United Left Alliance will form party, says Higgins

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

mike65

Hmmm, if this works could they then hook up with SF to form a technical group and be the main opposition group?

whiteonion

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Ireland's "open market economy" has always been a failure from start to finish. This country's boom was funded from EU money being extracted from net contributors. Social democratic policies are much better for the economy. That is why countries such as Norway, Denmark, Sweden and Germany are fairing much better than Ireland, UK and USA.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

dlofnep

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

With one of the developed world's worst social balance. These "lefties" that you chastise are the same people who have for decades fought for worker's rights, a fair wage, social equality, and the welfare of all classes. Poorly regulated, free-market economics simply don't work - and need to be balanced with those that seek social democracy.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

dlofnep

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I'd consider myself more in favour of a mixed economy, that has both capitalist and socialist aspects. A pure capitalist state will never seek to ensure that the welfare of the most vulnerable in society is protected.

I'm a pragmatist, and understand that the creation of business and business investment is important to ensure that there is sufficient work to go around. But at the same time - that said business cannot be allowed to run wild, without regulation and without allowing people to form for collective bargaining on issues such as pay, and working conditions.

Einhard

dlofnep wrote: »

I'd consider myself more in favour of a mixed economy, that has both capitalist and socialist aspects. A pure capitalist state will never seek to ensure that the welfare of the most vulnerable in society is protected.

I'm a pragmatist, and understand that the creation of business and business investment is important to ensure that there is sufficient work to go around. But at the same time - that said business cannot be allowed to run wild, without regulation and without allowing people to form for collective bargaining on issues such as pay, and working conditions.

But the very fact that you accept capitalism in seeking to curb its worst excesses would make you politically anathema to Higgins and the Socialists.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

dlofnep

Einhard wrote: »

But the very fact that you accept capitalism in seeking to curb its worst excesses would make you politically anathema to Higgins and the Socialists.

I'm not seeking to make friends with Higgins. I do admire him as a person, and as a politician. I think his heart is very much in the right place. I'm sure I would find common ground with him on some issues, and not so much with others.

CiaranC

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Yeah the old lightly regulated open market economy has served us so well. Oh wait no it bankrupted us.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Einhard

dlofnep wrote: »

I'm not seeking to make friends with Higgins. I do admire him as a person, and as a politician. I think his heart is very much in the right place. I'm sure I would find common ground with him on some issues, and not so much with others.

I gathered that, but you responded to PermaBear's post about the ULA as if he were referring to all leftwingers.

As for Higgins, It'd be nigh on impossible to find anything on which we hold common ground economically, but I do admire and respect him. If all our representatives had half his integrity it'd be a good thing.

dlofnep

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I think you've hit the nail on the head - how exactly tax is going to be progressively shared. Left-leaning parties seek to protect the most vulnerable to preserve their welfare, while right-leaning wish to protect the wealthy to ensure that they continue to create employment. It's really just trying to find the balance on both that neither can agree on.

I think there is the pragmatist in us all on where the general line is. I would also argue however that Ireland has performed poorly when it comes to the creation of indigenous business. I think that while multinational investment is important - local economies also need to become more self-sufficient for long term stability. This part of the economy has been overlooked for far too long, and we need to start concentrating on it or we will be overly dependent on multinational investment, which is not good for a stable long-term economy.

I'm not a businessman, but from having spoken to a few local startup IT companies - their biggest issue has been the amount of red-tape hindering them from getting up off the ground. We need to start making Ireland more self-sufficient and independent in all aspects of life. Any assistance we can offer to local startups should be welcomed.

CiaranC

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Your politics are openly, blatantly, obviously and demonstrably a failure, and have destroyed this country, despite your constantly trying to pin this on some imaginary phantom bogeyman "left". These wackos couldnt do half as much damage as you and your ilk, with your politics of self serving greed have done. Time to put away Atlas Shrugged, read another book and pick an new online persona. I see youve changed your username so you are halfway there.

Dozen Wicked Words

Irish Political Party is honest about one of its aims. Wow, its the breakthrough in the case we have been waiting for. Who would have expected a Socialist Party (the clue is in the name) to object to the free market.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

dsmythy

People voted for Joe, Clare, Richard etc. Not a party or an idea. This won't end well. I look forward to the split.

Einhard

CiaranC wrote: »

Your politics are openly, blatantly, obviously and demonstrably a failure, and have destroyed this country, despite your constantly trying to pin this on some imaginary phantom bogeyman "left". These wackos couldnt do half as much damage as you and your ilk, with your politics of self serving greed have done. Time to put away Atlas Shrugged, read another book and pick an new online persona. I see youve changed your username so you are halfway there.

It's striking how many on the Left are rightly so quick to correct anyone who would seek to lump all those with left leaning views into one hmogenous group, and seek to distinguish between Stalinists, Trotskyists, the far- and moderate-Left etc, yet when it comes to the Right, they have no problem with such disingenuous lumping.

Min

I hope they do, I always listen in disbelief at their economic policies. I am sure they think they can fund the country because money grows on trees, lets raid the Leprechaun's stash of gold, chase every rainbow and things will be fine.

They were a joke on the Vincent Browne show, RBB only accounted for €6 billion he would raise...after he reversed the cuts, the rest must come from the above...
Their economic policies have more holes than a sieve.

20Cent

If FG insist on making the workers and poor pay for the sins of the banks expect the ULA to grow and grow. I'd give this Gov 18 months before it implodes and the ULA will make huge gains in the next election.

LeixlipRed

LOL at the OP believing it'll be the ULA discredited come the next general election. I reckon the Blueshirts and the sellouts are working on discrediting themselves as we speak.

Soldie

By the end of the day Sinn Féin will most likely have 15 seats, and the ULA will have 5 seats. With the hard left reaching their peak of 12% of the Dáil's seats in the face of the supposed "crisis of capitalism", I'm not too worried about the revolution coming any time soon.

Soldie

20Cent wrote: »

If FG insist on making the workers and poor pay for the sins of the banks expect the ULA to grow and grow. I'd give this Gov 18 months before it implodes and the ULA will make huge gains in the next election.

80% of income tax revenue comes from those earning €100k per year and above, so I don't know why you imply that the poor will be footing most of the bill. By the way, what is a worker? Anyone who has a job?

CiaranC

Soldie wrote: »

the supposed "crisis of capitalism"

Unfortunately for all of us, the "crisis of capitalism" hasnt even begun. It has merely been staved off for a period with this nonsensical "bailout" from our "friends" in Europe.

Its akin to keeping the country on life-support. The hard left are well poised to capitalise when that life-support inevitably has to be turned off.

OhNoYouDidn't

permabear, you are oozing bitterness. the smugness that over 35% of the electorate who voted left are wrong and will be shown up is pathetic.

The electorate moved to the left. That happens when the right fail as dramatically as they have in the last 3 years.

Deal with it and move on.

nesf

CiaranC wrote: »

Yeah the old lightly regulated open market economy has served us so well. Oh wait no it bankrupted us.

We didn't have a lightly regulated market, far from it. We had a badly regulated market.

There's an enormous difference between the two.

nesf

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

permabear, you are oozing bitterness. the smugness that over 35% of the electorate who voted left are wrong and will be shown up is pathetic.

The electorate moved to the left. That happens when the right fail as dramatically as they have in the last 3 years.

Deal with it and move on.

Right, that's the second thread I've seen you attack him personally accusing him of being bitter etc. Please drop it, play the ball not the man. Don't personalise the discussion!

OhNoYouDidn't

nesf wrote: »

Right, that's the second thread I've seen you attack him personally accusing him of being bitter etc. Please drop it, play the ball not the man. Don't personalise the discussion!

Are you talking as a mod?

The left made phenomenal gains and here is is before the count is even finished belittling the electorate who are clearly inferior to him

thetonynator

dlofnep wrote: »

I'd consider myself more in favour of a mixed economy, that has both capitalist and socialist aspects. A pure capitalist state will never seek to ensure that the welfare of the most vulnerable in society is protected.

Well luckily we have a great mix:

Capitalize the gains, socialise the losses. :rolleyes:

trashcan

Exactly. Or to put it another way, socialism for the rich and capitalism for the poor. (Not claiming to have invented that one btw, but I think it sums things up fairly accurately.)

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

karma_

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Some never get tired of repeating the same old rhetoric I see.

OhNoYouDidn't

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Stop being childish. The SP/ULA alliance added to their already very credible local base with a significant protest vote. That is what happens when capitalism goes through one of its inherent failures.

nesf

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

Are you talking as a mod?

The left made phenomenal gains and here is is before the count is even finished belittling the electorate who are clearly inferior to him

I'm telling you what not to do. Of course I'm talking as a mod. Attack his points, not himself.

rantie

Why don't you set down all you know about 'trotskyism' here? Or maybe on Twitter. The 140-character limit should suit you!

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Einhard

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

permabear, you are oozing bitterness. the smugness that over 35% of the electorate who voted left are wrong and will be shown up is pathetic.

The electorate moved to the left. That happens when the right fail as dramatically as they have in the last 3 years.

Deal with it and move on.

Just looking at the swing since the last election in 2007, and including FF as centre, or centre-right wing party, and excluding independents, the shift to those further to the left of FF has been about 6%. That's not exactly a dramatic syrge leftwards, especially when one considers that centre/centre-right parties still accounted for a majority of the vote cast.

Soldie

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

Stop being childish. The SP/ULA alliance added to their already very credible local base with a significant protest vote. That is what happens when capitalism goes through one of its inherent failures.

If the hard left wins only 20 seats "when capitalism goes through one of its inherent failures" then I'd hate to see it on a bad day.

It is arrogant to suggest that the electorate has moved to the left, because it is a statement that professes to know what the electorate wants, not the mention the fact that it is blinded by wishful thinking when spoken by a leftist. There are few things that can be said of the electorate's wishes with certainty, but two of which are that the people don't want Fianna Fáil in government, and that they'd favour a Fine Gael/Labour Party coalition.

ei.sdraob

Everytime i hear SFer use the word "business" I cringe

Is there any member of SF who ran a real business (of the legal kind)?

joulter

ei.sdraob wrote: »

Everytime i hear SFer use the word "business" I cringe

Is there any member of SF who ran a real business (of the legal kind)?

arthur morgan retired to spend more time running his business i think

ei.sdraob

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

The electorate moved to the left.

to the left?

http://www.rte.ie/news/election2011/results/index.html

-24% FF who are center/left/allovershop pursued public expenditure + welfare increase policies well above rate of economic growth which would make the most ardent socialists blush
+8.8% gain for FG center right
+9.3% gain for Lab center left
+6.8% to independents from all over spectrum
+3% gain to SF, left
-3% loss Green, authoritarian center left
+1.6% socialists, people before profit far left

CiaranC

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I didnt say capitalism is collapsing, I said the current crisis is nowhere near played out.

Instead our crony capitalists are doing what all modern neoliberal capitalist systems do, as soon as they start losing money they socialise the losses, soviet style. Right up to the point where they can start generating profit again, then they suddenly become capitalists again overnight.

And save your breath with the "thats not true capitalism" line, its as tired and hollow as the "thats not true communism" line from the reds when you point out the huge holes in their equally obnoxious, emptyheaded politic.

nesf wrote:

We didn't have a lightly regulated market, far from it. We had a badly regulated market.

There's an enormous difference between the two.

The political machine appointed a simpleton as a regulator here, I simply dont believe it was anything other than deliberate. Rather than face the political headaches of being openly light-regulation, they used a gombeenman and generated the same outcomes through his incompetence.

rantie

Not surprising that this politically illiterate rant is coming from Donegal, the most conservative enclave of bunker capitalism on the island.

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

nesf

CiaranC wrote: »

The political machine appointed a simpleton as a regulator here, I simply dont believe it was anything other than deliberate. Rather than face the political headaches of being openly light-regulation, they used a gombeenman and generated the same outcomes through his incompetence.

The thing is that light regulation does not mean bad regulation. E.g. we appointed a competent regulator and suddenly our system seems to work very well. You can have a well regulated lightly regulated market by having a regulator who effectively enforces what regulation that exists. Our problem was that we had a regulator who simply didn't do that.

We make a dreadful mistake by blaming our crisis on light regulation because this was patently not the problem! We need to focus less on the regulation itself and more on the appointment of solid regulators to enforce it. All the regulation in the world won't help you if you have a damp squib sitting in the regulator's chair.

ei.sdraob

rantie wrote: »

Not surprising that this politically illiterate rant is coming from Donegal, the most conservative enclave of bunker capitalism on the island.

two SF candidates elected there...

Dirk Gently

is there any confirmation that they are to form a "party" as opposed to a Dail technical group? i.e are the socialist party now merging with the SWP /PBP and the few independents into one new party?

rantie

Yes, and 1 FF 2fg and in IND who will not be dancing with Gerry! Also I would worry about the allegiances that might elect SF in the two Donegal constituencies.

ei.sdraob wrote: »

two SF candidates elected there...

Rabble Rabble

The ULA may as well become a party - a technical group doesn't have the same privileges AFAIK.

It wont be trotskyite for very long - the SWP always lose control of parties they form because they would lose their deposit were they to run on their own. So the parliamentarians will 10K dont depend on them.

Healy from South Tipp. is a strong socialist but not influenced by any kind of nonsenscial theory. Only rich boy Barret will have anything in common with the SWP.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Rubik.

nesf wrote: »

The thing is that light regulation does not mean bad regulation. E.g. we appointed a competent regulator and suddenly our system seems to work very well. You can have a well regulated lightly regulated market by having a regulator who effectively enforces what regulation that exists. Our problem was that we had a regulator who simply didn't do that.

We make a dreadful mistake by blaming our crisis on light regulation because this was patently not the problem! We need to focus less on the regulation itself and more on the appointment of solid regulators to enforce it. All the regulation in the world won't help you if you have a damp squib sitting in the regulator's chair.

Regling's report into the banking crisis specifically criticised the new system of banking regulation brought in 2003.

"The twin-headed bank regulatory framework in Ireland from 2003 onwards was a hybird, by global standards. The new regulatory structure had emerged from a policy of compromise, and this genesis did not help its credibility, or indeed encourage a focus on marcoprudential risks.... There was also some questions, in this framework, about ultimate responsibility and lines of command."

CiaranC

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Thats mainly because these "free market liberals" are a figment of your imagination. They dont actually exist anywhere but in your dreams and in the boring, overly long, repetitive, obnoxious, poorly written pages of Ayn Rand novels. You are the only libertarian in Ireland and even you voted for Fine Gael, who are all for bailing out private enterprises with tax payers money. Which was apparently "theft" last year when they were giving this money to some dying kid with Leukemia in Crumlins hospital, but this year its entirely necessary to put the systems where our good old "free market liberals" friends can go back to raking in the cash right back in place.

"Free market liberals" my hole. A bunch of doublethinking hypocrites who champion free markets right up to the point of the last drop of cash they can wring out of their failed systems then go banging the begging bowl for johnny PAYE to bail them out, again and again and again.

At least these clowns on the left actually believe the nonsense they spout, instead of having to do mental gymnastics to convince themselves and everyone else that their politics are anything other than a despicable charade.