Why was Peter Sutherland given a platform on the RTE news?

blue_steel

Why was this idiot given a platform on national news to pontificate his right wing agenda? Goldman-Sachs did more than anyone to cause the credit crunch by peddling their bull**** financial chicanery. I love how he brushed over the Anglo debacle and focused on how Joe Public will have to take more pain. In any decent society this charlatan would be hanging from a lamp-post by now.

Atlantic Dawn

He is on the steering committee of the Bilderberg Group, Jim Corr may not be that far away on his conspiracy theories

blue_steel

Irish times interview from earlier this year:

On one occasion, Sutherland visited Lenihan to tell him what a great job he thought he was doing and to say that Lenihan had the potential to be one of the great taoisigh of the 21st century. Lenihan was taken aback, he says.

BANKING IS AN AWKWARD subject for Sutherland; he is chairman of Goldman Sachs International, the UK subsidiary of the US investment bank, which is in the public spotlight over its decision to pay $16 billion in bonuses after Wall Street’s excesses brought the global economy to its knees.

Sutherland was also a board member at Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) during the financial meltdown when the UK bank collapsed into state arms after a frenetic, debt-fuelled growth. Of the bank’s 2007 role in the €71 billion acquisition of Dutch bank ABN Amro, the biggest ever banking takeover, Sutherland says it made “the mistake of buying at precisely the wrong time when the world was falling off the back of a bus”.

Sutherland’s affability has clearly landed him plum postings over the years. “To me, knowing people, networking with people has been a key to whatever limited success I have had, so I am not going to give that up,” he says. He is active in the secretive Bilderberg Group, the influential, invitation-only group which meets privately discuss the state of the world.

This guy could have been lifted straight from the pages of The Ragged Trousered Philanthropists.

eoinbn

blue_steel wrote: »

Why was this idiot given a platform on national news to pontificate his right wing agenda? Goldman-Sachs did more than anyone to cause the credit crunch by peddling their bull**** financial chicanery. I love how he brushed over the Anglo debacle and focused on how Joe Public will have to take more pain.

Who do you expect to take it? We had a deficit of about €24bn, it's now €20bn and we need to get it to €5bn. The amount of pain that the country has taken is fairly minor compared to what will be experienced by the time that this is 'over' which is still a decade away(that's assuming that we are left in control).

He seems to be a well respected man, both inside and outside of Ireland, but I am not surprised that a top exec of Goldman Sachs is blasted for saying-"save the banks"!

reprazant

blue_steel wrote: »

I love how he brushed over the Anglo debacle and focused on how Joe Public will have to take more pain. In any decent society this charlatan would be hanging from a lamp-post by now.

Would you have preferred he just talked about Anglo and not about what needs to be done to sort out the mess?

The fact is that more cuts need to be made. You don't need a right-wing agenda to see that.

Sir Oxman

Notice the use of 'we' as in 'we must gird our loins', what he means is you and I not him and them.

This man pockets copius pensions from this state along with his millions from his various boardships and investments nevermind the fact he's deeply involved with the biggest culprits of theis whole economic collapse, Goldman Sachs.

His ilk will never, ever see a poor day, yet take every opportunity to saddle the little man with their debts and fcuk-ups and tell him 'we must gird our loins'.

Pompous bastard that he is.

Sir Oxman

reprazant wrote: »

Would you have preferred he just talked about Anglo and not about what needs to be done to sort out the mess?

The fact is that more cuts need to be made. You don't need a right-wing agenda to see that.

And I certainly don't need a reprehensible, fatcat blooduscker like him to tell me that.

blue_steel

blue_steel wrote: »

Why was this idiot given a platform on national news to pontificate his right wing agenda?

RTE is awful its merely a Govt propaganda station. But a proper right wing agenda would have seen banks fail.

flutered

just another case of conditioning the public to accept less, we will be acustomened to this type of geezer appearing on our screens on the run up to the budget, also we will be given a list of names of people who approve of this, by the goverment to justify their budget, just as the minister for emigration was given a free ride by dobson recently, plus r. bruton not given a chance to reply.

blue_steel

eoinbn and reprazant: Just how brainwashed are you that you can listen to a man like than telling decent working people that they need to take more pain? You can be a doormat lacky for elistist scum all you want but I won't. I prey nobody you know requires decent healthcare for the next half a century or so. But if they do and they find it lacking you can just think about Gonzaga's finest in his ten grand suit on six-one, explaining why its all about the deficit.

Welease

blue_steel wrote: »

eoinbn and reprazant: Just how brainwashed are you that you can listen to a man like than telling decent working people that they need to take more pain? You can be a doormat lacky for elistist scum all you want but I won't. I prey nobody you know requires decent healthcare for the next half a century or so. But if they do and they find it lacking you can just think about Gonzaga's finest in his ten grand suit on six-one, explaining why its all about the deficit.

So is he wrong? and we won't need to take any pain????

Welease

blue_steel wrote: »

Yes WE need to take the pain.
So how about looking at our corporation tax rate? (Intel recently posted the highest quarterly revenue in its history)
How about removing the PRSI ceiling?
How about means testing children’s allowance?
How about taxing all income above 100K at 60%?
How about creating a tax on all future banking profits so that eventually they’ll pay for the mess they created? And let’s charge them a decent interest rate while we’re at it.
My point (incase you haven't grasped it) is that WE should include Sutherland and his cohorts. But his WE doesn’t. His WE is US!

If thats your point, then you should make it... Thats not the point you made..

You complained about him being on the radio, then attacked other posters who understood that complaining about personalities is pointless, and the simple fact is everyone in this country will have to take a lot more pain to fix the problem..

dean21

He was correct on one thing
The Irish media is to negative
If it not a bad story then don’t print it

blue_steel

Welease wrote: »

So is he wrong? and we won't need to take any pain????

Yes WE need to take the pain.
So how about looking at our corporation tax rate? (Intel recently posted the highest quarterly revenue in its history)
How about removing the PRSI ceiling?
How about means testing children’s allowance?
How bout taxing all income above 100K at 60%?
How about creating a tax on all future banking profits so that eventually they’ll pay for the mess they created? And let’s charge them a decent interest rate while we’re at it.
My point is WE should include Sutherland and his cohorts. But his WE doesn’t. His WE is US!

irishgrover

blue_steel wrote:

Yes WE need to take the pain.

• So how about looking at our corporation tax rate? (Intel recently posted the highest quarterly revenue in its history)
• How about removing the PRSI ceiling?
• How about means testing children’s allowance?
• How about taxing all income above 100K at 60%?

How about creating a tax on all future banking profits so that eventually they’ll pay for the mess they created? And let’s charge them a decent interest rate while we’re at it.
My point (incase you haven't grasped it) is that WE should include Sutherland and his cohorts. But his WE doesn’t. His WE is US!

wow, it you got into power I'd be completed ****ed :eek:

Welease

blue_steel wrote: »

Yes WE need to take the pain.
So how about looking at our corporation tax rate? (Intel recently posted the highest quarterly revenue in its history)
How about removing the PRSI ceiling?
How about means testing children’s allowance?
How bout taxing all income above 100K at 60%?
How about creating a tax on all future banking profits so that eventually they’ll pay for the mess they created? And let’s charge them a decent interest rate while we’re at it.
My point is WE should include Sutherland and his cohorts. But his WE doesn’t. His WE is US!

So you agree that we need more pain, and all of those things need to be looked at????? Isn't that what he said?

blue_steel

Welease wrote: »

If thats your point, then you should make it... Thats not the point you made..

You complained about him being on the radio, then attacked other posters who understood that complaining about personalities is pointless, and the simple fact is everyone in this country will have to take a lot more pain to fix the problem..

What are you talking about? So I can't attack Lenihan and Cowan for the state the economy is in? Its all about personalities. And Sutherland just sums up everything that is wrong with the world. His attitude is that the little people have to suffer for the mistakes of the elite. Maybe you are prepared to pick up the bill for him and his ilk but I am not.

blue_steel

Welease wrote: »

So you agree that we need more pain, and all of those things need to be looked at????? Isn't that what he said?

Do you honestly believe he was including himself in that "we"?

Welease

blue_steel wrote: »

What are you talking about? So I can't attack Lenihan and Cowan for the state the economy is in? Its all about personalities. And Sutherland just sums up everything that is wrong with the world. His attitude is that the little people have to suffer for the mistakes of the elite. Maybe you are prepared to pick up the bill for him and his ilk but I am not.

No, I am aware I will have to pick up the bill.. whether i like it or not doesn't factor into it (unless we were due an election right now, and the other parties proffered a different suggestions.. which is not the case)..

The vast majority of people in this country want to focus on the personalities and apportioning blame while refusing to deal with the situation we have.. The longer we take to deal with the situation the more is costs us in interest payments on the collossal loans were are currently taking to service our debt..

Sutherland is correct that we will all need to pay for this, and there is a lot more pain coming down the line.. It's irrelevant what part he and other played.. the simple facts are correct.. and people need to wake up to that fact..

The current situation in Ireland is a mix of unions, PS, retired, unemployed and private sector employee's complaining they didn't cause the problem so they shouldn't have to take the hit.. unsustainable...

Welease

blue_steel wrote: »

Do you honestly believe he was including himself in that "we"?

To me.... it's irrelevant.. we need a lot more people in the media telling the majority of Irish people to wake the fk up and start realising that changes need to be made NOW... we cannot continue to rack up debt at this rate..

blue_steel

Welease wrote: »

Sutherland is correct that we will all need to pay for this, and there is a lot more pain coming down the line.. It's irrelevant what part he and other played.. the simple facts are correct.. and people need to wake up to that fact..

I don't accept it's irrelevant what part Sutherland played. My original post was pointing out the madness of this guy getting a platform on RTE news (tax payer funded) to peddal his views. How about giving Joe Higgins ten minutes tomorrow night. At least he has a democratic mandate!

The current situation in Ireland is a mix of unions, PS, retired, unemployed and private sector employee's complaining they didn't cause the problem so they shouldn't have to take the hit.. unsustainable.

Ok lets just pay nurses and firemen the minimum wage? I have no problem cutting waste at admin and management level in the public sector but that won't happen.

blue_steel

Welease wrote: »

To me.... it's irrelevant..

Well to me its not. I guess thats the difference.

Welease

blue_steel wrote: »

I don't accept it's irrelevant what part Sutherland played. My original post was pointing out the madness of this guy getting a platform on RTE news (tax payer funded) to peddal his views. How about giving Joe Higgins ten minutes tomorrow night. At least he has a democratic mandate!

I don't believe it airing a view on RTE has ever had the requirement of requiring a democratic mandate.. I personally have never voted for the sh1te I hear O'Connor/Begg and their union buddies spew nightly
RTE asked for his views.. he gave them.. if you have an issue maybe you should take it up with RTE

blue_steel wrote: »

Ok lets just pay nurses and firemen the minimum wage?

Did anyone ask for that?

blue_steel wrote: »

I have no problem cutting waste at admin and management level in the public sector but that won't happen.

And why is that? Because people in this country don't and won't accept that cuts have to be made.. which is precisly Sutherlands point (and not just his point).

George Orwell 1982

Blue steel, you'll get nowhere with the rightwing psychopaths on this site.

Its like arguing with a gang of fox news presenters. Their arguments are just so wrong its depressing.

Welease

George Orwell 1982 wrote: »

Blue steel, you'll get nowhere with the rightwing psychopaths on this site.

Its like arguing with a gang of fox news presenters. Their arguments are just so wrong its depressing.

oh lol here we go again..

So ok.. Sutherland gets banned from RTE.. does that fix anything????

Do we suddenly stop having a defecit?

Grow up.. and either discuss the issue at hand or stop posting..

reprazant

George Orwell 1982 wrote: »

Blue steel, you'll get nowhere with the rightwing psychopaths on this site.

Its like arguing with a gang of fox news presenters. Their arguments are just so wrong its depressing.

So seeing that the country is in a massive financial mess and more cuts will have to be made makes you right wing now?

There was me thinking that it is bloody obvious.

So, if cuts and raising tax is out of the question, how do you propose we get ourselves out of the massive fiscal black hole the country is in?

George Orwell 1982

Welease wrote: »

I don't believe it airing a view on RTE has ever had the requirement of requiring a democratic mandate.. I personally have never voted for the sh1te I hear O'Connor/Begg and their union buddies spew nightly
RTE asked for his views.. he gave them.. if you have an issue maybe you should take it up with RTE

Suds is just one person. One very wealthy individual with many conflicts of interest in relation to how the Irish crisis plays out. The unions represent more than a quarter of a million people in Ireland. Now is it more democratic to consult the unions or Suds?

Welease wrote: »

And why is that? Because people in this country don't and won't accept that cuts have to be made.. which is precisly Sutherlands point (and not just his point).

Everyone excepts there has to be cuts and tax increase to pay off the debt. The question is on who should the burden fall. Suds is quite happy with the bank bailout. He wants the deficit closed which means cuts in education and healthcare and social welfare. This won't affect him and his buddies one bit. The man is hyprocrite and he is blind to his own hypocrisy.

reprazant

blue_steel wrote: »

I don't accept it's irrelevant what part Sutherland played. My original post was pointing out the madness of this guy getting a platform on RTE news (tax payer funded) to peddal his views. How about giving Joe Higgins ten minutes tomorrow night. At least he has a democratic mandate!

So you only want people on the news who's views you agree with or says what you want to hear?

Does everyone on the new have to have a democratic mandate? If a German economist was on and said the same thing, would you start a thread ranting about it?

blue_steel

Welease wrote: »

I personally have never voted for the sh1te I hear O'Connor/Begg and their union buddies spew nightly
RTE asked for his views.. he gave them.. if you have an issue maybe you should take it up with RTE

I've never seen a trade unionist given a 10 minute tete-a-tate with David Murphy. Open your eyes and be objective for f**k sake. RTE is a national broadcaster. I'm not paying my licence fee for it to run editorial pieces with members of the Bilderberg group.

George Orwell 1982

reprazant wrote: »

So seeing that the country is in a massive financial mess and more cuts will have to be made makes you right wing now?

There was me thinking that it is bloody obvious.

So, if cuts and raising tax is out of the question, how do you propose we get ourselves out of the massive fiscal black hole the country is in?

Its a question of who bears the burden of the tax increases and expenditure cuts.

reprazant

George Orwell 1982 wrote: »

Its a question of who bears the burden of the tax increases and expenditure cuts.

Who do you propose?

George Orwell 1982

From Fintan O'Toole's Irish Times article on Suds:

Precisely because he is idolised in the Irish business community, he had the opportunity to change the culture of Irish banking. Had he taken it, “we” would not be in the loin-girding business at the moment.
Actually, Sutherland had this opportunity twice – first when he was chairman of Allied Irish Banks from 1989 to 1993, and president of the Irish Bankers’ Federation (IBF).

As a former attorney general, he discovered something truly staggering: that his own bank had been colluding in a systematic fraud on the State through the organised evasion of Dirt tax. He was not responsible for that fraud, but he was responsible for what happened when the bank’s internal auditor, Tony Spollen, discovered it.

What did he do? As he explained to the Dáil’s public accounts committee (PAC): “The issue of non-resident accounts and Dirt was an issue which was essentially one for management. Management, as I understand it, believed that the issue was under control.”

He passed the Dirt issue to a sub-committee (headed by a participant in the Ansbacher scam) which decided that there was not a problem because AIB had an informal Dirt amnesty from the Revenue. (It didn’t.) Sutherland, as he put it himself, “did not intervene in any way”. All that really happened under his leadership was that the internal auditor Spollen was shifted out of his job, though Sutherland insisted that this had nothing to do with him either.

Sutherland had a second chance to face up to the scale and implications of the rottenness in Irish banking when the scandal emerged. During the PAC’s hearings and after its scathing report, he could have taken some personal responsibility and led a process of profound moral change. Instead, we learned what he really means by the word “we”. He threw his prestige behind AIB.

Of the handing over of the issue to a sub-committee, he said that “everyone, I think, was basically happy with the process”. He stood over his own behaviour, even with the benefit of hindsight: “If I were to do it all over again, I wouldn’t change one iota of the steps that we took in terms of having an objective analysis of the situation and coming to a fair and proper conclusion.”

He explained that he never raised the question of an industry-wide fraud on the State at the IBF when he was its president. Had he done so, he said, “It would have ended up simply with, I suspect, statements by all of the chief executives or chairmen: ‘Oh, yes, absolutely, we’re doing it the best we can’, and so on.”

When the PAC report was published, with its damning conclusion that “eminent” bank directors did little to enforce ethical standards, Sutherland had nothing to say. Given that he was the most eminent of all, that silence was one of the reasons why the culture of Irish banking remained so lethally intact.

And Sutherland has sailed blithely onwards, indefatigably smug and unshakeably self-assured. His “we” is now more copious, stretching as it does to the whole field of global finance capitalism.

He was a director of Royal Bank of Scotland when it engaged in the recklessness that has cost the British taxpayer at least £45 billion (€52.55 billion) so far, and sat on the remuneration committee that lavished huge bonuses on its chief executive.

He is a big figure in Goldman Sachs, a bank which Gordon Brown accused of “moral bankruptcy” for its decision to pay out bonuses of $5.4 billion (€4.2 billion) less than two years after it had to be bailed out by the US taxpayer.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2010/0511/1224270130001.html

Welease

George Orwell 1982 wrote: »

Suds is just one person. One very wealthy individual with many conflicts of interest in relation to how the Irish crisis plays out. The unions represent more than a quarter of a million people in Ireland. Now is it more democratic to consult the unions or Suds?

I'm was not aware that the unions have been denied their input.. Can you point me to a link? Many people are consulted for their input...

And you believe Begg being a director of the central bank is different to Sutherland having differing interests? Weren't the central bank and regulators supposed to stop this from happening??????

George Orwell 1982 wrote: »

Everyone excepts there has to be cuts and tax increase to pay off the debt. The question is on who should the burden fall. Suds is quite happy with the bank bailout. He wants the deficit closed which means cuts in education and healthcare and social welfare. This won't affect him and his buddies one bit. The man is hyprocrite and he is blind to his own hypocrisy.

Actually they (Irish people) don't accept their needs to be cuts.. the CP agreement was passed to ensure no further cuts to pay (but keeping increments).. The unions continually complain about any possible cuts...
Very few are taking the cuts required in order to eliminate the defecit..

The cuts this year will amount to a 3b cut in a defecit of 20b.. merely scratching the surface..

katkin

The original question asked here was why was sutherland given a platform on RTE news this evening. I saw it at six, they had him on twice, telling us how correct the govt were not to burn the bondholders and to undertake austerity measures.

To me his message came across as: "Good government, pat on the head for you from me, now shut up Irish people and take your medicine - don't be thinking that those other dissenting voices suggesting we burn the bondholders and stop paying back rich ****ers like me with yere tax money are right, no there's no other way, you the Irish people who had nothing to do with these deals must pay!"

Good RTE! do the govts dirty work for them there!

Welease

blue_steel wrote: »

I've never seen a trade unionist given a 10 minute tete-a-tate with David Murphy. Open your eyes and be objective for f**k sake. RTE is a national broadcaster. I'm not paying my licence fee for it to run editorial pieces with members of the Bilderberg group.

Are you seriously telling me you have never seen union officials like O Connor or Begg on RTE?

George Orwell 1982

reprazant wrote: »

Who do you propose?

Look I understand the dynamics of the Irish situation. The deficit is enormous and we stupidly gauranteed all the liabilities of the banks.

We can't default on anglo because its now effectively a state bank and default on the bond holders would be a sovereign default.

We can keep cutting govt expenditure but it just deflating our economy more.

This leaves us totally shafted and there is nothing we can do except wait til the country goes bust and avail of the EU/IMF bailout.

Those on over 500,000 a year pay on average 32% income tax. I would raise that to 45%. Someone on 100k would pay about that at present.

George Orwell 1982

Welease wrote: »

Are you seriously telling me you have never seen union officials like O Connor or Begg on RTE?

They are on TV. But there is usually someone there challenging them. They don't get ten minutes to themselves.

Welease

George Orwell 1982 wrote: »

Look I understand the dynamics of the Irish situation. The deficit is enormous and we stupidly gauranteed all the liabilities of the banks.

We can't default on anglo because its now effectively a state bank and default on the bond holders would be a sovereign default.

We can keep cutting govt expenditure but it just deflating our economy more.

This leaves us totally shafted and there is nothing we can do except wait til the country goes bust and avail of the EU/IMF bailout.

Those on over 500,000 a year pay on average 32% income tax. I would raise that to 45%. Someone on 100k would pay about that at present.

What about the lowest 50% who pay no tax?

Welease

George Orwell 1982 wrote: »

They are on TV. But there is usually someone there challenging them. They don't get ten minutes to themselves.

That could be because they talk utter bollox

Here's 10 mins.. of O'Conner on RTE

blue_steel

Welease wrote: »

That could be because they talk utter bollox

What cuts have you taken? You are so gung-ho for cuts I'd just love to know what you, personally are prepared to do.

Welease

blue_steel wrote: »

What cuts have you taken? You are so gung-ho for cuts I'd just love to know what you, personally are prepared to do.

What does it matter? You could tax me 100% tomorrow it won't make a dent in the defecit..

Stop trying to personalise the arguements on me, Sutherland and whoever..

This country is borrowing 20b more a year than the tax take.. We are borrowing at rediculous rates.. and everyone will need to take savage cuts to rectify the situation..

Why do you have a problem with that?

George Orwell 1982

Welease wrote: »

Actually they (Irish people) don't accept their needs to be cuts.. the CP agreement was passed to ensure no further cuts to pay (but keeping increments).. The unions continually complain about any possible cuts...
Very few are taking the cuts required in order to eliminate the defecit..

The cuts this year will amount to a 3b cut in a defecit of 20b.. merely scratching the surface..

The reality is that Ireland has a very weak trade union movement. There was no appetite for strikes. The govt knew this. So the drove home a deal which meant public sector workers would take paycuts, a pension levy, tax increases, a freeze on recruitment and promotions and a wage freeze until 2014. This has been used an example across Europe for how to take the pain. Most other countries couldn't possibly implement such cutbacks.

We don't have to get the deficit down to zero. The target is to get it down to about 5bn of 3% of GDP by 2014. Nearly all other eurozone countries are running large deficits at the moment as well. We just have to reduce ours to a level where we don't stand out and become a target for speculators.

George Orwell 1982

Welease wrote: »

What does it matter? You could tax me 100% tomorrow it won't make a dent in the defecit..

Stop trying to personalise the arguements on me, Sutherland and whoever..

This country is borrowing 20b more a year than the tax take.. We are borrowing at rediculous rates.. and everyone will need to take savage cuts to rectify the situation..

Why do you have a problem with that?

And I suppose you think that bondholdes that invested in a house of cards like anglo Irish bank should get all their money back in full + interest. Because that is what Suds is advocating.

blue_steel

Welease wrote: »

What does it matter? You could tax me 100% tomorrow it won't make a dent in the defecit..

Stop trying to personalise the arguements on me, Sutherland and whoever..

This country is borrowing 20b more a year than the tax take.. We are borrowing at rediculous rates.. and everyone will need to take savage cuts to rectify the situation..

Why do you have a problem with that?

Because EVERYONE won't be taking savage cuts. Its like talking to a brick wall here. I will not be lectured to by a rich s**t like him about financial pain.

George Orwell 1982

Welease wrote: »

What about the lowest 50% who pay no tax?

Well, the reason they pay so little tax is because they earn so little. Much play has been made of the undeniable fact that top earners pay the most tax and that huge numbers don't pay any tax.

According to Revenue's Statistical Report for 2007, 661,000 tax cases had gross incomes of less than €15,000 a year and, as might be expected, paid minimal taxes totalling €14 million on gross incomes of €4,744 million. If, ignoring the social consequences, their effective tax rate of 0.3% could be increased by 10% to 10.3%, an additional €474 million would be raised. At the other end of the spectrum, 81,000 people had gross incomes in excess of €100,000 a year and paid taxes totalling €4,353 million on gross incomes of €16,065 million. If their effective tax rate of 27% increased by the same 10% to 37%, a total of €1,606 million could be raised.

http://www.revenue.ie/en/about/publications/statistical/archive/2007/index.html

George Orwell 1982

blue_steel wrote: »

Because EVERYONE won't be taking savage cuts. Its like talking to a brick wall here.

I did warn you...:rolleyes:

Welease

George Orwell 1982 wrote: »

The reality is that Ireland has a very weak trade union movement. There was no appetite for strikes. The govt knew this. So the drove home a deal which meant public sector workers would take paycuts, a pension levy, tax increases, a freeze on recruitment and promotions and a wage freeze until 2014. This has been used an example across Europe for how to take the pain. Most other countries couldn't possibly implement such cutbacks.

And thanks for a perfect example of how people refuse to take any pain..

Paycuts came in before CP agreement.. they were minor.. and despite the subsequent defecit, the PS refused to take any futher cuts once the real situation became known..

Pension Levy.. the PS pension defecit is currently running at over 105 BILLION... Anglo is small fry compared to our liabilites on the PS pension.. You are being asked to contribute to a defined BENEFIT pension that is unsustainable which is why it's not really available outside the PS.. and you believe that is taking the pain .. L O fkin L

Freeze on recruitment.. Yes.. (well except no.. the PS is still hiring).. but what you meant was a freeze on removing unnecessary middle management positions in the HSE and FAS etc, plus the removal of frontline services by the removal of temp workers..

Promotions and Wage freeze... err yes.. apart from some increments which are still being paid.. so in fact those people do get pay rises..

And thats and example of where about 50% (can't be arsed to look it up) of our tax take is being spent......

George Orwell 1982 wrote: »

We don't have to get the deficit down to zero. The target is to get it down to about 5bn of 3% of GDP by 2014. Nearly all other eurozone countries are running large deficits at the moment as well. We just have to reduce ours to a level where we don't stand out and become a target for speculators.

No.. we need to wipe it out.. so we don't have to continue to service a rediculous debt..

Welease

George Orwell 1982 wrote: »

And I suppose you think that bondholdes that invested in a house of cards like anglo Irish bank should get all their money back in full + interest. Because that is what Suds is advocating.

No I don't .. I think it should have been managed down in a far more sensible manner..

But once, again it doesnt change the fact.. Lenihan made a decision and I, you and everyone else now needs to pay for that bad decision.. and delaying the inevitable only raises the cost..

Welease

blue_steel wrote: »

Because EVERYONE won't be taking savage cuts. Its like talking to a brick wall here. I will not be lectured to by a rich s**t like him about financial pain.

So you would rather be lectured by rich s**ts like Begg/O'Conner about not taking any financial pain? (i.e. bury your head in the sand)

liammur

George Orwell 1982 wrote: »

From Fintan O'Toole's Irish Times article on Suds:



http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2010/0511/1224270130001.html

Pity we don't have a few politicians like O Toole. His ship of fools book was no bad read.

George Orwell 1982

Welease wrote: »

And thanks for a perfect example of how people refuse to take any pain.. ..

And I suppose that's why the international press talk about "savage cuts in public sector pay", "swinging cutbacks" etc, etc when talking about Ireland. Why the Greeks chanted "We are not the Irish, we will resist".

Paycuts came in before CP agreement.. they were minor.. and despite the subsequent defecit, the PS refused to take any futher cuts once the real situation became known..

A 14% pay cut across the board. The unions accepted this and agreed to implement reforms which would lead to savings for the exchequer. In France the can't even raise the retirement age to 62.

Maybe you would like to live under a dictatorship where goverments can organise the workforce any way they like. Thats what happens in China and Singapore.

Pension Levy.. the PS pension defecit is currently running at over 105 BILLION... Anglo is small fry compared to our liabilites on the PS pension.. You are being asked to contribute to a defined BENEFIT pension that is unsustainable which is why it's not really available outside the PS.. and you believe that is taking the pain .. L O fkin L

I suspect you don't understand how the public sector pension system works. Here are some links.

http://www.irisheconomy.ie/index.php/2009/04/03/public-sector-pay-cuts/

http://www.tascnet.ie/upload/public_service_pension_levy_1.pdf

Freeze on recruitment.. Yes.. (well except no.. the PS is still hiring).. but what you meant was a freeze on removing unnecessary middle management positions in the HSE and FAS etc, plus the removal of frontline services by the removal of temp workers..

No nurses training in Ireland are emigrating. They have no choice.

Promotions and Wage freeze... err yes.. apart from some increments which are still being paid.. so in fact those people do get pay rises..

They are the terms and conditions of employment in the public sector. You take a position of 40K with the agreement that you get increments sliding up to say 50k after 6 years. Any private sector employer could do the same or use bonuses or whatever sweetner as part of the employment contract. Increments are not a pay rise on the original employment contract.

No.. we need to wipe it out.. so we don't have to continue to service a rediculous debt..

No serious commentator is saying we need to wipe out the deficit completely. France hasn't had a budget surplus since the second world war. The current target for Ireland is for a deficit of 3% of GDP by 2014.