Conor Lenihan blames Opposition for State's problems

einshteen

Mr Lenihan said the Opposition was to blame for many of the problems facing the State because it failed to prevent the Government’s mistakes.

“We put our hands in the air and say we were responsible – but in fact one of the main reasons that . . . we were able to make those mistakes is we were not checked by a strong Opposition.”

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2011/0108/1224287043148.html


This makes absolutely no sense to me, do you think the Times is taking it out of context with the paraphrasing, or is there some basis to this that I'm not seeing? Baffled.

ascanbe

einshteen wrote: »

Mr Lenihan said the Opposition was to blame for many of the problems facing the State because it failed to prevent the Government’s mistakes.

“We put our hands in the air and say we were responsible – but in fact one of the main reasons that . . . we were able to make those mistakes is we were not checked by a strong Opposition.”

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2011/0108/1224287043148.html


This makes absolutely no sense to me, do you think the Times is taking it out of context with the paraphrasing, or is there some basis to this that I'm not seeing? Baffled.

Of course it doesn't; Brian Lenihan is saying it.

steelcityblues

The man should really f*ck off from the public spectacle at this stage - and his brother too.

Kensington

More Fianna Fail pass-the-buck and Blame the opposition rubbish.

Would it have mattered a toss if the opposition had tried to stop them? After all, this is the same opposition which offered "no credible alternative", according to Fianna Fail, despite the fact some of the opposition proposals made sense and are far more credible than some of the FF policies they have enacted. FF would have ignored anything the opposition suggested regardless.

They need to go away and not come back for a very long time...

Mr.Micro

Since he has been in office Lenihan has not done anything right or said anything astute or sensible. He is not going to start now.....he is related to Mary O'Rourke, the apple does not far fall from the tree. He has/had nothing to offer except idiotic rhetoric the buffoon he is.

sligopark

typical lenihan - blame everyone else

Rubik.

I wouldn't even have come in here if I had known it was Conor Lenihan speaking.

sligopark

Rubik. wrote: »

I wouldn't even have come in here if I had known it was Conor Lenihan speaking.

Eh well spotted

mikemac

ascanbe wrote: »

Of course it doesn't; Brian Lenihan is saying it.

Conor Lenihan

Einhard

I'm surprised he's not blaming the kebabs!!

InchicoreDude

He probably has a point but at the end of the day, the government have to take full responsibility for this...

ascanbe

feelingstressed wrote: »

Conor Lenihan

Oops! Ah well, the point stands.

southsiderosie

The article says:

“We put our hands in the air and say we were responsible – but in fact one of the main reasons that . . . we were able to make those mistakes is we were not checked by a strong Opposition.”

I would actually like to see the full quote here before storming in with my torch and pitchfork. I actually think his earlier comment was sillier:

Asked who he would recommend as the next Fianna Fáil leader, Mr Lenihan said: “No particular recommendation. I just think it’s time for a fresh start in the party.”

The leadership of Fianna Fáil must pass, in a post-election scenario, “to people who have not been part, in a cabinet sense, of the situation that developed over the last 10 years”, he said.

He ruled out Minister for Foreign Affairs Micheál Martin, Minister for Tourism Mary Hanafin and his brother and Minister for Finance Brian Lenihan. “Nothing personal, they’re all great people.”

:rolleyes:

Gratzi22

The country neeeds a fresh start and, as we all know FF will not be in government next term, I cannot believe in a brighter day if FG are any where near leading our country. Same ol same ol (i.e. politicians are born equivalent, regardless).

Labour may be favorites but as a middle earner I don't want to be taxed out of the problem, God knows it is tough at the minute. Moreover, originally being from the North I know SF and I cant vote for them. Why cant the SDLP organise down here?

Byron85

I saw it yesterday. It's Fianna Fáil doublethink at it's best.

darragh16

Gratzi22 wrote: »

Why cant the SDLP organise down here?

Weren't the supposed to merge with Fianna Fail up north. I suppose thats why they didn't set up down here.

Bob the Builder

Ah, sher there's no alternative.

Think I might just vote for Beverly. Again.

nesf

einshteen wrote: »

This makes absolutely no sense to me, do you think the Times is taking it out of context with the paraphrasing, or is there some basis to this that I'm not seeing? Baffled.

There is a grain of truth in it actually. Though one has to take off the "FF are the evil nasty boogymen" glasses to actually see it.

One issue was that during elections, especially the last two, the Government and the main Opposition were all basically promising the same things and promising even more than the other guy. More schools, more Gardaí, more hospital beds, you name it. There was no constructive Opposition here saying "hold on lads, we need to hedge aside a surplus for when this all goes bad." If anything the Opposition were egging the Government on and vice versa into more spending promises.

In that sense you can say we had a weak Opposition, and bluntly we had, and that had we a stronger one that was more questioning of the general trend the country was going in it might have helped. However, it was quite clear that the people voted for those who made those promises, so the Opposition were merely responding to the people's calls and desires here to keep the party going and it's extremely unlikely that FG or Lab would have been rewarded in the polls for throwing cold water on the whole thing and demanding restraint during elections.

So yes, there's a grain of truth to what he's saying. Not that I think for one second that FF would have listened to an Opposition calling for restraint in spending or anything.

Einhard

nesf wrote: »

There is a grain of truth in it actually. Though one has to take off the "FF are the evil nasty boogymen" glasses to actually see it.

One issue was that during elections, especially the last two, the Government and the main Opposition were all basically promising the same things and promising even more than the other guy. More schools, more Gardaí, more hospital beds, you name it. There was no constructive Opposition here saying "hold on lads, we need to hedge aside a surplus for when this all goes bad." If anything the Opposition were egging the Government on and vice versa into more spending promises.

In that sense you can say we had a weak Opposition, and bluntly we had, and that had we a stronger one that was more questioning of the general trend the country was going in it might have helped. However, it was quite clear that the people voted for those who made those promises, so the Opposition were merely responding to the people's calls and desires here to keep the party going and it's extremely unlikely that FG or Lab would have been rewarded in the polls for throwing cold water on the whole thing and demanding restraint during elections.

So yes, there's a grain of truth to what he's saying. Not that I think for one second that FF would have listened to an Opposition calling for restraint in spending or anything.

The role of the Opposition isn't really to hold the government to account in the Dail. That's, frankly an impossible task in the Irish system where the government, once elected, rules effectively by fiat. Holding the government to account should rather be the role of the people, and its a responsibility at which sucessive generations of Irish people have failed miserably.

Liam Byrne

Lehman's must be delighted that they're not being blamed anymore!

I wonder who will they choose to blame next?

If only FF's game of pass-the-buck actually involved bucks.....well, other than the game on the Galway Tent that is.

Kev_ps3

Yet the Irish people want this man as minister of finance! Even to this day! What a pathetic lot we are.

hallelujajordan

nesf wrote: »

There is a grain of truth in it actually. Though one has to take off the "FF are the evil nasty boogymen" glasses to actually see it.

One issue was that during elections, especially the last two, the Government and the main Opposition were all basically promising the same things and promising even more than the other guy. More schools, more Gardaí, more hospital beds, you name it. There was no constructive Opposition here saying "hold on lads, we need to hedge aside a surplus for when this all goes bad." If anything the Opposition were egging the Government on and vice versa into more spending promises.

In that sense you can say we had a weak Opposition, and bluntly we had, and that had we a stronger one that was more questioning of the general trend the country was going in it might have helped. However, it was quite clear that the people voted for those who made those promises, so the Opposition were merely responding to the people's calls and desires here to keep the party going and it's extremely unlikely that FG or Lab would have been rewarded in the polls for throwing cold water on the whole thing and demanding restraint during elections.

So yes, there's a grain of truth to what he's saying. Not that I think for one second that FF would have listened to an Opposition calling for restraint in spending or anything.

Agree completely Nesf, although if I had posted what you did, I would be accused of just trying to shift blame away from FF . . Conor Lenihan is being accused of this even though in the first half of his quote he says . . "We put our hands in the air and say we were responsible . . " . .

I also agree that we need to cast the net further and look at the responsibility of the people right across society who were calling on politicians within government and opposition to (in your words) "keep the party going." Party policies in 2002 and 2007 right across the spectrum reflected these desires. I'm sure Liam, jmayo et al will be quick to point out that they weren't making such calls but frankly that's irrelevant at this stage. . . . If we seek to blame FF for everything and don't even try to understand why there is a collective responsibility then we will learn nothing from this sorry mess. . .

hallelujajordan

Kev_ps3 wrote: »

Yet the Irish people want this man as minister of finance! Even to this day! What a pathetic lot we are.

Perhaps you should read the link or the thread . . this comment came from the Minister for Finances brother ..

Liam Byrne

Kev_ps3 wrote: »

Yet the Irish people want this man as minister of finance! Even to this day! What a pathetic lot we are.

If "the Irish people" want that, it's news to me......it's more than likely the FF redefinition of "Irish people" referring to those that caused the crisis, since he looked after them.

Anyway, you're talking about a different Lenihan.......same stable of incompetent idiots, but different individual.

bmaxi

Speculating on what the opposition might have done is just pure nonsense.
The fact remains, the Government had the power, made the decisions, and are responsible for the consequences. The scale of corruption is another element
Do you really think, had the opposition been in power during this time and fcuked up to the extent that this government has, Conor Lenihan would be saying "well really we must take part of the blame"? Would he fcuk!
Only Lenihan, among many FF deputies with brains the size of peas, could be stupid enough to spout such drivel.

sligopark

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Anyway, you're talking about a different Lenihan.......same stable of incompetent idiots, but different individual.

Classic post

Liam Byrne

hallelujajordan wrote: »

Agree completely Nesf, although if I had posted what you did, I would be accused of just trying to shift blame away from FF . . Conor Lenihan is being accused of this even though in the first half of his quote he says . . "We put our hands in the air and say we were responsible . . " . .

Hold on a second now.

If Lenihan & FF are laying blame at others door, then the "we put our hands in the air and say we were responsible" is irrelevant; remember these are the same people who are claiming that everyone is responsible.

So if "everyone" is, they are. That is the extent to which Lenihan is acknowledging blame, which is ludicrous, because everyone isn't responsible to the same extent as FF are.

However what Lenihan is clearly not doing is acknowledging the level of responsibility that lies ONLY at FF's door, because they made the decisions.

How he can blame the opposition to any real extent when the Government block votes of confidence, by-elections and do everything in their power to ensure that none of the opposition's proposals are even discussed properly is beyond me........I've lost count of the times FF claimed "There is no alternative".

The other Lenihan didn't even read the reports on Anglo, FFS!

hallelujajordan wrote: »

I'm sure Liam, jmayo et al will be quick to point out that they weren't making such calls but frankly that's irrelevant at this stage

hallelujajordan wrote: »

If we seek to blame FF for everything and don't even try to understand why there is a collective responsibility then we will learn nothing from this sorry mess. . .

If we seek to blame everyone living on a road for what two houses on that road get up to then those two houses will learn nothing from that mess, and the other people will look at it and say "Well, if we're going to get blamed and punished anyway....."

I've said it before; I'm far from unique; but if I was living somewhere like Canada I wouldn't have a €22,000 bill for the corruption of others. Is that fair ?

On some threads FF apologists are claiming that FF will reform and improve.....how can FF reform and improve if they don't even realise their actions are wrong ?

Liam Byrne

hallelujajordan wrote: »

Perhaps you should read the link or the thread . . this comment came from the Minister for Finances brother ..

Ah but if one Lenihan is to blame then they're all to blame........it's the same FF logic that they try to apply to all Irish people.

So it doesn't really matter who said it; they're all to blame.

Ulysses Gaze

Just when you think Conor Lenihan can't get any worse, he does.

What about the NAMA alternative that was put forward by the Opposition that wasn't properly debated Conor because NAMA was:

'The Only Game in Town'

But after watching this clown's performance on the Frontline with David McWilliams it really doesn't surprise me that he is yet another FF cue-card reading Gom.

hallelujajordan

Liam Byrne wrote: »

If we seek to blame everyone living on a road for what two houses on that road get up to then those two houses will learn nothing from that mess, and the other people will look at it and say "Well, if we're going to get blamed and punished anyway....."

On some threads FF apologists are claiming that FF will reform and improve.....how can FF reform and improve if they don't even realise their actions are wrong ?

Let me make your analogy a little more realistic. .

There are 10 houses on the road . . 3 of them are FF houses but 9 of them went crazy during the boom (I'm allowing that you live in No. 10 )

The 3 FF houses are certainly the most culpable (they had the executive power, they ultimately made the decisions) but there are 6 other houses who shared the spoils and shared the policies yet now seek to walk away from their responsibility and park everything at the 3 FF houses . . .

If the 6 were able to recognise their own responsibility (and you can do that while still holding FF responsible and removing them from office) then we may learn from this mess . .

Het-Field

hallelujajordan wrote: »

Agree completely Nesf, although if I had posted what you did, I would be accused of just trying to shift blame away from FF . . Conor Lenihan is being accused of this even though in the first half of his quote he says . . "We put our hands in the air and say we were responsible . . " . .

I also agree that we need to cast the net further and look at the responsibility of the people right across society who were calling on politicians within government and opposition to (in your words) "keep the party going." Party policies in 2002 and 2007 right across the spectrum reflected these desires. I'm sure Liam, jmayo et al will be quick to point out that they weren't making such calls but frankly that's irrelevant at this stage. . . . If we seek to blame FF for everything and don't even try to understand why there is a collective responsibility then we will learn nothing from this sorry mess. . .

In that case, you should have no compunction in voting Fine Gael at the next election ?

Fianna Fail were behind the wheel. They implemented policy which was historically discredited (i.e. the creation of bubbles, and inflating markets rather then currencies). They engaged on a wanton spending binge, when they could have rolled it back. The structural difficulties can certainly be blamed on them and nobody else. Seeking to blame the opposition for that one is cowardly and incorrect.

2007-2011 is irrelevant. The auction policies espoused by FF/FG/LAB etc were never allowed to be implemented. Between 2007-2008 Dail business was taken up by Bertie and his jaunts up to the Mahon Tribunal. Once that was finished in March 2008, Bertie took a lap of honour, and then we had the vote on the Lisbon Treaty. Within weeks of the Dail resuming the extent of the current crisis began became clear. The 2007 manifestos went out the window. Little or nothing fresh was implemented, and most of the actions taken (after a period of great paralysis) were retroactive.

johnnyskeleton

nesf wrote: »

In that sense you can say we had a weak Opposition, and bluntly we had, and that had we a stronger one that was more questioning of the general trend the country was going in it might have helped. However, it was quite clear that the people voted for those who made those promises, so the Opposition were merely responding to the people's calls and desires here to keep the party going and it's extremely unlikely that FG or Lab would have been rewarded in the polls for throwing cold water on the whole thing and demanding restraint during elections.

But if you think about it even further, the reason why all the parties were offering anything and everything is because in 2002 when they didn't and FF did, they got destroyed. So lesson learned, the Irish people want to be promised free stuff. So the blame either goes to all the Irish people, or, as I see it, back to FF who have always made popular promises of unsustainable free stuff and then left office when things go pear shaped.

If FF hadn't been promising goodies in the last elections then the other parties wouldn't have had to offer the same just to compete. In any event, I don't think he's criticising the platforms that the other parties ran on, he is criticising their performance in the Dail.

hallelujajordan

Het-Field wrote: »

In that case, you should have no compunction in voting Fine Gael at the next election ?

Quite .. I have in the past been a member of FG and I would have no compunction in either voting directly for FG or in transferring my vote to them . .

Het-Field wrote:

Fianna Fail were behind the wheel. They implemented policy which was historically discredited (i.e. the creation of bubbles, and inflating markets rather then currencies). They engaged on a wanton spending binge, when they could have rolled it back. The structural difficulties can certainly be blamed on them and nobody else. Seeking to blame the opposition for that one is cowardly and incorrect.

The bit you are missing (or ignoring) is that the opposition were putting forward the same (now discredited) policies. We are not guessing about what they might have done. . we know what they would have done because they told us. And you are right, the government could have pulled back spending but its also important to recognise that during the period you are talking about the opposition were criticising them for not spending enough.

They are not to blame for the current situation only because they failed to convince the electorate to allow them to drive the train but it is clear to any objective observer that they would have driven the train over the same cliff . . .

irishh_bob

einshteen wrote: »

Mr Lenihan said the Opposition was to blame for many of the problems facing the State because it failed to prevent the Government’s mistakes.

“We put our hands in the air and say we were responsible – but in fact one of the main reasons that . . . we were able to make those mistakes is we were not checked by a strong Opposition.”

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2011/0108/1224287043148.html


This makes absolutely no sense to me, do you think the Times is taking it out of context with the paraphrasing, or is there some basis to this that I'm not seeing? Baffled.

i remember during the bush presidency in america that fox news used to push this argument , that the democrats were responsible for iraq going badly

will our media offer to carry water for lenny on this one

Het-Field

hallelujajordan wrote: »

Quite .. I have in the past been a member of FG and I would have no compunction in either voting directly for FG or in transferring my vote to them . .




The bit you are missing (or ignoring) is that the opposition were putting forward the same (now discredited) policies. We are not guessing about what they might have done. . we know what they would have done because they told us. And you are right, the government could have pulled back spending but its also important to recognise that during the period you are talking about the opposition were criticising them for not spending enough.

They are not to blame for the current situation only because they failed to convince the electorate to allow them to drive the train but it is clear to any objective observer that they would have driven the train over the same cliff . . .

As far as I am aware, that would only apply to the structural defecit. The decision to live off the fruits of the property market were off-manifesto, and really became prevalent between 2004-2007. The latter is the reason for the IMF's entry. Blame for that can be laid firmly at the door of Bertie and Co. Anything the opposition would say on the subject (i.e. stamp duty reductions/abolition) would have to have been within the context of the importance which FF placed on the market.

Liam Byrne

hallelujajordan wrote: »

Let me make your analogy a little more realistic. .

There are 10 houses on the road . . 3 of them are FF houses but 9 of them went crazy during the boom (I'm allowing that you live in No. 10 )

The 3 FF houses are certainly the most culpable (they had the executive power, they ultimately made the decisions) but there are 6 other houses who shared the spoils and shared the policies yet now seek to walk away from their responsibility and park everything at the 3 FF houses . . .

If the 6 were able to recognise their own responsibility (and you can do that while still holding FF responsible and removing them from office) then we may learn from this mess . .

It's a fair point, were it not for 2 issues:

1) The assumption of the 6 other houses - how do we know it's not 2, 3 or 4 ? We only have FF's word for it that it's 6, and they have zero credibility

2) Any time the facts are raised with FF, we get "I don't accept that", and they continue as before, delaying and fudging in the hope the problem goes away (or is transferred to a spouse). If and when they accept the extent of their part in it, THEN we can allocate lesser levels of blame.

nesf

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

But if you think about it even further, the reason why all the parties were offering anything and everything is because in 2002 when they didn't and FF did, they got destroyed.

Yup, like I said, perfectly rational for FG and Lab to behave as they did in 07. Does mean there's no one counselling caution in the Dáil though which is something of a problem.

hallelujajordan

Liam Byrne wrote: »

It's a fair point, were it not for 2 issues:

1) The assumption of the 6 other houses - how do we know it's not 2, 3 or 4 ? We only have FF's word for it that it's 6, and they have zero credibility

The '6' is my opinion .. simple as that . . we have no data to support this one way or another but, in my opinion, a large majority of Irish citizens got carried away with the celtic tiger boom times and their unchecked behaviour played a big role in the creation of an unsustainable bubble. Of the 6, there is probably 1 who admits to their behaviour and accepts responsibility. The other 5 are hanging out with you in No. 10 blaming FF for everything . .

2) Any time the facts are raised with FF, we get "I don't accept that", and they continue as before, delaying and fudging in the hope the problem goes away (or is transferred to a spouse). If and when they accept the extent of their part in it, THEN we can allocate lesser levels of blame.

Complete nonsense. . You can talk about 'blame' all you want . . I prefer the term responsibility and responsibility exists whether or not it is accepted and acknowledged. . and its not for you to allocate it conditionally or otherwise.

The responsibility of the '6' is not diminished by the failure of the '3' to acknowledge their responsibility ..

Liam Byrne

hallelujajordan wrote: »

The '6' is my opinion .. simple as that . . we have no data to support this one way or another

The responsibility of the '6' is not diminished by the failure of the '3' to acknowledge their responsibility ..

The "responsibility" of the "6" is down to your own opinion; you said youself that you have no proof.

Unfortunately FF's tactics have ensured that all 10 - including the one-in-ten that you grudgingly acknowledge - get screwed.

Even by your own figures - for which you admit you have no proof - 400,000 people are being screwed who had ABSOLUTELY NO INPUT into the disaster.

Yet those 400,000 have to listen to FF passing the buck.

All I can say is roll on March....and if nothing else we'll have fun watching FF canvassers squirm as they try to lay the blame on all and sundry except where the bulk of it lies.

Not worth the €22,000 that FF have robbed from me to pay their buddies, but at least I'll get something out of it......maybe €1 per lie and excuse.

jmayo

hallelujajordan wrote: »

...
Conor Lenihan is being accused of this even though in the first half of his quote he says . . "We put our hands in the air and say we were responsible . . " . .

Can't believe he actually even said that. Maybe he was talking about kebabs ?

hallelujajordan wrote: »

I also agree that we need to cast the net further and look at the responsibility of the people right across society who were calling on politicians within government and opposition to (in your words) "keep the party going." Party policies in 2002 and 2007 right across the spectrum reflected these desires. I'm sure Liam, jmayo et al will be quick to point out that they weren't making such calls but frankly that's irrelevant at this stage. . . . If we seek to blame FF for everything and don't even try to understand why there is a collective responsibility then we will learn nothing from this sorry mess. . .

I hear my name mentioned.

hallelujajordan,

kindly answer these little questions?

Who the f*** has been the primary government party since 1997 ?

Who were the ones actually in charge and paid handsomely for it ?

hallelujajordan wrote: »

Let me make your analogy a little more realistic. .

There are 10 houses on the road . . 3 of them are FF houses but 9 of them went crazy during the boom (I'm allowing that you live in No. 10 )

The 3 FF houses are certainly the most culpable (they had the executive power, they ultimately made the decisions) but there are 6 other houses who shared the spoils and shared the policies yet now seek to walk away from their responsibility and park everything at the 3 FF houses . . .

If the 6 were able to recognise their own responsibility (and you can do that while still holding FF responsible and removing them from office) then we may learn from this mess . .

Typical ff ... it is always about property :rolleyes:

lucozader

the man is a disgrace

hallelujajordan

jmayo wrote: »

Typical ff ... it is always about property :rolleyes:

Read the thread. Liam started the property analogies. I just made them more realistic.

the groutch

comment like Lenihan's are pure rediculous, no matter what the opposition had said, FF would ignore them, sure it took 16 months and a court order to get a by-election in Donegal

Liam Byrne

hallelujajordan wrote: »

Read the thread. Liam started the property analogies. I just made them more realistic.

No - like Lenihan, Fitzpatrick & co, you made up figures to suit your predefined stance.

Billy7878

I remember Bollokky Ahern telling people who gave them advice about the time being nigh that he didnt know why they hadn't committed suicide yet, dont think FF were really open minded about taking any kind of advice ever

hallelujajordan

Liam Byrne wrote: »

No - like Lenihan, Fitzpatrick & co, you made up figures to suit your predefined stance.

I didn't make anything up, any more than you did.. I presented an opinion that I felt was more realistic. You are welcome to disagree with it but don't accuse me of making things up. . .

Liam Byrne

hallelujajordan wrote: »

I didn't make anything up, any more than you did.. I presented an opinion that I felt was more realistic. You are welcome to disagree with it but don't accuse me of making things up. . .

It might be an opinion, but there is nothing to back it up.

Explain so where the "more realistic" figures came from.......

hallelujajordan

Liam Byrne wrote: »

It might be an opinion, but there is nothing to back it up.

Explain so where the "more realistic" figures came from.......

Its based on my observations over the past 10 years. Looking at the spending habits of friends, family, colleagues, neighbours, acquaintances (none of whom are FF members). Looking at people buying second (and in some cases third) properties in the mistaken belief that the market could only go up and there was easy money to be made.

Its based on a game I used to play in January with the other half trying to spot the new reg cars . . Do you remember in 2004 / 2005 / 2006 how easy it was to spot a new reg car in January ? Not so easy any more.

It's based on the trouble I had looking for a plumber after I moved into my house in 2003. When I finally got one he turned up in a brand new 5-series BMW and charged me a small fortune.

Its based on looking at the property pages during the same time and seeing packed out auctions for apartments in Bulgaria. And hearing from the hairdresser that her hubby had bought two flats in Budapest.

It's based on the observation that all of the major political parties adopted low tax; high spend policies during the noughts in response to the demands of the electorate.

I'm not making this up Liam; there is a wealth of evidence to show that Irish people overspent and over borrowed during the Celtic tiger era . .

Liam Byrne

hallelujajordan wrote: »

Its based on my observations over the past 10 years. Looking at the spending habits of friends, family, colleagues, neighbours, acquaintances (none of whom are FF members). Looking at people buying second (and in some cases third) properties in the mistaken belief that the market could only go up and there was easy money to be made.

Really ? You must hang around in completely different circles to me.

hallelujajordan wrote: »

It's based on the trouble I had looking for a plumber after I moved into my house in 2003. When I finally got one he turned up in a brand new 5-series BMW and charged me a small fortune.

Only one ? So you're different to all those people that you hand around with ?

hallelujajordan wrote: »

It's based on the observation that all of the major political parties adopted low tax; high spend policies during the noughts in response to the demands of the electorate.

As I've said a million times before, it's not about how much you spend, it's about what you choose to spend it on. FF's attempts at "solutions" involved throwing more money at them and keeping their fingers crossed.

I have absolutely no problem with a government spending money on solutions and improvements and productivity.

hallelujajordan wrote: »

I'm not making this up Liam; there is a wealth of evidence to show that Irish people overspent and over borrowed during the Celtic tiger era . .

No, there isn't. There's a wealth of evidence that some or even many Irish people overspent and over borrowed.

And even taking all that into account, the fact remains that you pulled the figure of 6 out of thin air; I'm not knocking that based on your limited experience however I am against your view that that implies that 90% - or even 100%, given your "Irish people" generalisation - did.

I don't know any murderers or drug dealers or robbers, and yet if I claimed that that implied that there were none, it would be dismissed, and rightly so.

If you want to find figures that back up your 60%, then I will accept them, because there is plenty of evidence that too many people did; however until you back it up with actual figures it is nothing but guesswork.

And even if it turns out to be reasonably accurate guesswork it still means that 400,000 people are being hammered by FF for the mistakes of the other 90%, which, at the end of the day, is still wrong.

raymon

hallelujajordan wrote: »

Quite .. I have in the past been a member of FG and I would have no compunction in either voting directly for FG or in transferring my vote to them . .




The bit you are missing (or ignoring) is that the opposition were putting forward the same (now discredited) policies. We are not guessing about what they might have done. . we know what they would have done because they told us. And you are right, the government could have pulled back spending but its also important to recognise that during the period you are talking about the opposition were criticising them for not spending enough.

They are not to blame for the current situation only because they failed to convince the electorate to allow them to drive the train but it is clear to any objective observer that they would have driven the train over the same cliff . . .

I wondered who this 8% - 14% of the population still supporting FF was. Hallelujajordan do you still think we should bring back bertie to sort out the mess? Is conor kebabs Lenihan a good politician too?

Looks like sinn Fein is now more popular than FF

Bottle_of_Smoke

hallelujajordan wrote: »

Its based on my observations over the past 10 years. Looking at the spending habits of friends, family, colleagues, neighbours, acquaintances (none of whom are FF members). Looking at people buying second (and in some cases third) properties in the mistaken belief that the market could only go up and there was easy money to be made.

Its based on a game I used to play in January with the other half trying to spot the new reg cars . . Do you remember in 2004 / 2005 / 2006 how easy it was to spot a new reg car in January ? Not so easy any more.

It's based on the trouble I had looking for a plumber after I moved into my house in 2003. When I finally got one he turned up in a brand new 5-series BMW and charged me a small fortune.

Its based on looking at the property pages during the same time and seeing packed out auctions for apartments in Bulgaria. And hearing from the hairdresser that her hubby had bought two flats in Budapest.

It's based on the observation that all of the major political parties adopted low tax; high spend policies during the noughts in response to the demands of the electorate.

I'm not making this up Liam; there is a wealth of evidence to show that Irish people overspent and over borrowed during the Celtic tiger era . .

The fact is hundreds of thousands didn't take part in this madness. Now I'm a little bit guilty myself because I racked up a 3K credit card bill. Whilst that was stupid, it was within my means and luckily the bank have since granted me a loan to restructure it but I just thank my lucky stars I didn't get a 20K car loan (which I was told I was pre-approved at the time for)

So why the f*ck should I and many others bail out these mortgages through taxes when we never contributed or benefitted from these crazy loans?