMA are the only games in town. As Dermot Desmond says, probably NAMA was not the best idea....we need to be reducing the public sector, not increasing it. Plus the banks know the loans / people best, and can manage the debts best. So for the govt to lend money to the banks would in my opinion have been the best option, but NAMA is just a means of acquiring the goods ( in this case property ) for a percentage of the market cost a few years ago.
    The people who have definitely lost out / have lost money are the developers, who lost their 20% ( or whatever the individual case may be ) deposit in the property.

    Amhran Nua wrote: »
    But a minute ago you were comparing the people in charge to Aer Lingus bosses in the 80s, good for nobody but themselves.
    Most of them are. Lenehen though is getting to grips with the job, after Ahern + Cowen caved in to the p.s. unions during the tiger. The measure of his performance will be the extent and means by which he grapples with public sector pay.


  • Options
    #98
    Amhran Nua
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,124 ✭✭✭Amhran Nua


    jimmmy wrote: »
    if earning money / providing a better service
    He didn't provide a better service though. Only a cheaper one.
    jimmmy wrote: »
    O'Leary has done more for the social good of the country by lowering air faires and creating employment and paying massive taxes than any of the bossees of the unionised airline that was Aer Lingus 30 years ago.
    He wasn't trying to do any social good though, only make a profit.
    jimmmy wrote: »
    I would value his opinion on anything to do with economics to be honest.
    He has experience of how the real world works.
    Economics are a far cry from the skills needed to run an airline.
    jimmmy wrote: »
    I did not mention Nama.
    But is that not Lenihan's baby?
    jimmmy wrote: »
    Most of them are. Lenehen though is getting to grips with the job, after Ahern + Cowen caved in to the p.s. unions during the tiger. The measure of his performance will be the extent and means by which he grapples with public sector pay.
    Lenihan is getting to grip with tens of billions of other people's money in one of the worst implementations of a NAMA type model ever seen.


  • Options
    #99
    jimmmy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,539 ✭✭✭jimmmy


    Amhran Nua wrote: »
    He didn't provide a better service though. Only a cheaper one..

    Better value for money in most peoples eyes ( compared to the 180 to 200 pounds most people were forced to pay on unionised Aer Lingus 30 years ago ) .
    Ok you may have got a reheated breakfast on board but it cost you more than a fortnights wages ;)

    Plus O'Leary provided more frequent flights, flew from / to more airports ...ok he + his company are not perfect, but overall to millions of people they have provided a better service....and they have paid a lot of tax....

    His airline unlike Aer Lingus has a record of no crashes either ( thank God )....and I think he has a better record on punctuality than Air Lingus ...and probably lost baggage ..so I dunno how you can say "He didn't provide a better service"
    Amhran Nua wrote: »
    He wasn't trying to do any social good though, only make a profit..

    "only" make a profit....I demonstrated how he did achieve social good though. I think him and his airline have beneffited society more than many do-gooders paid by the govt to benefit society.;)

    Amhran Nua wrote: »
    Economics are a far cry from the skills needed to run an airline..

    So you could not develop or run one of the leading airlines in Europe ( from a little green island off Europes west coat ) without Economics ?

    Amhran Nua wrote: »
    Lenihan is getting to grip with tens of billions of other people's money in one of the worst implementations of a NAMA type model ever seen.
    perhaps. time will tell a lot.


  • Options
    #100
    Amhran Nua
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,124 ✭✭✭Amhran Nua


    jimmmy wrote: »
    Better value for money in most peoples eyes
    No, cheaper in most people's eyes. O'Leary recognised a simple fact about airline travel, which is that its not an end unto itself, its a taxi ride.
    jimmmy wrote: »
    "only" make a profit....I demonstrated how he did achieve social good though. I think him and his airline have beneffited society more than many do-gooders paid by the govt to benefit society.;)
    He didn't set out to achieve social good, it was a byproduct of his profit making goals.
    jimmmy wrote: »
    So you could not develop or run one of the leading airlines in Europe ( from a little green island off Europes west coat ) without Economics ?
    Yes, economics in the macro sense has little to do with book keeping and cost cutting, its an entirely different discipline.
    jimmmy wrote: »
    perhaps. time will tell a lot.
    Not if the greens pull out. Which is admittedly unlikely.


  • Options
    #101
    Biggins
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 34,568 ✭✭✭✭Biggins


    Amhran Nua wrote: »
    ...O'Leary recognised a simple fact about airline travel, which is that its not an end unto itself, its a taxi ride...

    LOL Its off topic (sorry) but does O'Leary still own his own infamous taxi?

    For those that don't know, he purchased one some time back so that he could speed through Dublin streets in the Taxi lanes and avoid a lot of the traffic!
    That's O'Leary for you! :pac:


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    Amhran Nua
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,124 ✭✭✭Amhran Nua


    I think they made him get rid of that. :D


  • Options
    #103
    jimmmy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,539 ✭✭✭jimmmy


    He does not make govt rules. he just lives by them + pays his taxes. And millions of people keep wanting to give his company money. Strange that ;)


  • Options
    #104
    bug
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,204 ✭✭✭bug


    odoylerulez wrote: »
    What an inditement of irish politics! lol

    Irish politics is one big joke. Family after family getting their inlaws involved you know. Anyone not in the inner circle is treated like an outcast.

    Irish politics is somewhat of a ridiculous inherited entitlement.

    In the run up to the Lisbon debate there were people here who dedicated more time to it that the politicians involved themselves.

    To be honest there are enough of you here intelligent enough, eloquent enough, and so engaged, that you could break the mould.


  • Options
    #105
    nacho libre
    Registered Users Posts: 16,639 ✭✭✭✭nacho libre


    ei.sdraob wrote: »
    agree with him on the Iraq war?

    wtf the guy is selling weapons

    he shouldnt be allowed near politics

    he has no policies

    oh you don't have to convince me. i am likely as opposed to war-profiteers, as you are, having an influence in politics. as general patton famously once said war is a racket and Ganley has made millions from it.
    what i'm saying to you is there are others here who despise him not for this but for his stance on the Lisbon Treaty. If he was a yes campaigner for Lisbon i suspect there wouldn't have been the level of scrutiny against him that there was.
    i suspect the more right-wing advocates of the treaty would only care to the extent of whether his presence would undermine the campaign.


  • Options
    #106
    sherdydan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 393 ✭✭sherdydan


    declan ganley? hardly accountable, also, I wouldnt consider him a true irishman, spent many of his formative years outside the country. also he made his money selling soviet aluminium during the cold war... i do wonder was it just aluminium?

    also he plain and simply is an obnoxius pr**k, who just says yes to people of every different socio-economic background


Advertisement