Richard Boyd Barrett

BKtje

Been a while since i was in ireland so I guess i'm recalling the prices wrongly (thought the aircoach was 9 one way and 7 for the flyer). Apologies so.

Better, ok it drops you closer to the terminal but considering I had to get another bus to get the aircoach it wasn't better for me. Obviously with the licence being granted to aircoach for the sameish route that rules that little tid bit out. Still I always liked the service and flyer itself, more so than the aircoach.

I don't like the fact that it was forced to quit by the governement even though people used it instead of the aircoach. A little competition is always better for the customer. Anyway that's enough off topicness.

david337

"It's a pity that he advocates policies that have no hope of being generally accepted, and that would probably cause chaos if they were accepted."

What are those policies that he advocates? Why are they not gone into in detail? Why are they generally dismissed at the wave of a hand? Richards’s view of socialism is completely different to that of the Statist societies like the USSR. By socialism he means extending democracy into the economic sphere, essentially large scale investment should be democratically controlled (as opposed to a central committee or an unelected board of directors) and used for the needs of people by the people. If the majority of investment is controlled by the majority of people then we would essentially have a non-profit economy. We are talking about the levers of the economy here, not small businesses.

The reason he puts so much efforts into organising protests for various different things is because he believes (as I do) that great change comes about through people power. Any great progress in society has been brought about by people power. Just look at Egypt and the speed of change there, all through people power, if change in Egypt had been left to a parliamentary committee we would be waiting a very long time.

Roll on our day of rage! And yes I hope there is a bit of chaos.

djpbarry

david337 wrote: »

By socialism he means extending democracy into the economic sphere, essentially large scale investment should be democratically controlled (as opposed to a central committee or an unelected board of directors) and used for the needs of people by the people.

Are the people qualified to manage investment in such a fashion?

david337 wrote: »

Roll on our day of rage! And yes I hope there is a bit of chaos.

Because that's exactly what Ireland needs right now to restore confidence in the economy.

20Cent

You know what is a crazy policy, Irish taxpayers paying billions to investors who lost. That is nuts yet is accepted as somehow inevitable. It is reported in the media as if it is normal!! Fair play to RBB good to have other voices in the Dail.

p1akuw47h5r3it

david337 wrote: »

"It's a pity that he advocates policies that have no hope of being generally accepted, and that would probably cause chaos if they were accepted."

What are those policies that he advocates? Why are they not gone into in detail? Why are they generally dismissed at the wave of a hand? Richards’s view of socialism is completely different to that of the Statist societies like the USSR. By socialism he means extending democracy into the economic sphere, essentially large scale investment should be democratically controlled (as opposed to a central committee or an unelected board of directors) and used for the needs of people by the people. If the majority of investment is controlled by the majority of people then we would essentially have a non-profit economy. We are talking about the levers of the economy here, not small businesses.

The reason he puts so much efforts into organising protests for various different things is because he believes (as I do) that great change comes about through people power. Any great progress in society has been brought about by people power. Just look at Egypt and the speed of change there, all through people power, if change in Egypt had been left to a parliamentary committee we would be waiting a very long time.

Roll on our day of rage! And yes I hope there is a bit of chaos.

Egypt's situation is completely different to Ireland.

Our "day of rage" would achieve nothing, other than ruining our economy/country even more.

And why do you want chaos? What will that solve, apart from nothing?

Cookie_Monster

david337 wrote: »

The reason he puts so much efforts into organising protests for various different things is because he believes (as I do) that great change comes about through people power.

yeah, he's proved that by threatening Dublin Bus staff on the 46a, hijacking peaceful student protests and protesting alongside wasters who refuse to pay their tiny rent on house given to them for nothing.

Well done that man :rolleyes:

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

david337

Egypt's situation is completely different to Ireland.

Our "day of rage" would achieve nothing, other than ruining our economy/country even more.

And why do you want chaos? What will that solve, apart from nothing?

Awh now Dandan, one thing is for certain, people like you will change nothing.

Firstly Egypt's situation isn't entirly different to Ireland. The world bank and IMF approved and commended all of Mubareks neo-liberal pro-privitisation policys, the same structural adjustment programs will be implemented here as where in Egypt. The dire economic situation these caused in Egypt form the backdrop to the revolution.

Secondly the continuation of the current economic and political policys will make our country/economy worse. In other words maintainance of the status que will make things worse, i.e. the eu/imf deal in particular. A day of rage would challenge this status que.

Thirdly, where you see chaos, meaning mass protest and strikes, I see order. You could look at Egypt and see chaos or you could look at Egypt and see the fantastic orgaisation of the protestors, the organised street cleaning, the defence committees, the strike committees etc.

In other words things can fall apart and come together at the same time.

PatsytheNazi

timespast wrote: »

Capitalism is on it's knees but the old rhetoric of the SWP isn't the answer.

I'm most definitely left wing....... the alternative is the majority will be left behind.

The SWP are nothing other than the Irish branch of a British left movement and take their ideology from them. That's why they'll never get anything from me.

p1akuw47h5r3it

david337 wrote: »

Awh now Dandan, one thing is for certain, people like you will change nothing.

Firstly Egypt's situation isn't entirly different to Ireland. The world bank and IMF approved and commended all of Mubareks neo-liberal pro-privitisation policys, the same structural adjustment programs will be implemented here as where in Egypt. The dire economic situation these caused in Egypt form the backdrop to the revolution.

Secondly the continuation of the current economic and political policys will make our country/economy worse. In other words maintainance of the status que will make things worse, i.e. the eu/imf deal in particular. A day of rage would challenge this status que.

Thirdly, where you see chaos, meaning mass protest and strikes, I see order. You could look at Egypt and see chaos or you could look at Egypt and see the fantastic orgaisation of the protestors, the organised street cleaning, the defence committees, the strike committees etc.

In other words things can fall apart and come together at the same time.

How will "people like me" not change anything?

Mubaracks "neo-liberal pro privitisation policies" made Egypt one of the "fastest growing middle eastern economies".

Growth in Egypt has picked up steadily since 2004 (see chart), making it one of the Middle East's fastest-growing economies.
It launched bold reforms in 2004 that, along with a favorable external environment, have triggered an impressive acceleration of growth, to 7 percent in 2006/07.
In its most recent review of Egypt's economy, the IMF says the expansion has broadened from energy, construction, and telecommunications to such labor-intensive sectors as agriculture and manufacturing.

http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/survey/so/2008/car021308a.htm

There wasnt a "dire economic situation" in Egypt as a result of the IMF.


Fine Gael aren't continuing the same FF policies.

And civilised protests and "chaos" are two different things. I certainly don't want to Dublin to be refered to as a War Zone like you seem to want.

Downtown Cairo is a war zone tonight – as reports come in of massive occupations by protesters in towns across Egypt, the centre of the capital is awash with running street battles. Along with hundreds of others I've just been teargassed outside the parliament building, where some youths were smashing up the pavement to obtain rocks to throw at police.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/global/blog/2011/jan/25/middleeast-tunisia#block-32

david337

Quote:
Growth in Egypt has picked up steadily since 2004 (see chart), making it one of the Middle East's fastest-growing economies.
It launched bold reforms in 2004 that, along with a favourable external environment, have triggered an impressive acceleration of growth, to 7 percent in 2006/07.
In its most recent review of Egypt's economy, the IMF says the expansion has broadened from energy, construction, and telecommunications to such labor-intensive sectors as agriculture and manufacturing.



Serously your giving us a report from the IMF in order to counter the claim that the IMF made the country worse. Whenever I hear the word growth I get suspicious because growth never tells you the distribution of wealth, the levels of inequality, the amount of unemployed or the amount living below the poverty line.

Egypt’s own government investment authority adds more to this very bad report that the imf wrote. And it points out that 90% of Egyptians didn't see any of this wealth. Some 20% of the population were living on less than $2 a day when structural adjustment programs began, it then jumped to 44% because of the STP’s http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/nov/08/egypt-imf

p1akuw47h5r3it

david337 wrote: »

Quote:
Growth in Egypt has picked up steadily since 2004 (see chart), making it one of the Middle East's fastest-growing economies.
It launched bold reforms in 2004 that, along with a favourable external environment, have triggered an impressive acceleration of growth, to 7 percent in 2006/07.
In its most recent review of Egypt's economy, the IMF says the expansion has broadened from energy, construction, and telecommunications to such labor-intensive sectors as agriculture and manufacturing.



Serously your giving us a report from the IMF in order to counter the claim that the IMF made the country worse. Whenever I hear the word growth I get suspicious because growth never tells you the distribution of wealth, the levels of inequality, the amount of unemployed or the amount living below the poverty line.

Egypt’s own government investment authority adds more to this very bad report that the imf wrote. And it points out that 90% of Egyptians didn't see any of this wealth. Some 20% of the population were living on less than $2 a day when structural adjustment programs began, it then jumped to 44% because of the STP’s http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/nov/08/egypt-imf

No growth doesn't but it is not the IMF's fault that the wealth was unfairly distrubuted. I think we are going of topic slightly anyhow.

(To try get back on track) The article states how

President Hosni Mubarak signed up to an IMF loan that was conditional on economic liberalisation.

This sin't the case with Ireland. You stated we are in/heading for a similar situation as Egypt and I am saying this sin't true.

As you quoted:

Some 20% of the population were living on less than $2 a day when structural adjustment programs began, it then jumped to 44% because of the STP’s

This isn't the case with Ireland, we are not half as bad off as those figures. The IMF won't have the same effect

The positions of Ireland and Egypt are completely different, which is what I am arguing (we don't have problems with police brutality, unfair elections, freedom of speech etc. like Egypt). We don't need "days of rage" or mass protests.

reprazant

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

PBP recently:

Protest against Blair
Protest against rats in Dun Laoghaire
Protest in support of a family of scroungers who refused to pay their council rent
Protests to not demolish the old baths in Dun Laoghaire, but to leave them in place as a rotting hulk
Protests against the demolition of an old shed on Carlisle Pier that served no purpose and was contaminated by asbestos
Support of the illegally running Patton Flyer

I'm sure there's much more, but I do my best to try and avoid them

Were you actually in favour of the plans for the baths?

david337

The IMF won't have the same effect

Yes it will. As far as I am aware there is no country in the world that got the IMF in twice. They wreck countries and the only thing that they are interested in is asset stripping countries bare. They are the bailiffs of the world. They like to trap countries in unplayable debt so they can impose their own economic models on those countries.

djpbarry

david337 wrote: »

As far as I am aware there is no country in the world that got the IMF in twice. They wreck countries and the only thing that they are interested in is asset stripping countries bare. They are the bailiffs of the world. They like to trap countries in unplayable debt so they can impose their own economic models on those countries.

So why do so many countries opt to accept loans from the IMF? Why is almost every state in the world a member of the IMF?

david337

So why do so many countries opt to accept loans from the IMF? Why is almost every state in the world a member of the IMF?

Almost every state in the world is a member of the UN but the security council decides what to do. The IMF functions on one dollar one vote. The USA contributes 18% of the total, the biggest share, therefore the most votes, the next nearest I think is Germany at 6%.

As to the first question. Many countries were forced to take IMF loans, Latin America and Africa had an over reliance on westren loans in the 70's. So in order to stop a system wide default they turned those places into economic colonys. It is the same story with us, if we defaulted Greece, Portugal and Italy would soon follow suit.

Monty Burnz

Lenny Lovett wrote: »

the alternatives seem to have a limited life span too.

To be fair, capitalism has been going strong for a few thousand years.

Monty Burnz

david337 wrote: »

Richards’s view of socialism is completely different to that of the Statist societies like the USSR. By socialism he means extending democracy into the economic sphere, essentially large scale investment should be democratically controlled (as opposed to a central committee or an unelected board of directors) and used for the needs of people by the people. If the majority of investment is controlled by the majority of people then we would essentially have a non-profit economy. We are talking about the levers of the economy here, not small businesses.

Can you please give us examples of other successful economies run on that basis?

And with no motive for profit, why should I arse myself to do anything difficult, like start a business, or obtain higher qualifications?

Pure fantasy, imho.

p1akuw47h5r3it

david337 wrote: »

Yes it will. As far as I am aware there is no country in the world that got the IMF in twice. They wreck countries and the only thing that they are interested in is asset stripping countries bare. They are the bailiffs of the world. They like to trap countries in unplayable debt so they can impose their own economic models on those countries.

What does that prove?

And no they don't wreck every country.

djpbarry

david337 wrote: »

Almost every state in the world is a member of the UN...

And every state in the world can choose not to be. Same goes for the IMF.

david337 wrote: »

As to the first question. Many countries were forced to take IMF loans...

I'm not sure that is correct, but I am sure that Ireland was certainly not forced to do any such thing. Besides, Ireland would not be in its current state had it managed its affairs properly in the first place.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Killer Pigeon

I always thought he was a little insecure as an individual. The way he stands, his expression, etc.. I wouldn't be suprised if he went from a placid tree-hugger to a raving psychopath in 2.5 seconds and started sawing the bourgeoisie to pieces with a chainsaw - the Patrick Bateman of the proletariat ...

Fulton Crown

Is that Boyd Barrett- the peoples champion and chippy prostestor who lives at home with his parents in an affluent South Dublin Suburb.?

Wonder who funds this guy...the State...John Q Taxpayer ?

People voted for this leftie ??

Dumb..............

The Waltzing Consumer

Fulton Crown wrote: »

Is that Boyd Barrett- the peoples champion and chippy prostestor who lives at home with his parents in an affluent South Dublin Suburb.?

Wonder who funds this guy...the State...John Q Taxpayer ?

People voted for this leftie ??

Dumb..............

Ya know, just cause he got a fantastic private education and was brought by a very wealthy property developer, and just because his birth mother is a rich actress who is married to Jeremy Irons who is also filthy rich, and just because he lives in a very rich and protected area of South Dublin, that does not make him a CHAMPAGNE SOCIALIST :pac:

He is proper hardcore! This one time, he drove all the way to the Northside, oh yeah, all the way!

Fulton Crown

The Waltzing Consumer wrote: »

Ya know, just cause he got a fantastic private education and was brought by a very wealthy property developer, and just because his birth mother is a rich actress who is married to Jeremy Irons who is also filthy rich, and just because he lives in a very rich and protected area of South Dublin, that does not make him a CHAMPAGNE SOCIALIST :pac:

He is proper hardcore! This one time, he drove all the way to the Northside, oh yeah, all the way!

Could be right there Wurlitzer...could be right sure enough.

Notice that my little question on who funds this spunker went unanswered ?

20Cent

Fulton Crown wrote: »

Could be right there Wurlitzer...could be right sure enough.

Notice that my little question on who funds this spunker went unanswered ?

Spunker?

He's a TD. Look at the other candidates in Dun Laoghaire RBB looks sane.

Who funds him.
An international cabal of communists who want to take over the world and turn it into North Korea.:rolleyes:

OhNoYouDidn't

Fulton Crown wrote: »

Is that Boyd Barrett- the peoples champion and chippy prostestor who lives at home with his parents in an affluent South Dublin Suburb.?

Wonder who funds this guy...the State...John Q Taxpayer ?

People voted for this leftie ??

Dumb..............

He lives with his partner and kids in a modest house in Ballybrack.

He has been a full time SWP activist for years.

Is your post not technically libleous?

dynamick

The address he gives on all official literature is Brigadoon, Station Road, Glenageary, Co. Dublin. Maybe he lives somewhere else.

hatrickpatrick

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

PBP recently:

Protest against Blair

Who assisted an illegal war.

Protest against rats in Dun Laoghaire

Link?

Protest in support of a family of scroungers who refused to pay their council rent

Link?

Protests to not demolish the old baths in Dun Laoghaire, but to leave them in place as a rotting hulk

Actually he wants to see them redeveloped as a swimming facility. What he protested against wasn't the mere demolition, it was the building of ANOTHER feckin' skyscraper apartment block in their place.

Protests against the demolition of an old shed on Carlisle Pier that served no purpose and was contaminated by asbestos

Again, the reason this is protested is not because of the pier itself, it's because the alternative proposed by the council is a 14 story glass apartment complex.

Support of the illegally running Patton Flyer

What have people got against that? It ran a far better service than the Aircoach or Aerdart, it should have got the contract, and in any case why should there only be one? Competition? Free market?

I'm sure there's much more, but I do my best to try and avoid them

why is this, do you believe democracy triumphing over government interests is a bad thing? You really shouldn't be living in a republic then...

Fulton Crown

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

He lives with his partner and kids in a modest house in Ballybrack.

He has been a full time SWP activist for years.

Is your post not technically libleous?

No !

Only repeating what was reported in Irish Indo.