How come we have to pay?

Djdukey

Im probably being really naive here but im just curious, also if im wrong please correct me.

Why is it that the politicians, the bankers and basically those who think they are somebody, do not have to pay back any of the money, they THINK they were entitled to. You know, the money the tax payers paid.

Isn't there a case of a man who claimed the pension for his dead brother (or something simlilar) and has to pay it off all back each week. Fair enough.

But what I don't think is fair is that these "leaders", are able to claim expenses for houses in cork, get their homes decorated, claim milage all while earning a a good wage?

Why is it that they dont have to pay back the money? They seem to think a "sorry" is enough.

Maybe I have this wrong and like I said i could have.

But, if thats true, what I do think is funny is that people can go marching and protesting over Israel, yet sit back and do nothing about whats going on here. I know Israel is an important topic and I understand why there doing it, but its not the only issue that needs to be addressed.

Count Dooku

Because politicians know that people don’t have real alternatives for them

Brian O Dalaigh

Djdukey wrote: »

...

Why is it that the politicians, the bankers and basically those who think they are somebody, do not have to pay back any of the money, they THINK they were entitled to. You know, the money the tax payers paid.

...
But what I don't think is fair is that these "leaders", are able to claim expenses for houses in cork, get their homes decorated, claim milage all while earning a a good wage?

...

The reason is because the whole system is corrupt. There is no democracy in Ireland, despite what you may be told. We have a system of "Tyranny of the Majority". A lot of people have become disillusioned with the politics in this country. Basically what happens is that with PR and our current system of democracy the party with the most votes rules - but that means that usually about 45% of the population is not represented in government - usually people who vote for left wing/socialist politicians who generally come from working class areas. Those in power (usually right-wing FF, FG or centre-right Labour) represent the interests of small businesses, developers, large businesses, banks etc. Those interests are then reflected in government policy which ignores the needs of those in working class areas. These people then become disillusioned and stop voting, because what's the point in voting if it makes no difference! That reduces their representation in the Dáil even further and so the cycle continues until you get a situation like present where the ruling government represents only c. 52% of the wishes of those that elected them, but only about 70% of the people voted - i.e. only c. 36% of the people of the country are represented in policy and decision making. And to keep themselves in power, these parties will carry on making decisions that keep the current crop voting and isolate the rest. This usually means policies that suit them, their banker friends, developer friends, etc. Which means that they get to keep their expenses. They get to keep their high wages. And they get us to say "Yes we deserve to pay for your mistakes". Sickening isn't it.

And the worst thing is the propaganda - on the radio about 2 months ago someone (I cant remember who said it) said that those on the dole need to be encouraged to go back to work, and that those on the dole receive €16,000. I'm sorry but that's just not true. I am on the dole. I am entitled to €10,192 - €6,000 less than he claimed. Yet he was not corrected about his figures. I have already suffered 2 cuts in the last 2 years in the form of the dissolution of the Christmas bonus and the reduction in the weekly amount I receive. My partner is on part time public-sector work (€15,000 gross) and her salary has been reduced (as a percentage) more than those on €30,000 (which means someone on the higher figure doesn't get their second car, while we have to do without items of clothing - I haven't bought clothing in 2 years) - and she has to pay her pension contribution, pension levy, income levy, prsi, and there are two other contribs she must pay which I can't remember just now. All the while the banks are getting hundreds of billions in bailouts, recapitalisations, golden handshakes, etc.

The next mainstream party to knock on my door is getting a good bollickin off me.

Uriel.

Brian O Dalaigh wrote: »

The reason is because the whole system is corrupt. There is no democracy in Ireland, despite what you may be told. We have a system of "Tyranny of the Majority". A lot of people have become disillusioned with the politics in this country. Basically what happens is that with PR and our current system of democracy the party with the most votes rules - but that means that usually about 45% of the population is not represented in government - usually people who vote for left wing/socialist politicians who generally come from working class areas. Those in power (usually right-wing FF, FG or centre-right Labour) represent the interests of small businesses, developers, large businesses, banks etc. Those interests are then reflected in government policy which ignores the needs of those in working class areas. These people then become disillusioned and stop voting, because what's the point in voting if it makes no difference! That reduces their representation in the Dáil even further and so the cycle continues until you get a situation like present where the ruling government represents only c. 52% of the wishes of those that elected them, but only about 70% of the people voted - i.e. only c. 36% of the people of the country are represented in policy and decision making. And to keep themselves in power, these parties will carry on making decisions that keep the current crop voting and isolate the rest. This usually means policies that suit them, their banker friends, developer friends, etc. Which means that they get to keep their expenses. They get to keep their high wages. And they get us to say "Yes we deserve to pay for your mistakes". Sickening isn't it. And the worst thing is the propaganda - on the radio about 2 months ago someone (I cant remember who said it) said that those on the dole need to be encouraged to go back to work, and that those on the dole receive €16,000. I'm sorry but that's just not true. I am on the dole. I am entitled to €10,192 - €6,000 less than he claimed. Yet he was not corrected about his figures. I have already suffered 2 cuts in the last 2 years in the form of the dissolution of the Christmas bonus and the reduction in the weekly amount I receive. My partner is on part time public-sector work (€15,000 gross) and her salary has been reduced (as a percentage) more than those
on €30,000 (which means someone on the higher figure doesn't get their second car, while we have to do without items of clothing - I haven't bought clothing in 2 years) - and she has to pay her pension contribution, pension levy, income levy, prsi, and there are two other contribs she must pay which I can't remember just now. All the while the banks are getting hundreds of billions in bailouts, recapitalisations, golden handshakes, etc. The next mainstream party to knock on my door is getting a good bollickin off me.

Errg, Can't read - my eyes hurt - can you please introduce some formatting, paragraphs etc.. into your post

Riskymove

Djdukey wrote: »

Isn't there a case of a man who claimed the pension for his dead brother (or something simlilar) and has to pay it off all back each week. Fair enough.

Why is it that they dont have to pay back the money? They seem to think a "sorry" is enough.

while all the other emotive points may be relevant...I'd point out here that the guy you are talking about was found guilty of fraud

so far the politicians you are talking about have not been

Brian O Dalaigh

Uriel. wrote: »

Errg, Can't read - my eyes hurt - can you please introduce some formatting, paragraphs etc.. into your post

Sorry about that. It was my first post. I've edited it now so hopefully you can read it a bit more clearly.:)

ei.sdraob

Because people still trust and vote for the crowd who promised a house and BMW for everyone and a soft landing

douglashyde

Brian O Dalaigh wrote: »

The reason is because the whole system is corrupt. There is no democracy in Ireland, despite what you may be told. We have a system of "Tyranny of the Majority". A lot of people have become disillusioned with the politics in this country. Basically what happens is that with PR and our current system of democracy the party with the most votes rules - but that means that usually about 45% of the population is not represented in government - usually people who vote for left wing/socialist politicians who generally come from working class areas. Those in power (usually right-wing FF, FG or centre-right Labour) represent the interests of small businesses, developers, large businesses, banks etc. Those interests are then reflected in government policy which ignores the needs of those in working class areas. These people then become disillusioned and stop voting, because what's the point in voting if it makes no difference! That reduces their representation in the Dáil even further and so the cycle continues until you get a situation like present where the ruling government represents only c. 52% of the wishes of those that elected them, but only about 70% of the people voted - i.e. only c. 36% of the people of the country are represented in policy and decision making. And to keep themselves in power, these parties will carry on making decisions that keep the current crop voting and isolate the rest. This usually means policies that suit them, their banker friends, developer friends, etc. Which means that they get to keep their expenses. They get to keep their high wages. And they get us to say "Yes we deserve to pay for your mistakes". Sickening isn't it.

And the worst thing is the propaganda - on the radio about 2 months ago someone (I cant remember who said it) said that those on the dole need to be encouraged to go back to work, and that those on the dole receive €16,000. I'm sorry but that's just not true. I am on the dole. I am entitled to €10,192 - €6,000 less than he claimed. Yet he was not corrected about his figures. I have already suffered 2 cuts in the last 2 years in the form of the dissolution of the Christmas bonus and the reduction in the weekly amount I receive. My partner is on part time public-sector work (€15,000 gross) and her salary has been reduced (as a percentage) more than those on €30,000 (which means someone on the higher figure doesn't get their second car, while we have to do without items of clothing - I haven't bought clothing in 2 years) - and she has to pay her pension contribution, pension levy, income levy, prsi, and there are two other contribs she must pay which I can't remember just now. All the while the banks are getting hundreds of billions in bailouts, recapitalisations, golden handshakes, etc.

The next mainstream party to knock on my door is getting a good bollickin off me.

Forgive me if this sounds ignorant:

Am I right in saying "you have been on the dole for two years?" How does someone end up on the dole for two years?

The problem with Ireland isn’t that it’s corrupt or that the bankers and high earners “are not paying”. Keep in mind 0.5% of Irelands’ top earners contributes 17% of the income tax.

And the bank bailouts arn’t bailing out the “bankers”. In order for Ireland to have a working economy, you need cash flowing banks. It really is that simple.

Brian O Dalaigh

douglashyde wrote: »

Forgive me if this sounds ignorant:

Am I right in saying "you have been on the dole for two years?" How does someone end up on the dole for two years?

Simple really. While I was working I became sick (end of 2007) and had to leave the job for health reasons (with no possibility of return due to cutbacks - i.e. health and no money or a job and no health which would probably have led to no job anyway and a large hospital bill too). Unfortunately when I was ready to come back to work the economy had collapsed and so I found myself, and still do, unable to find a job, despite my education and work experience. If I could get a job I would.

douglashyde wrote: »

The problem with Ireland isn’t that it’s corrupt or that the bankers and high earners “are not paying”. Keep in mind 0.5% of Irelands’ top earners contributes 17% of the income tax.

And the bank bailouts arn’t bailing out the “bankers”. In order for Ireland to have a working economy, you need cash flowing banks. It really is that simple.

The bank bailouts are bailing out the bankers. It's keeping the banks open, which keeps those responsible for the crisis in jobs. I agree that to have a working economy you need cash flowing banks, but despite the money pumped into them we don't have cash flowing banks. We still have banks that are not functioning. The reality is that these billions we have pumped into these banks are never going to be seen again, and the banks will fail anyway.

I don't know of any bankers who have lost their homes or jobs (other than retiring), correct me if I'm wrong. Regarding those paying 17% of income tax - they can afford to pay more. Most of those are on salaries that I would be lucky to earn in about 15 years in total, and that was when I was working. And please tell me how Ireland is not corrupt? Most of those guilty will not serve a day in court, never mind any time behind bars.

Cookie_Monster

Brian O Dalaigh wrote: »

The bank bailouts are bailing out the bankers. It's keeping the banks open, which keeps those responsible for the crisis in jobs. I agree that to have a working economy you need cash flowing banks, but despite the money pumped into them we don't have cash flowing banks. We still have banks that are not functioning. The reality is that these billions we have pumped into these banks are never going to be seen again, and the banks will fail anyway.

banks are functioning, they are lending to plenty of people. I recently got a lot of money in a loan. The person beside me in work just got a mortgage. They are not lending to people/business that can't prove they are able to pay it all back.

The banks need to be bailed out because of the stupid guarentee, if they go under either the government and country go broke paying back the depsoits or no one gets any of their money back which would cripple hundred of business and thousands of people. No win situation, the money has to be stumped up.

And it was revieled today they are EXTENDING the bank guarentee for all banks for some bizarre reason.

Liam Byrne

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

They are not lending to people/business that can't prove they are able to pay it all back.

That would be understandable under normal circumstances; don't lend to businesses that aren't in some way viable.

However the irony is that the banks themselves are not viable.

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

The banks need to be bailed out because of the stupid guarentee, if they go under either the government and country go broke paying back the depsoits or no one gets any of their money back which would cripple hundred of business and thousands of people. No win situation, the money has to be stumped up.

And it was revieled today they are EXTENDING the bank guarentee for all banks for some bizarre reason.

Agreed. Giving OUR money to badly-run, unviable businesses is sickening. And let no-one forget that it was FF's panicking that led to the guarantee.

Boxoffrogs

Brian O Dalaigh wrote: »

The reason is because the whole system is corrupt. There is no democracy in Ireland, despite what you may be told. We have a system of "Tyranny of the Majority". A lot of people have become disillusioned with the politics in this country. Basically what happens is that with PR and our current system of democracy the party with the most votes rules - but that means that usually about 45% of the population is not represented in government - usually people who vote for left wing/socialist politicians who generally come from working class areas. Those in power (usually right-wing FF, FG or centre-right Labour) represent the interests of small businesses, developers, large businesses, banks etc.

Hello, Labour are not centre-right, not by a country mile. I do get annoyed when they are classed as hard left which is also wrong but they are certainly not a right wing party.

In response to the OP, they have not paid back anything because there is no incentive for them to, and because we let them do whatever they like. We accept the "Tyranny of the majority" because it's all we've ever known, well for the most part anyway.

Brian O Dalaigh

diddledum wrote: »

Hello, Labour are not centre-right, not by a country mile. I do get annoyed when they are classed as hard left which is also wrong but they are certainly not a right wing party.

That was a mistake. I was too focussed on the FF/FG aspect that I inserted centre-right instead of centre-left.

Brian O Dalaigh

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

banks are functioning, they are lending to plenty of people. I recently got a lot of money in a loan. The person beside me in work just got a mortgage. They are not lending to people/business that can't prove they are able to pay it all back.

The banks need to be bailed out because of the stupid guarentee, if they go under either the government and country go broke paying back the depsoits or no one gets any of their money back which would cripple hundred of business and thousands of people. No win situation, the money has to be stumped up.

And it was revieled today they are EXTENDING the bank guarentee for all banks for some bizarre reason.

No the banks are not functioning. If they were functioning we wouldn't be bailing them out. If I had a business and it owed millions of euros, and I got someone to give me millions more (shame on them), and then continued to trade in the same manner, that would not mean that suddenly my business was functioning - it simply means that rather than me and my business being screwed, now it's me, my business and the person who gave me the money that's screwed. All that's happening is that we seem to be seeing how many people's lives we can screw up to keep the same high-powered people earning money off our backs.

Scarab80

Liam Byrne wrote: »

That would be understandable under normal circumstances; don't lend to businesses that aren't in some way viable.

However the irony is that the banks themselves are not viable.

Strange then that BOI's recent rights issue was fully subscribed and that the value of their shares is up over 10% since completion of the issue.

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Agreed. Giving OUR money to badly-run, unviable businesses is sickening. And let no-one forget that it was FF's panicking that led to the guarantee.

Honohan Banking Report wrote:

There can be little doubt that a disorderly failure of Anglo would, in the absence of any other protective action, have had a devastating effect on the remainder of the Irish banks. Given the other banks‘ reliance from day-to-day and week-to-week on the willingness of depositors and other lenders not to withdraw their funds, and the certainty that those lenders would infer from the failure of Anglo that all the other Irish banks might be in a comparable situation, in all likelihood the main banks would have run out of cash within days

Sand

Strange then that BOI's recent rights issue was fully subscribed and that the value of their shares is up over 10% since completion of the issue.

Strange Lenihan still needs to extend the guarantee if the market has such confidence in the banks.

Either way, youre making the same mistake all supporters of Lenihans scheme do. The BOI share price is utterly unimportant unless you are a shareholder. Propping up the BOI share price should not be an economic policy of this country, and the only appropriate reaction to its movement is indifference.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Liam Byrne View Post
Agreed. Giving OUR money to badly-run, unviable businesses is sickening. And let no-one forget that it was FF's panicking that led to the guarantee.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Honohan Banking Report
There can be little doubt that a disorderly failure of Anglo would, in the absence of any other protective action, have had a devastating effect on the remainder of the Irish banks. Given the other banks‘ reliance from day-to-day and week-to-week on the willingness of depositors and other lenders not to withdraw their funds, and the certainty that those lenders would infer from the failure of Anglo that all the other Irish banks might be in a comparable situation, in all likelihood the main banks would have run out of cash within days

Again, that sounds like a problem for the banks and their bondholders, not for the Irish country. Its very likely that given the ECB policy of trying to prevent bank failures and the heavy German exposure to Irish banks we could have forced them to carry the expenses if they were that concerned with the bondholders. Or for the bondholders to do a deal with the banks. Given the markets have such confidence in the banks.

Whatever the possible outcomes of not extending the guarantee the decision that was made to put one in place, and indeed the terms under which it was granted which Honohan heavily criticised (Honohan does not support the Guarantee that Lenihan put in place) has had a devastating effect on the country as a whole.

Scarab80

Sand wrote: »

Strange Lenihan still needs to extend the guarantee if the market has such confidence in the banks.

BOI could probably raise money without government guarantee at the moment however the other banks have not completed their recapitalisations yet (i.e. AIB are still in the process of selling off their Polish, UK and US assets).

Sand wrote: »

Either way, youre making the same mistake all supporters of Lenihans scheme does. The BOI share price is utterly unimportant unless you are a shareholder. Propping up the BOI share price should not be an economic policy of this country, and the only appropriate reaction to its movement is indifference.

Disregarding the fact that the state owns 1.9bn ordinary shares in BOI and that we are 550m up on the 3.5bn investment not including the guarantee fee - the point I was addressing is that our banks are not viable businesses. Clearly professional investors in the market do not agree.

Sand wrote: »

Again, that sounds like a problem for the banks and their bondholders, not for the Irish country. Its very likely that given the ECB policy of trying to prevent bank failures and the heavy German exposure to Irish banks we could have forced them to carry the expenses if they were that concerned with the bondholders. Or for the bondholders to do a deal with the banks. Given the markets have such confidence in the banks.

You definitely haven't read today's papers have you...

UK banks Irish exposure

ECB 'will absolutely not' give capital to ailing banks

Interesting that you think a complete collapse of our banking system is "not a problem for the country". Also why would bondholders agree to take losses when they are ranked pari-passu with depositers and other creditors. Clearly they would only accept a write down where losses are shared equally. Further the Banking report makes it clear that at the time of the guarantee everyone involved - the banks, the regulator, the central bank and the department of finance - were of the opinion that a liquidity crisis rather than a solvency crisis was being faced.

Sand wrote: »

Whatever the possible outcomes of not extending the guarantee the decision that was made to put one in place, and indeed the terms under which it was granted which Honohan heavily criticised (Honohan does not support the Guarantee that Lenihan put in place) has had a devastating effect on the country as a whole.

Honohan criticised the inclusion of dated subordinated debt in the guarantee as they are there to soak up losses in the case of liquidation, the total amount guaranteed amounted to 11.4bn or 2.6% of the total amount guaranteed. Again this is only relevant in the case of a wind up so is only relevant to Anglo and INBS - dated sub debt there amounted to 2.4bn. Furthermore these losses have been shared with the sub debt holders through bank buy backs of this debt at discounted rates. The Honahan report puts the loss borne by sub debt holders in the 3 main banks at 5.1bn.

Indeed it has had a devastating effect on the country, but consider the effect on the country if no guarantee was put in place and the banking system collapsed...

Patrick Honohan wrote:

Absent Government support or ELA they would have to close their doors also, unable to pay out on cheques presented and other payments instructions. Closure of all, or a large part, of the banking system would have entailed a catastrophic immediate and sustained economy-wide disruption involving very significant, albeit extremely difficult to quantify, social costs, reflecting in particular the fundamental function of the payments system in a modern economy. These costs would have been broad-based in terms of income, employment and destruction of the value of economic assets and would have been on top of the recessionary downturn which has actually occurred. Considering the experience of other countries in such circumstances, the social and economic costs, if they could be quantified, would surely have run into tens of billions of euros.

Cookie_Monster

Sand wrote: »

Strange Lenihan still needs to extend the guarantee if the market has such confidence in the banks.

there is no real reason to extend the guarentee except for Anglo. the gov can't afford a run on Anglo as they now own it, which is exactly what will happen if the gaurentee expires. the others would be ok at this point. We can already see BOI emerging from the situation, probably into profit this year too.

The crazy way Anglo has been dealt with over the last 9 months is the real problem, it should never have been in the original guareentee and should have been allowed to fail, a case of tough luck on those that couldn't get the money out in time.

AlekSmart

A very revealing piece in the Indo today from Shane Ross which underlines the nature of how little the beast changes....

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/shane-ross/shane-ross-alans-little-bank-of-horrors-2228186.html

It`s difficult to fathom Alan Dukes reluctance to be 100% above board with the Oireachtas regarding the selection process for new board members.

I would share Shane Ross`s view that we are witnessing,yet again,the resurgence of the "Ancien Régieme" which led the country deep into this dark forest of shame.

If Alan Dukes is unwilling or unable to fulfill his Public Service remit on the Anglo-Irish board then he should resign immediately and be replaced,preferably,by Shane Ross !!!

dan_d

Actually it's not the difficult to fathom. Look at the man's background. He is up to his eyeballs with every politician and "cute hoor" in the country, and the one constant thing there is to avoid giving a straight answer at any cost.

He should not be in the position he is in.

North_West_Art

I was keen to see what sort of other replies were going to be posted to the original question... the OP was concerned about sounding naive, but I think it is a simple and valid question.

Why is one person tried, under full process of the law, for not having a tv license, or failing to pay county council rates for example... while the very people in charge of the country, and their crony developers and bankers, are allowed to walk away from their debts.

Very simple question

George Orwell 1982

North_West_Art wrote: »

I was keen to see what sort of other replies were going to be posted to the original question... the OP was concerned about sounding naive, but I think it is a simple and valid question.

Why is one person tried, under full process of the law, for not having a tv license, or failing to pay county council rates for example... while the very people in charge of the country, and their crony developers and bankers, are allowed to walk away from their debts.

Very simple question

For the very simple reason that the privilaged classes in society always protect themselves first. When there was a famine before the French revolution did the nobles let themselves starve or the peasants? The peasants of course! The politicians, bankers, barristers tell us this is the way it has to be and the people accept it. End of story.

limklad

Count Dooku wrote: »

Because politicians know that people don’t have real alternatives for them

Yes they do it call an election. The only problem in the past is that people will elected them back. The next election will be different because everybody is currently hurting because of their bad management of the economy and it was proven our crises is home grown and not external causes as they initially said it was.

ei.sdraob

A better question would be how much more we would have to pay

Drumpot

OK . . .

Lets not ignore that alot of our problems are home grown and that FF made some shocking decisions and led our country into its greatest economic challange in the history of the state . .

Devil's advocate -

Was it not the US sub prime crisis that started the decline ?

Have we not always relied heavily on exports that have contributed heavily to the recession that is hitting pretty much all of the Western capitalist society's ?

Why is the rest of the world in crisis management ? - Point being, has everything that could go wrong simply gone wrong ? - If our exports and global economies been ok, we wouldnt of had the crash that has ensued.


Now, I am in no way taking responsibility away from FF for the role they played.

But . .

They were elected by the people of this country . .

The alternative opposition's only positive trait (ahead of FF) was that they didnt come across as "corrupt" as they were demanding that more be spent during the boom (some of them suggesting policies that would of worsened the bubble). There was little, if anything, to suggest that another party would of put the breaks on the bubble.

There are individuals in FF and all parties who will defo have their hands in the cookie Jar , but I believe a majority of politicians will make decisions with the best intentions (rightly or wrongly) and that its far too simplistic to assume that an entire party is "corrupt" or "looking after their buddies".

It's a conspiracy that helps people sleep at night. . An easily identifiable baddy (FF) and an easily understandable concept of why they made bad decisions (corrupt) . . Hey Presto, we can sleep at night because its that simple . .

In truth our government has made mistakes that has cost us dearly . . But they didnt make them to line their pockets, they made them because they got caught up in the same delusion that gripped the rest of the country . . FF are not differant to any other party in that they like to offer the electorate a sweetner to get voted back in (Im not condoning it, just saying its part of politics the world over).

I think few people in Ireland can critically analyse how well/bad our government has done since Sep 2008, but find it funny that many outside of Ireland think that they have done remarkably well under the circumstances.

I could find other examples that praise the measures that Ireland took to try to rebalance its books, but take this piece for example - http://blogs.wsj.com/marketbeat/2010/05/27/dont-forget-about-ireland/?KEYWORDS=ireland

It says "dont forget about Ireland" . . Why is this ?

Is it Because of our government ? No, it mentions that the decisions made by our government have been widely commended and positively received by international investors.

Is it because of our Banks ? No, it mentions NAMA , without going into detail, but seems to be happy enough with this concept.

It is actually because of the knockon effect that may befall us because of the european wide crisis.

In truth, one of the biggest reasons why Bank guarantee's and subsequent bailouts were done was so we would not be seen as defaulting on our responsibilities. Our credit rating would be effected which would increase cost of government loans, even our banks would struggle to get funding.

I am not saying that I agree or like NAMA. Nor am I saying that FF were just unlucky as they drove us right into this mess. . What I am saying is that people need to find a little more objectivity on what has happened to our economy, only then will they learn and vote for a better alternative (not just an alternative). .

I know this sounds like a copout answer from our government "everybody is going through a crisis", but its actually true and this is having a huge knockon effect at how bad ours is turning out.

When I see that gombeen McWilliams, spouting out populist waffle without going through the weakness's , it just makes me nautious. . "Leave the Euro" . ."Take the good bits and leave the bad bits" . . Eh, we see all the positives to your point, but will there be any potential knockon negatives ? Oops not enough column space and sure we have to fit the funnies into the column before the holes in your idea's prop up. .

Im not sure anybody really understands what best course of action is. . No matter what we do/did, we cannot control the crisis in the rest of the world and this does effect/limit our options. Some people argue for alternative measures (to NAMA etc) as if there is a suger daddy happy to throw whatever money we need and that this suger daddy will give us money if we default on certain responsibilities. Not only that, they presume that the ECB offered us a blank cheque with no terms and conditions attached.

Incidentally, I must refer to http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=66178032&postcount=11 . I believe this is a brilliant example of how our government is viewed abroad, so much so that others will prob follow . .

I dont hate FF the way some do as I just see them as a contributor to the crisis (as opposed to being the main reason why it happened). If we voted for better , competent politicians (in all parties) we wouldnt be in this mess. If we wanted strong regulation on banks we would of demanded it (back in the days when they were overcharging us all, but no marchs or anything happened) . . Democracy is alive and well in Ireland, its just people are too lazy to excercise their right and make sure we get the best it has to offer . .

Brian O Dalaigh

limklad wrote: »

Yes they do it call an election. The only problem in the past is that people will elected them back. The next election will be different because everybody is currently hurting because of their bad management of the economy and it was proven our crises is home grown and not external causes as they initially said it was.

It may be called an election. But then Mr Ford's long-lived quote seems very apt here: "You can have any color you like as long as its black". The same can be said for Irish elections. We have such as small country with such a tightly grouped set of politicians. The only difference between FF/FG and Labour is that one has a set of green election posters, another has a set of blue election posters, and the final one has a set of red ones. That's the only difference.

If FG or Labour were elected to power do you really think things would change? If you do you're obviously quite naive. Remember that we have a system of government where more people voted for Sinn Féin than for the Green Party, yet the Green Party got more seats, and where the majority of people voted for parties other than FF yet guess who's in power (remember most people who voted green couldn't bare to vote FG or Labour but didn't want FF either so they voted Green - this is why you've such a drop off in support for them - because they went behind the voters' backs and jumped into bed with FF). Remember that modern "democracy" is "rule by a select few elected by the majority of those that vote" rather than "representation of the people regardless of gender, sexual preference, age, ability, ethnicity, social background, geographic location".

dan_d

This appears to have slipped below the radar around here (though I haven't had a chance to check a number of other sources to compare details!)

http://edition.cnn.com/2010/BUSINESS/07/01/banker.bonuses.eu.ft.ft/index.html?fbid=VEWfa2AWsT4

I wonder if we will be made to implement these measures here, as I'm guessing it would be quite a shock to our illustrious bankers.

Nuravictus

Brian O Dalaigh wrote: »

There is no democracy in Ireland, despite what you may be told. We have a system of "Tyranny of the Majority".

Err democracy is tyranny of the majority, I think what you want is a constitutional republic.

Scarab80

dan_d wrote: »

This appears to have slipped below the radar around here (though I haven't had a chance to check a number of other sources to compare details!)

http://edition.cnn.com/2010/BUSINESS/07/01/banker.bonuses.eu.ft.ft/index.html?fbid=VEWfa2AWsT4

I wonder if we will be made to implement these measures here, as I'm guessing it would be quite a shock to our illustrious bankers.

Yup it would appear so...

"These requirements will be implemented across Europe from next year after further detailed consultation," said one official.


National regulators will have some discretion in applying the rules to their own countries but the overall percentages appear to be fixed. Regulators would be able to impose financial or non-financial penalties on groups with risky remuneration policies.