Have we, as a people, failed the Republic?

later12

There has been so much talk of how Governments have failed us, and how the state has failed us; the state meaning the regulatory machinery of state and the civil service and its elected leadership.

However true that may be, have we, the people, not also failed?

Personally, I don't think it is a question of having failed the state, but rather one of having failed our country: the country being the Republic which was founded out of the belief that we were capable of self governance, and indeed the belief, possibly mistaken, that self governance was in our best interest. This belief was perpetuated through an uprising, a war of independence, and perhaps most terribly, a civil war.

Whether or not we shall actually lose our financial independence is one issue. What is certain is that we are on the brink of losing it. We have brought our sovereignty to the edge, gambled it on SUVs, parties and conservatory decking.
We all benefitted from the celtic tiger; anybody who resided in this country over the past 15 years and claims not to have been a beneficiary is probably deluding themselves.
So then, do we not bear a collective responsibility, quite apart from cleaning up the mess? Don't we also deserve to be tagged with the title of the generation who brought Ireland's sovereignty to the brink, and gambled away that hard won principle of self-governance?

The coming months will doubtless see more protests outside Leinster House, more pelted eggs, and even more barstool lamentations in the spirit of Peig sayers, of what was robbed, and of the curse of being Irish.

However, how many of us will blame ourselves, protest at our own stupidity, and actually learn from what we have done to our own country or ponder upon our failure in autonomy?

shofukan

meglome

I've had this out a number of times. I think we are ultimately responsible. We lived in a high spend, low tax country and most of us thought that was perfectly reasonable. Now obviously in hindsight we can see that it was a house of cards and you cannot spend big and have low taxes. The majority were bought off with the promises from FF, with the huge value of their house, with their fatter wage packet. We didn't question, we didn't hold our elected representatives to any standards, no one was ever accountable. TD's caught being corrupt were re-elected often with bigger majorities.

If we don't change our politics won't change. You get the government you deserve.

maccored

what meglome said. Many people pointed out the flaws at the time, but many more ignored what was being said.

charlemont

Due to partition the republic itself is too small to be controlled on its own..its too easy to have self interest political parties like FF with no strong opposition in a jurisdiction with a small population..

Scofflaw

Bluntly, yes. Not that I go on about this regularly or anything.

bluntly,
Scofflaw

Dannyboy83

later10 wrote: »

There has been so much talk of how Governments have failed us, and how the state has failed us; the state meaning the regulatory machinery of state and the civil service and its elected leadership.

However true that may be, have we, the people, not also failed?

Personally, I don't think it is a question of having failed the state, but rather one of having failed our country: the country being the Republic which was founded out of the belief that we were capable of self governance, and indeed the belief, possibly mistaken, that self governance was in our best interest. This belief was perpetuated through an uprising, a war of independence, and perhaps most terribly, a civil war.

Whether or not we shall actually lose our financial independence is one issue. What is certain is that we are on the brink of losing it. We have brought our sovereignty to the edge, gambled it on SUVs, parties and conservatory decking.
We all benefitted from the celtic tiger; anybody who resided in this country over the past 15 years and claims not to have been a beneficiary is probably deluding themselves.
So then, do we not bear a collective responsibility, quite apart from cleaning up the mess? Don't we also deserve to be tagged with the title of the generation who brought Ireland's sovereignty to the brink, and gambled away that hard won principle of self-governance?

The coming months will doubtless see more protests outside Leinster House, more pelted eggs, and even more barstool lamentations in the spirit of Peig sayers, of what was robbed, and of the curse of being Irish.

However, how many of us will blame ourselves, protest at our own stupidity, and actually learn from what we have done to our own country or ponder upon our failure in autonomy?

Did the African slaves fail their American plantation owners?
Did the peons in the feudal system fail their lords?

I'm delighted the oligarchy is caving in.
I only wish it could be quicker.

KeithAFC

Yes you have.

meglome

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

Did the African slaves fail their American plantation owners?
Did the peons in the feudal system fail their lords?

I'm delighted the oligarchy is caving in.
I only wish it could be quicker.

em didn't we continually go out and elect the people who crashed the bus? I don't seem to recall anyone being forced to do that. I don't seem to recall anyone being forced to re-elect TD's who were dodgy or useless or liars.

We badly need change, best to start looking at ourselves first.

zig

I dont think we failed our country, its an unfair statement, you are putting the responsibilities of what has happened the past few years completely on the people. Because so many journalists and politicians got it wrong leading up to the crash they now have successfully twisted this to make the people feel responsible.
This 'blame ourselves' mentality is the reason FF are still in power, its probably the only thing they have left.

Ok, we could have been more responsible with our own finances but we were not the ones that lead this country down the tubes, our government is, not to mention a contribution from the media.

Dannyboy83

meglome wrote: »

I've had this out a number of times. I think we are ultimately responsible.

No.
Most of us didn't think it was reasonable.
Only the beneficiaries thought it reasonable.
Those of us who have to foot the bill and prop up the system have been screaming about it for a while now.

Now obviously in hindsight we can see that it was a house of cards and you cannot spend big and have low taxes.

There is nothing wrong with Low taxes.
You can have astronomical taxes and STILL be bankrupt, because you are STILL not living within your means.

In fact, there is no other choice for Ireland but Low taxes.
The socialist model simply won't work in Ireland.

In an ideal world I'd be a socialist, unfortunately this is reality and we have to live in Ireland, so Libertarian policies ought to win out.

If we don't change our politics won't change. You get the government you deserve.

Not necessarily, in democracy, you get the government which the majority want. And after that - whoever has the biggest guns.

We don't have a democracy anyway, we have an oligarchy, so it's all irrelevant.
If you want change, the oligarchy have to be disposed of.

Eliot Rosewater

later10 wrote: »

However true that may be, have we, the people, not also failed?

I think the Irish people have and, furthermore, I believe they are continuing to fail, which is more important.

There is very little will to actually deal with the crisis. Our government is short nearly twenty billion euro and what do we have? Students out protesting against fees and demanding no education funding cuts. (And these are our future politicians!) Old age pensioners who would be the first to protest if - shock! - their payouts were reduced in line with the cost of living. Public sector unions who have to be dragged tooth and nail to accept even the most cushy agreement given the context.

In short, the general public clutching onto its benefits and entitlements and avoiding the repercussions of poor choices, while the country collapses about its feet.

Most people get the government they deserve, and in the coming months they'll probably get the unhappy bailout they deserve, too. I, myself, feel no responsibility to this country. I live in a family where the sole breadwinner is a public servant yet I have argued pretty consistently for public sector cuts. I'm willing to deal with it. I am also young and extremely motivated. Why should I stay in Ireland to feed the, well, whims of a short-sighted public?


EDIT: by the way, an excellent post here by the Corinthian on Ireland's relationship with responsibility. It should be put to music and made the national anthem of this country!

Dannyboy83

meglome wrote: »

em didn't we continually go out and elect the people who crashed the bus? I don't seem to recall anyone being forced to do that. I don't seem to recall anyone being forced to re-elect TD's who were dodgy or useless or liars.

Some of you did, sure thing.
Those of you who could benefit.
I don't recall Fianna Fail ever having a 100% victory, do you?

Clearly, SOME people were opposed to them.

We badly need change, best to start looking at ourselves first.

It's a flaw of humanity.
It would happen again tomorrow.
It's unrealistic to assume anything else.

The system needs changing, it's a lot more likely to yield results than trying to reprogam humans.

Batiste

A lot of welfare knackers all over ireland voted Fianna Fail,including working classes too ,who were defrauding the system,a few guys working in the building trade,factories,and abroad even,were scamming the system,now that most people sign on at a post office every week,as opposed to every month,it could prove more difficult to defraud the system..

This believe it or not contributed in the good and bad times to this mess,there are wasters at the bottom of the pile too you know!

Fianna Fail kept it sweet when it mattered the most in ireland,and to the detriment of millions of middle classes in ireland who pay tax by the way.

We still have single mothers who think they have some god given right to that council house and that welfare cheque,while the da is out drinking or up to no good,who takes care of the kids when they are abused/neglected - welfare,social services,family planning,sti clinics,prison rehab,even the gards FFS these people are a grevious cost on our nation.Look at the rot across the pond were not far off now are we,sit down watch your coronation street,your x factor your ****ing porn.And take a look at yourself!

meglome

zig wrote: »

This 'blame ourselves' mentality is the reason FF are still in power, its probably the only thing they have left.

Ok, we could have been more responsible with our own finances but we were not the ones that lead this country down the tubes, our government is, not to mention a contribution from the media.

No it's the blame everyone else mentality that has FF still in power. If we don't look at how we as individuals do things nothing will change.

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

No.
Most of us didn't think it was reasonable.
Only the beneficiaries thought it reasonable.
Those of us who have to foot the bill and prop up the system have been screaming about it for a while now.

Well the majority (of the electorate) voted continually for FF and their supporters. So that suggests to me people got what they wanted (or at least what they thought they wanted).

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

There is nothing wrong with Low taxes.
You can have astronomical taxes and STILL be bankrupt, because you are STILL not living within your means.

In fact, there is no other choice for Ireland but Low taxes.
The socialist model simply won't work in Ireland.

In an ideal world I'd be a socialist, unfortunately this is reality and we have to live in Ireland, so Libertarian policies ought to win out.

I'm not saying there is anything wrong with low taxes, I specifically said there is something wrong with low taxes and high spending. You cannot spend what you don't have, but we tried it anyway.

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

Not necessarily, in democracy, you get the government which the majority want. And after that - whoever has the biggest guns.

We don't have a democracy anyway, we have an oligarchy, so it's all irrelevant.
If you want change, the oligarchy have to be disposed of.

Yes in a representative democracy you get the government the majority wants, thus you get the government you deserve, as a nation. You or I didn't vote for this government but the Irish people did.

So what you're saying, if I take it this oligarchy exists for a moment, is we need to change for that to happen. Isn't that what I said?

Sand

I think it would be fair to say that the governments of the past 10-15 years have broadly reflected the wishes of the people of the country, in so far as they were presented with options and the information to decide on those options. Fine Gael and Labour didnt offer anything except more spending, faster! And people were entitled to believe they Financial Regulator was being paid to monitor the systematic risk of the banking sector - certainly there was no scope for objective reviews of his performance in 2002 or 2007.

The unfortunate aspect of our state is not that it is unresponsive to the wishes of the public, but that it doesnt have a sufficient check on populist misgovernment, and isnt transparent enough to provide people with information they would need to make an educated decision.

So yes, the root cause is the Irish peoples endorsement of feckless parties and politicians, but I wouldnt accept that as a moral judgement, rather a fact we have to accept when we look at our system of government and determine just how much input should populist movements have vs. transparency, accountability and checks on their power. Because the Irish people arent going to change - good governance is going to have to be forced on this country, with the vested interests kicking and screaming all the way.

20Cent

No "we "did not fail, we is a word used far too often lately.
Most of us were working away, putting a roof over our heads, children etc called living a life. We don't have time to analyse the subprime debt in America or personally audit our banks even if we could we should not have to.
We have been ripped off by a shower of criminals who ran the country into the ground and have fecked off with the proceeds.
Those responsible need to be brought to justice and those who made bad investments lose their money.

Plus there is all this crap about single mother allowances etc a tiny fraction of what the banks have gotten. This we are in it all together business are those with a vested interest in the public paying for private debt.

Wolfe Tone

The "republic" which was founded sure as hell aint the one which was planned.

SkepticOne

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

Most people get the government they deserve, and in the coming months they'll probably get the unhappy bailout they deserve, too. I, myself, feel no responsibility to this country. I live in a family where the sole breadwinner is a public servant yet I have argued pretty consistently for public sector cuts. I'm willing to deal with it. I am also young and extremely motivated. Why should I stay in Ireland to feed the, well, whims of a short-sighted public?


EDIT: by the way, an excellent post here by the Corinthian on Ireland's relationship with responsibility. It should be put to music and made the national anthem of this country!

So everyone else has failed the country but not you? Do you not see a little irony considering your post is about people not taking responsibility?

Raging_Ninja

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

The "republic" which was founded sure as hell aint the one which was planned.

Just because James Connolly wanted a Marxian state doesn't mean the other wanted it - the socialist bits of the Proclamation of Independence were the price for his support and troops. As my old history lecturer told us, Pearse probably puked into a bucket after reading that portion of the Proclamation.

Sand

In fairness to James Connolly, he was the only one with a plan for this new Republic that justified the bother. As he said, if all that changes is just the flags, whats the point? The rest of the men of 1916 just wanted to change the flags, paint the post boxes green and insert themselves at the top of the new order as the new aristocrats.

PeterIanStaker

This collective guilt idea is a media invention. We have a lot going for us and we need to think positive and suceed in spite of the morons in Leinster house, not because of them.

Of course people dont want to hear that, they'd far rather be miserable and spiteful.

The ordinary hardworking person who provides for their family and the corrupt gombeen political class are not one and the same.

Those elected to office in this country are inferior to their constituents, and fail them over and over again.

Amhran Nua

This has been said over and over again, so hopefully it will start to enter the general consciousness soon.

Its really simple.

The single transferable vote lets people vote for individual TDs. This means that neither TDs nor voters have any direct interest in looking after the national questions, instead they have every incentive to focus on the local level. And this is what has happened, the infamous parish pump.

99% of other countries with proportional representation use the party list system, so people are forced to vote for party policies, which is as it should be.

The Irish people and their representatives are not stupid, they just play the cards they are dealt. Anyone that would like to continue flogging the increasingly ripe horse of "the majority voted FF", please post up a scan of a ballot sheet that offered a choice between political parties, rather than politicians who have been building a relationship with local residents for the last decade.

Didn't think so.

Unfortunately this leaves us with nobody really at the wheel of the country, creating a vacuum that is filled by the lowest common denominator, like Bertie Ahern and his ilk.

As for posts the like of "the Corinthian"s, cited above, that level of self-loathing self-flagellation is tragic both for nonexistent grasp on reality that it represents and the barely concealed ethnic contempt dripping from it. I have no idea how anyone could seriously hold an opinion like that in this day and age. We have almost every capital city in Europe being torn up by protests for one reason or another, and some point to the protests in Ireland as being evidence of some deficiency. Ridiculous.

meglome

Amhran Nua wrote: »

The Irish people and their representatives are not stupid, they just play the cards they are dealt. Anyone that would like to continue flogging the increasingly ripe horse of "the majority voted FF", please post up a scan of a ballot sheet that offered a choice between political parties, rather than politicians who have been building a relationship with local residents for the last decade.

Didn't think so.

Deluded, ill-considered, mistaken, tricked, stupid... take your pick. We, the Irish people, didn't just vote for these people, we consistently voted for them. Once might be a mistake but when it's three times I'd have to wonder about stupidity.

Amhran Nua wrote: »

As for posts the like of "the Corinthian"s, cited above, that level of self-loathing self-flagellation is tragic both for nonexistent grasp on reality that it represents and the barely concealed ethnic contempt dripping from it. I have no idea how anyone could seriously hold an opinion like that in this day and age. We have almost every capital city in Europe being torn up by protests for one reason or another, and some point to the protests in Ireland as being evidence of some deficiency. Ridiculous.

I don't think there's any need for self-loathing. But if, and it's a big if, we can learn something from all this then things might change. Blaming FF, the bankers, the elites or whomever won't help us look at how we we're involved, or can change and grow.

later12

zig wrote: »

Because so many journalists and politicians got it wrong leading up to the crash they now have successfully twisted this to make the people feel responsible.

In fact, I do not think they got it wrong to begin with.
I was about ten years old when Ireland started to go through the celtic tiger phase in the late 1990s. I probably knew what a property bubble was from about the age of 12 when I started secondary school. 'The property bubble' was a part of common parlance, and sometimes the subject of a skit on Friday night TV (Bull Island, if anyone remembers it). Lets not re-enforce this ridiculous notion that nobody knew there was a bubble economy. Even schoolkids like myself seemed to know what was happening, and any kid can tell you that a bubble must burst.

This 'blame ourselves' mentality is the reason FF are still in power, its probably the only thing they have left.

No, the only thing that this government have left (in my opinion) is the 'go-with-the-flow' mentality of the people. To be honest, the quietening of our rebellious nature over the past century has, in fairness, been to our credit and continues to be so. However, I really do think it is also reflective of our attitude over the past 15 years when times were good and money was easy. We 'went with it', and in doing so, endorsed it.

Ok, we could have been more responsible with our own finances but we were not the ones that lead this country down the tubes, our government is, not to mention a contribution from the media.

In fact, we are.
As much as i have very little time for bankers, we must remember that they were rarely the people buying up these dodgy loans. The usual suspects eating up the majority of the debt that has us in so much trouble, were actually Mr and Mrs Sean Murphy. It was not 'Fingers' Fingleton, nor Sean Fitzpatrick (regardless of what The Irish Daily Star would have us believe), who is responsible for the property crash or the commercial crash.

The fact is, if anglo Irish bank was the only problem here, we would be laughing. it isn't. The problem is the everyday citizen. We are the main reason that the country is in such a grave situation; not them.

Eliot Rosewater

SkepticOne wrote: »

So everyone else has failed the country but not you?

In my defence I didn't say everyone else, I said "most people". To clarify, it seems to me that the majority of the population is simply unwilling to deal with the economic crisis. A good counter argument would be that those fighting for the maintenance of the status quo are shouting the loudest, and give a perception of dominance when they in actuality have none. But I don't really accept that. People coming out and directly calling for strong action on the budgetary front - on the media and in personal conversations - are few and far between. A guy like Constantin Gurdgiev stands out like a sore thumb. Most others seems content to try and hang onto their entitlements and hope the problems disappear.

Amhran Nua wrote: »

As for posts the like of "the Corinthian"s, cited above, that level of self-loathing self-flagellation is tragic both for nonexistent grasp on reality that it represents and the barely concealed ethnic contempt dripping from it.

The Corinthian offered an examination of Irish people's tendency to externalise responsibility, based on his extensive experience, but you dismiss it because it is "self-loathing"? Does this mean that any general criticism of this country or its inhabitants is inherently bad, because it amounts to "self-loathing"?

The Irish people, or the majority at least, deserve criticism. While I except your point about the PR-STV system, the people themselves cannot be exempted. FG, FF and Labour all promises unsustainable policies in 2007. They wouldn't have done so if the Irish people didn't want them.

Amhran Nua

meglome wrote: »

We, the Irish people, didn't just vote for these people, we consistently voted for them.

You completely missed the point, as plain as I thought it was laid out. Irish people voted for the individual TDs. Not for the policies or parties.

meglome wrote: »

Blaming FF, the bankers, the elites or whomever won't help us look at how we we're involved, or can change and grow.

What is this, an American sitcom where we all grow a little by the end of each episode, complete with preachy moralising? I'll say it again - get rid of the STV and you get rid of a vast swathe of problems. Its no panacea, but its one giant leap.

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

The Corinthian offered an examination of Irish people's tendency to externalise responsibility

He offered some anecdotes of his apparently miserable childhood with a generous helping of vitrilolic and prejuidiced bile. End of.

20Cent

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

In my defence I didn't say everyone else, I said "most people". To clarify, it seems to me that the majority of the population is simply unwilling to deal with the economic crisis. A good counter argument would be that those fighting for the maintenance of the status quo are shouting the loudest, and give a perception of dominance when they in actuality have none. But I don't really accept that. People coming out and directly calling for strong action on the budgetary front - on the media and in personal conversations - are few and far between. A guy like Constantin Gurdgiev stands out like a sore thumb. Most others seems content to try and hang onto their entitlements and hope the problems disappear.

Telling your da that he is paid too much over the dinner table isn't really a demonstration of being willing to deal with it. Try going home to a wife and kids after missing a few months mortgage payments reading about bondholder, developer and bank bailouts then offer to take one for the team. See how the libertarianism works out for you then.

I believe most people are willing to make sacrifices but to quote Fintan O'Toole not willing to be the sacrifice.

The only people who have not been bailed out are being asked to pay for it. Now its suggested they shouldn't complain!!!

Amhran Nua

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

People coming out and directly calling for strong action on the budgetary front - on the media and in personal conversations - are few and far between. A guy like Constantin Gurdgiev stands out like a sore thumb.

Oho I missed this bit. Is this the same Constantin Gurdgiev who's always complaining about being in negative equity on his blog, having bought in the middle of a bubble it seems, then lined up with a few others looking for debt forgiveness in the Times recently? Sounds like strong action alright, the taxpayer subsidising his mortgage, which is the only way any "forgiveness" could ever pan out.

meglome

Amhran Nua wrote: »

You completely missed the point, as plain as I thought it was laid out. Irish people voted for the individual TDs. Not for the policies or parties.

No I didn't miss the point. People could have consistently voted for TD's based on nothing more than they wore a nice shirt. None of that changes the fact they kept voting for people who were promoting very unsustainable policy's. People who even when caught lying and cheating were re-elected in the first count. It may have been FF who directly were in charge but it's our whole approach to our politics and politicians that's to blame.

Amhran Nua wrote: »

What is this, an American sitcom where we all grow a little by the end of each episode, complete with preachy moralising? I'll say it again - get rid of the STV and you get rid of a vast swathe of problems. Its no panacea, but its one giant leap.

And although I didn't respond to your point about STV I agree it may help. But that also doesn't change the fact that holding our politicians accountable would solve most of our issues or at least won't create new problems.

Sand

Oho I missed this bit. Is this the same Constantin Gurdgiev who's always complaining about being in negative equity on his blog, having bought in the middle of a bubble it seems, then lined up with a few others looking for debt forgiveness in the Times recently? Sounds like strong action alright, the taxpayer subsidising his mortgage, which is the only way any "forgiveness" could ever pan out.

Is there anyone in the past 10-15 years who bought a property who isnt in negative equity? Or alternatively, in denial?

Constantin Gurdgiev is pointing out the obvious - the debt levels entered into are unsustainable and we are simply wasting time and capital in trying to kick the can down the road hoping things will magically get better. We are afraid to go back to the Germans who lent us the money and say "Sorry, we actually blew it all on hookers and booze. Actually no, that would have been interesting, we actually blew it on a housing estate in the middle of Ballygobackwards".

And whatever his own personal situation he is offering an opinion on the wider economic situation where the Irish taxpayer is trying to subsidise the people who foolishly lent him money to buy a house in the middle of a property bubble they should have been monitoring themselves (one assumes their on staff economists and risk management staff are on the payroll for some purpose). And trying to subsidise the depositors who foolishly gave their money to casino banks for safekeeping. :rolleyes:

I cant see a reformed bankruptcy law that doesnt involve a loss of the property the loan was held against. The principle of moral hazard requires it at the bare minimum.

But the idea of a Victorian bankruptcy where people are nailed to a cross and flogged through the streets with a sign around their neck isnt going to do anything other than delay the inevitable.

Amhran Nua

meglome wrote: »

People who even when caught lying and cheating were re-elected in the first count.

Thats exactly the point. While the TD that brought in free third level education promptly lost her seat. Putting these two together you come up with two possibilities: either a) the entire electorate is insane, or b) you haven't got the full picture.

As is usually the case when it appears you are the sole voice of sanity and everyone else seems crazy, option b) is the correct one. Or to put it another way, once you remove the impossible, whatever remains must be the reality. This is the reality that has just been described to you.

Our approach to politics and politicians is the result of the STV system.

Eliot Rosewater

Amhran Nua wrote: »

He offered some anecdotes of his apparently miserable childhood with a generous helping of vitrilolic and prejuidiced bile. End of.

His criticisms are legitimate, you're just trying to brush them under the carpet with sensationalist descriptions. With reference to today, the shifting of responsibility elsewhere is extremely common. How often have we heard "the bankers are getting their bailout, why can't we...."? Or, "the bank forced me to take out a 110% mortgage".

20Cent wrote: »

Telling your da that he is paid too much over the dinner table isn't really a demonstration of being willing to deal with it

Okay, what do you suggest I do? I'm a student, I'm receiving no grants or government subsidies (besides fees, of course). All I can do is vocalise my concerns (which I do a lot! ).

Amhran Nua wrote: »

Oho I missed this bit. Is this the same Constantin Gurdgiev who's always complaining about being in negative equity on his blog,

Constantin Gurdgiev is a very uncommon name in Ireland, so, yes, presumably.

I was commenting on his vocal stance on RTE and in the papers in support of large budget cutbacks, including the "tearing up" of the Croke Park Deal. Are you suggesting he isn't vocal about this? (That was my original claim.)

20Cent

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

Okay, what do you suggest I do? I'm a student, I'm receiving no grants or government subsidies (besides fees, of course). All I can do is vocalise my concerns (which I do a lot! ).

My point was that its easy to talk about sacrifice etc when you don't have much to sacrifice.

Amhran Nua

Sand wrote: »

And whatever his own personal situation

He's caught with his trousers down on this one I'm afraid, and I admit without shame to a pinch of schadenfreude at the sight of a man who has made it his life's work to promote a system that weakens state support for the poor coming back hat in hand to the taxpayer. Even the article admits it, albeit in a downplayed fashion:

This will increase the interest burden on the taxpayer, or in the end perhaps on the ECB but we argue that, in the overall socioeconomic context, debt forgiveness to the maximum feasible extent is a first step to restoring the economy and society.

He should be handing in his libertarian card around now, I reckon.

Sand wrote: »

But the idea of a Victorian bankruptcy where people are nailed to a cross and flogged through the streets with a sign around their neck isnt going to do anything other than delay the inevitable.

Agreed, in particular with reference to enterprise bankruptcy. harsh bankruptcy laws are a double edged sword - if most new businesses require tens of thousands of euros to get started, and probably fail, who would want to take that risk? It stunts new enterprise, something we badly need.

Amhran Nua

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

His criticisms are legitimate

No, they aren't, they are exactly as I described them - anecdotes backed up by a bellyful of bile, like someone who was taking their knowledge of Irish society from the caricatures on Hollyoaks and Eastenders.

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

I was commenting on his vocal stance on RTE and in the papers in support of large budget cutbacks

Sure, according to Constantin we can cut back services and use the savings to pay for his mortgage.

Sand

Constantin Gurdigiev could simply default on his mortgage and rent. Hed lose the house, but hes going to lose that under any reasonable bargain. Thats his own lookout.

What he is arguing for is a systematic approach to a systematic problem. And when I say "he", I refer to the use of the word "we" in the quote youve cited. Hes doing so as part of a larger group - I doubt theyre hinging their argument on the personal interest of Constantin Gurdigiev.

Amhran Nua

Sand wrote: »

Constantin Gurdigiev could simply default on his mortgage and rent. Hed lose the house, but hes going to lose that under any reasonable bargain.

On the contrary, the bargain he's angling for would mean he just didn't pay his contractual debts. This is what debt forgiveness means. The inevitable result would be that we, the taxpayers, would end up paying them for him. I have no idea how this departure from the libertarian dogma he espouses can be defended by anyone with a similar perspective. It's a complete and utter failure, philosophically, there's no way around it.

Sand wrote: »

What he is arguing for is a systematic approach to a systematic problem. And when I say "he", I refer to the use of the word "we" in the quote youve cited. Hes doing so as part of a larger group - I doubt theyre hinging their argument on the personal interest of Constantin Gurdigiev.

His name is on the dotted line looking for a taxpayer bailout for his personal decisions. Although I'd be interested to know the financial state of the rest, I know Lucey was flying a kite for this previously also.

SkepticOne

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

In my defence I didn't say everyone else, I said "most people". To clarify, it seems to me that the majority of the population is simply unwilling to deal with the economic crisis.

So it is not just you. There are others who are not responsible. Who are they? It is not "the public" that are to blame is it? It is specific groups with varying degrees of responsibility. Blame is not shared among the public equally.