United Left Alliance Meeting in Sligo.

Pete M.

ULA TDs Joe Higgins and Richard Boyd-Barrett will be at a public meeting in Sligo on Thursday 5th May at 8:00pm in the Glasshouse (I think).

Cllr.D. Bree will also be there.

There is an alternative way of doing things.


http://www.unitedleftalliance.org/

Mint Sauce

Can we assume for anyone not able to view the link that this is open to all members of the public, to listen or join in on the debate?

Pete M.

irish-stew wrote: »

Can we assume for anyone not able to view the link that this is open to all members of the public, to listen or join in on the debate?

Absolutely Stew.

It's a public meeting so come along and see what the story is.

Share your views and ask questions.

Buford T Justice

Wow, a bunch of left wing loonies spouting waffle about how we should all burn the banks, tell Europe to piss off..... and somehow we'll all live happily ever after and all had jobs and mortgages and money......


Can't wait.....:rolleyes:

Pete M.

Good man Fingers. Thanks for that contribution

Keep the auld head in the sand anyway

Buford T Justice

You have you're beliefs, as do I. I happen to disagree with yours.

If I have my head in the sand, then your's is up your..... as clearly, we are both as delusional as each other.

For Forks Sake

Fingers McGee wrote: »

Wow, a bunch of left wing loonies spouting waffle about how we should all burn the banks, tell Europe to piss off..... and somehow we'll all live happily ever after and all had jobs and mortgages and money......


Can't wait.....:rolleyes:

Will someone take a count of how many times the term "working people" is mentioned?

Pete M.

Up my what now?

But yeah, each to their own eh?

If you have any inclination, have a look at this.

http://www.eamonnzaidan.ie/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/The-Looney-Left.pdf

A bit long I know, but it's fair enough I think.

Pete M.

For Forks Sake wrote: »

Will someone take a count of how many times the term "working people" is mentioned?

Will do.

And maybe 'banks/bankers', 'IMF', 'unfair', croyneism' and 'incompetent' too.

Buford T Justice

Pete M. wrote: »

Will do.

And maybe 'banks/bankers', 'IMF', 'unfair', croyneism' and 'incompetent' too.

I'm not saying the current situation is fair, but the loonie left's answer isn't it either.

red sean

The United Left Alliance!
If only they'd managed to get 83+ seats in the General Election. We'd never see a poor day again!!!!!!

edolan

Fingers McGee wrote: »

I'm not saying the current situation is fair, but the loonie left's answer isn't it either.

So what's the answer? Going with the traditional Irish alternative of a centre-right party with a .......... centre-right party. It's the first time we have a left alternative as the main opposition in the Dail should be interesting.

Pete M.

Fingers McGee wrote: »

I'm not saying the current situation is fair, but the loonie left's answer isn't it either.

That may be fair enough Fingers...

But for a start, just dismissing any sort of left leaning organisation as 'the looney left' is simple minded and betrays a lack of understanding of what they are trying to achieve. Just because it's alliteration doesn't mean it's clever or true to say it. If that was the case then 'The Rapacious Right' should be a much more commonly used term :P

And perhaps the solution to our problems isn't entirely made up of how Socialists see the world.

I think that we need to draw from all the systems of running society we have developed so far, whether that's socialism, capitalism, Confucianism and whatever and to take all the good bits, take out the bad bits and make an effort to run society, not for profit, but for people, corny eh?

The economy should serve the people, not the other way round.

At the moment there is massive influence on how this Country and the EU and the US and the rest of the world is run from the Rapacious Right and sh1ts fcuked up, no doubt about it.

So in order to get to the middle ground and the equilibrium we may want, then it will take proper organised opposition from the Left. The 'Looney Left' as you describe them may draw from the failed socialist ideologies of the past, but they don't want to repeat the mistakes made.

Shur I'll keep ya posted how we get on....;)

Buford T Justice

In fairness, I do agree that we need middle ground on this.

I call them the looney left, because I think a lot of them have looney ideas about how this country should be run. (btw, i have no issue with you using the phrase The Rapacious Right) Take Ming Flanagan. Should we listen to the words of someone who openly flouts the laws in this country? Its only smoking a bit of hash yes, but its hardly a good example to be setting to the people he represents. He may have stopped now, but that's only because of pressure from the gardaí.

When he was elected he also came out with waffle about taking a 50% pay cut. Whilst this is commendable, its hardly a sacrifice for him, as he wold be getting a substantial salary increase from what he was on previously, so it smacks of populism to me.

Also, the independents who won't even bother to dress accordingly in the Dáil. (think Richard boyd baratt might be one, not sure) but there are some.

How can we be expected to have any respect for these people, when they can't even respect the principles of the house that they are elected to?

Pete M.

Fingers McGee wrote: »

In fairness, I do agree that we need middle ground on this.

Cool. That's progress straight away :pac::pac:

I call them the looney left, because I think a lot of them have looney ideas about how this country should be run. (btw, i have no issue with you using the phrase The Rapacious Right) Take Ming Flanagan. Should we listen to the words of someone who openly flouts the laws in this country? Its only smoking a bit of hash yes, but its hardly a good example to be setting to the people he represents. He may have stopped now, but that's only because of pressure from the gardaí.

Seriously, you can't use the term looney for policies which promote redistribution of wealth from the rich to the poor.
As for Ming, he got the votes even though his constituents knew all about him and his dope smoking.
What about Jim McDaid and his driving the wrong way down a dual carriageway while loaded! And him still a pillar of the community!:eek:
What about our former Taoiseach allegedly drinking after hours in his local in Offaly?
(That didn't really bother me at all btw)
Drink does a lot more harm to our society than dope will ever do.
What about various ministers speeding around the place in the state car?
Ming has more of the characteristics of the kind of politician we need in this country than most of the rest of them.
I have absolutely no problem with Mr. Flanagan.

When he was elected he also came out with waffle about taking a 50% pay cut. Whilst this is commendable, its hardly a sacrifice for him, as he wold be getting a substantial salary increase from what he was on previously, so it smacks of populism to me.

Waffle? As far as I know he is actually giving half of his salary, €46K, to local community projects. This will achieve more over the course of his tenure than Tony McLoughlin sitting quiet in the back benches. Would you give up half your salary if you got a big job like this? None of the others are doing it. Ming has because he is actively involved in the local community and sees where it can be used efficiently. This is as much as I know, maybe he's really putting it all in an offshore account. Call it populism if you want, but it isn't as bad as promising the restoration of the PSO to Sligo airport or restoring cancer services and then not delivering. What about Gilmore and his 'It's Frankfurt's way or Labours way'? That was populism on a far grander and irresponsible scale.

Also, the independents who won't even bother to dress accordingly in the Dáil. (think Richard boyd baratt might be one, not sure) but there are some.

Ah now come on. Those who robbed us wore suits every day to work. You'd hardly find a banker or FF politician without his Louis Copeland or similar pricey suit now would you? And does this mean that they are men of integrity? Does it fcuk. I'm not a great man for uniforms or formal dress, so that doesn't bother me at all. It's kind of like The Velvet Rooms isn't it? They require smart dress and shoes, to keep the clientele of a certain standard, but the last time I was in there (as a designated driver) it was as debauched a place as one with no dress code, if not worse.

How can we be expected to have any respect for these people, when they can't even respect the principles of the house that they are elected to?

How can we respect those in this country who gambled it all and lost and got us into the sh1t we are in? They still drive round in big cars and live in fine houses. Bertie and the Brians and their cronies are still getting fine fat pensions, living it up and laughing at the rest of us.

Your anger is directed at the wrong set of people I reckon.
It's easy to hate those who are different.
It's harder to look at ourselves and our systems and see what is wrong with them.
Society at the moment is sick and it's going to take some harsh medicine to sort it out.

Buford T Justice

Pete M. wrote: »

Seriously, you can't use the term looney for policies which promote redistribution of wealth from the rich to the poor.

The impression I get is that they are looking for a blanked re-distribution, if you will without any regard for the wider consequences.

Pete M. wrote: »

What about Jim McDaid and his driving the wrong way down a dual carriageway while loaded! And him still a pillar of the community!:eek:
What about our former Taoiseach allegedly drinking after hours in his local in Offaly?
(That didn't really bother me at all btw)
Drink does a lot more harm to our society than dope will ever do.
What about various ministers speeding around the place in the state car?
Ming has more of the characteristics of the kind of politician we need in this country than most of the rest of them.

All of the above is true, and I'm not trying to defend any of them, they're all a bunch of **** too. However, if this new breed of TD is trying to come out and say 'we are the way forward' kind of thing, then in fairness they are no better than the ilk before them, with rhetoric and disregard for the laws of the country when it suits them. If they are to be the way forward, then they should be setting the appropriate example, and Mings blatant law breaking is not the appropriate example.

Plus, trying to justify his actions by saying 'Well x did such and such before, what do you say to that' is not the way forward either. Its like saying I can do it because they did it before me'. Its the same old thing we've had over and over for the last 14 years.

Pete M. wrote: »

Waffle? As far as I know he is actually giving half of his salary, €46K, to local community projects. This will achieve more over the course of his tenure than Tony McLoughlin sitting quiet in the back benches. Would you give up half your salary if you got a big job like this? None of the others are doing it. Ming has because he is actively involved in the local community and sees where it can be used efficiently. This is as much as I know, maybe he's really putting it all in an offshore account. Call it populism if you want, but it isn't as bad as promising the restoration of the PSO to Sligo airport or restoring cancer services and then not delivering. What about Gilmore and his 'It's Frankfurt's way or Labours way'? That was populism on a far grander and irresponsible scale.

I'm not trying to defend anyone else here who is sitting quietly by either.
Like I said, what he is doing is commendable, and no doubt the money will be well used where it goes, but it was announced as populist spin to say 'aren't i great, I'm taking a pay cut' when in actual fact he's still getting a pay increase. I called it waffle because its the same old act of putting a particular spin on something. Call it semantics, but if he had said 'I'm donating 50% of my new salary to blah blah' then I would have been happier than that.

Pete M. wrote: »

Ah now come on. Those who robbed us wore suits every day to work. You'd hardly find a banker or FF politician without his Louis Copeland or similar pricey suit now would you? And does this mean that they are men of integrity? Does it fcuk. I'm not a great man for uniforms or formal dress, so that doesn't bother me at all. It's kind of like The Velvet Rooms isn't it? They require smart dress and shoes, to keep the clientele of a certain standard, but the last time I was in there (as a designated driver) it was as debauched a place as one with no dress code, if not worse.

No, its not like the velvet rooms. That is just a place that likes to think its better than all the rest of the nite clubs in the town by having a poncie dress code.
In my opinion. its the principle of the thing. Not like school uniforms or wearing a tie to mass or that sort of thing. Its the Dáil, so surely on principle, if not respect for the house you should dress accordingly. I'm not saying it makes affects their integrity, but you wouldn't want the chief mourners at a funeral wearing bright Hawaiian shirts would you?

Pete M. wrote: »

How can we respect those in this country who gambled it all and lost and got us into the sh1t we are in? They still drive round in big cars and live in fine houses. Bertie and the Brians and their cronies are still getting fine fat pensions, living it up and laughing at the rest of us.

Your anger is directed at the wrong set of people I reckon.
It's easy to hate those who are different.
It's harder to look at ourselves and our systems and see what is wrong with them.
Society at the moment is sick and it's going to take some harsh medicine to sort it out.

We can't, and I don't - plane and simple. They're nothing but a bunch of crooks. Bertie always was, but he got away with it for a long long time.

I don't think my anger is mis-directed at all. I agree that a change is needed, but personally, I think the new gov't is it. All that aside, If the ULA are the real thing, then they should be putting forward some sort of actual plans. I don't think they are. I think they are either too inexperienced (which is ok btw) or are too busy spouting populist policy without regard for the actual wider reaching consequences.

Lets look at their 'Programme' for a moment.

1. End the bailout of banks and developers.

Nice idea, but be realistic. All the banks go bust, and where does everyones money go? Who puts the money into the ATM machines, who gives loans to... well, anyone really. Tell the bondholders to feck off - Where do we get our money from so, as the markets are too expensive, and the IMF/EU are the only ones who will lend to us to fund the state

2. Tax the greedy not the needy

Increase corporation tax, and all the multinationals will just shut up shop and go to another country where its cheaper to do business. This will end with massive job losses among other things. We've seen this a few times in the last few years already. How does this sit with the next one

3. End the jobs crisis
The ULA condemns the complete failure of the government and the private sector to preserve or create jobs.

Really? The private sector (a sector interested in making more money) doesn't want to create jobs? Surely that goes against everything. If there was work to be done and money to be made doing it, then surely people would be hired to do it. Are they going to make the work for the private sector to do?

Reduce the working week without loss of pay and create tens of thousands of jobs by sharing out the work.

Given the current state of financial affairs, who is going to pay for these tens of thousands of extra jobs, when there are enough people to do the work at the minute? The work being done is not going to generate any additional income, so this is just going to be a massive cost, which the country doesn't have money for.

4. Reverse the cuts – Defend public services

More teachers and smaller classes. Again nice idea but who pays for it.....

They support the trade unions, which are the one non governmental group who have the ability to hold the country to ransom for their own ends. Mass strikes and protests preventing people getting access to services, not answering phones, not doing x cos they are on strike, that sort of shite. For an organisation who proclaim to be by the people for the people, the support the unions, who make the people suffer when they call massive strikes.

5. Equality for all

Not to sound racist here, but why do you want to give asylum seekers the chance to work? Its already nigh on impossible to get a job in this country as it is, never mind adding however many extra people to the same list. This would do two things:
1) Make it more difficult for anyone to get a job. (Trust me, its not easy as it is)
2) Create a system where the asylum seekers will be hired for a job because they can be paid less. Its happened before, it will again.....

Unionise all workers - and take more money from everyones pocket as a union contribution.



I welcome the ULA, but I am greatly unimpressed by them at the moment, hence my disdain.

Society isn't sick, its just a bit down in the dumps because of money worries and no job. What's sick in this country is its governance.

/deep breath, rant over.

Pete M.

Well I'm just glad that this thread got a bit of a debate going.

I'm glad that you welcome the ULA, but understand why you have your reservations.

I'm sure we could go on debating, but think I'll leave it here for now.

It's good to rant

Buford T Justice

Pete M. wrote: »

Well I'm just glad that this thread got a bit of a debate going.

I'm glad that you welcome the ULA, but understand why you have your reservations.

I'm sure we could go on debating, but think I'll leave it here for now.

It's good to rant

Glad we can agree on something. I got started on that post last night and I was going to make it a quick one, but it just flowed out. I think I was sitting on a soap box instead of a chair.

Nice to have a proper debate though, without the usual 'You're a wally if you think that' sort of thing......

Pete M.

It can happen alright, hope you managed to get to bed at some stage

Any new group will take a while to find it's feet, but I think the ULA can provide a real alternative to the policies of the other main parties in this fine wee country.

I look forward to crossing swords again sometime

However if you want me to reply to the points raised above I will gladly do so.
Don't want you to think that I'm giving up.

Pete M.

Bumpalicious this meeting will be

Buford T Justice

To be honest, I wouldn't mind being there to hear what they have to say for themselves, especially that bare faced liar Declan Bree.

I think alas, I'm too much of a cynic at this moment to have a complete open mind and I'd just get wound up listening to them.

Pete M.

The meeting went ahead this evening and was quite successful with around 70 people attending.
The room was filled to standing room only with people from all walks of life and all ages.
Obviously there is an appetite in Sligo for a proper alternative to the doomed policies of the 'two cheeks of the same arse' that are FF and FG as one contributor put it.
Both Higgins and Boyd-Barrett spoke well and made absolute sense.

The intention is to start a branch of the ULA in Sligo, which will embrace those who oppose the idea that normal working people should be forced to pay for the debts of an uncaring and unrepentant elite.
It is from the bottom up that we need reform, not the Fine Gabour gombeens who continue to implement the demands of the IMF/ECB and the vested interests that they represent.

The interest on the money given to this state by them will amount to some €10 billion per year. The proposed sale of state assets would raise at an absolute maximum around €5 billion.
Enough to pay the interest on the debt for half of one year!

And they think that this makes sense.

Who is Looney now?

Buford T Justice

It's all well and good pointing out the flaws of the present incumbents, thata what the opposition is for. They have great notions about what should be done, and I credit them for that. However, they have no realistic financial alternative. I don't like the situation anymore than you do, but we're stuck in a hole that ff has put us in and we need to dig ourselves out of it. I'd love to tell the ecb and the IMF where to go, but the reality is we need their cash to fund the state.