Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Joe Higgins Appreciation Thread

  • 22-04-2011 3:49pm
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,798 ✭✭✭


    The Dail is much livelier with Joe back in the melting pot. His suggestion the Queen should pay for room and bed is hilarious and has been picked up by media all over the world.

    I have respected his integrity for a long time as he is probably the only politician I know that takes the average industrial wage to live on and returns the rest of his TD's.

    The below is an extract from the Dail the weekend after Bertie declared himself to be a socialist. Some of the wit is outstanding and it is amazing to look at the exchange in view of the subsequent economic meltdown orchistrated by FF policies at the time.

    For the record I am not a socialist in any way shape or form.


    The verbatim report of the debate on Wednesday 17 November 2004

    Leaders’ Questions, Dáil Éireann.

    Joe Higgins (Socialist Party): Many of today’s newspapers were kind enough to point out that I was not in the House yesterday when the Labour Party leader asked the Taoiseach about his new found commitment to socialism. Ironically, I was abroad for several days on political work to advance the cause of socialism.

    Pat Rabbitte (Labour Party): Did the Deputy have the Government jet?

    J. Higgins: You can imagine, a Cheann Comhairle, how perplexed I was when I returned to find my wardrobe almost empty. The Taoiseach had been busy robbing my clothes. Up to recently the Progressive Democrats did not have a stitch left due to the same Taoiseach but we never expected him to take a walk on the left side of the street.

    The Taoiseach: Extreme left.

    J. Higgins: He said: "I am one of the few socialists left in Irish politics". Immediately, Tomás Ó Criomhthaín came to mind, as he lamented the last of the Blasket Islanders: "Ní bheidh ár leithéidí arís ann". I then thought: "Good, Taoiseach. There are two of us in it and we will go down together."

    Sadly, I had to take a reality check. If this conversion was genuine we would have to go back 2,000 years to find another as rapid and as radical. Saul’s embrace of Christianity on the road to Damascus stood the test of time but the Taoiseach’s embrace of socialism on the banks of the Tolka hardly will.

    I was not impressed with the Taoiseach’s answers yesterday so I will set him a test on three brief points to check if he is a socialist. On public ownership, the Taoiseach stated

    The Taoiseach: Is the Deputy inquiring if I am a positive or a negative socialist? He is a socialist of the negative kind.

    J. Higgins: We will see if the Taoiseach answers in the positive. Public ownership is crucial for socialists and the Taoiseach stated that he likes the idea that the Phoenix Park and the Botanic Gardens are publicly owned. As has been stated, however, he gave our telecommunications industry to venture capitalists to play around with. Will the Taoiseach answer the question to which he failed to reply just now? The Government is split on Aer Lingus and the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy McDowell, wants it to be in private hands. Will the Taoiseach

    An Ceann Comhairle (Chair): The Chair is reluctant to intervene but the Deputy’s time is concluded.

    J. Higgins: The second test is that democratic socialists never support imperialist invasions and certainly those of the type launched by the US military which is wading in blood through Falluja. The Taoiseach helped the US military to get there. Will he now denounce that atrocity and condemn the murder of an innocent Iraqi as we this morning condemned those obscurantists who murder innocent hostages?

    On equality, the Taoiseach stated that he is happy that the children in Rutland Street school are given breakfast there. Why should they be obliged to depend on the school for their breakfast? It is because he has presided over one of the most unequal regimes in the western world which has given huge concessions to big business while poverty remains in our State.

    The Taoiseach has three minutes in which to reply. I suggest that he devote one minute to each of the three tests and I will judge his replies at the end.

    The Taoiseach: I would never consider that I subscribe to the same kind of politics or ideology as Deputy Joe Higgins.

    Michael D. Higgins (Labour Party): The Taoiseach has scored a "D" grade already.

    The Taoiseach: My politics and ideology might be closer to those of Deputy Michael D. Higgins. I have watched and listened to Deputy Joe Higgins with interest for three decades but I have never heard him say anything positive. He displays what I believe to be a far left or "commie" resistance to everything. He does so in the hope that some day the world will discover oil wells off our coast which will fall into the ownership of the State, thereby allowing us to run a great market economy with the State at its centre. That utopia does not exist.

    What I said yesterday when the Deputy was not present is that

    J. Higgins: I read what the Taoiseach said yesterday. He should just answer the questions I have put to him now.

    The Taoiseach:
    at the core of left centre political ideology is the desire to spread the wealth more evenly. That means that people must be encouraged to create the wealth. When this is done, they are taxed and the money collected is used to resource them.

    An Ceann Comhairle: Deputies should allow the Taoiseach to continue, without interruption.

    The Taoiseach: Deputy Joe Higgins is against wealth creation and, as a result, he favours high unemployment, high expenditure and high borrowing. Any of the tests the Deputy would set me fail on the grounds that he does not believe in them. That is the issue. What we do is create the wealth, thereby allowing ourselves to employ 100,000 people in the health services to care for others, tens of thousands of teachers, many community care professionals and resource and home liaison teachers and teachers to look after the disadvantaged in our schools. That is what our brand of socialism allows us to do. The Deputy’s brand of socialism has changed so much in recent years. As he is aware, one of the reasons for the rise in oil prices is because his friends in Russia have decided that the market economy can afford $50 a barrel. That is what is wrong with Deputy Joe Higgins’s policies. I would be delighted to discuss the matter with him on the Blaskets or elsewhere whenever he likes.

    J. Higgins: The basic advice a teacher gives to a pupil who is going in to do an examination is not to spend the entire time on one question.

    An Ceann Comhairle: Unfortunately, under Leaders’ Questions the Taoiseach must focus on one question and not on three.

    Dermot Ahern (Fianna Fáil): The problem is that one cannot sack a teacher.

    J. Higgins: It was one question, divided into parts (a), (b) and (c). The Taoiseach, not being able to answer parts (a) or (b), spent all of his time trying to answer (c). On that alone, he has flunked the test. He has also flunked his history test by putting my type of socialism in the same gallery as that of the Russian Stalinists. I do not have time - unless the Ceann Comhairle will provide it - to educate the Taoiseach about that matter. He referred to my friends in Russia.

    The Taoiseach: They are not communists any longer, they joined the WTO.

    Willie O’Dea (Fianna Fáil): Trotsky was the same.

    J. Higgins: My friends were murdered by the Stalinists. Trotsky and other fine socialists were killed because they stood for democratic socialism.

    An Ceann Comhairle: The Deputy’s minute is exhausted.

    J. Higgins: The Taoiseach stated that he has spread the wealth around. That is a curious statement, particularly as he has given €600 million to big business in corporation tax cuts, allowed tax exiles to get away with murder while ordinary people are obliged to pay through the nose and allowed stud farm owners and the rest to operate tax free while ordinary people are obliged to pay out massively through stealth taxation and in other ways. The Taoiseach should do the honest thing and withdraw the ludicrous claims he made at the weekend. Let us return to normal. Socialism is not a flag of convenience to be used after one’s party has been battered in the local and European elections in order to pretend that one is a friend of working people.

    The Taoiseach: In reply to Deputy Joe Higgins, my point is that one cannot distribute resources to education, health and social welfare unless wealth is generated. Deputy Higgins’s outrageous accusation against me that corporation tax has been lowered is not true. The facts are that the rate of corporation tax has soared from 4% to 9% of GNP during my period as Taoiseach. The Government through its policies has taken far more from the corporate tax sector by having lower taxes and generating far more activity in the economy. There are over 400,000 more in employment and lower unemployment figures

    Joan Burton (Labour Party): The recent corporation tax yield is down. That is a matter of fact.

    The Taoiseach: The Government has been given the resources to spend far more.

    J. Burton: The Taoiseach is wrong. His ready reckoner is wrong.

    The Taoiseach: That is how we can have more doctors, more nurses, more therapists, more teachers. When the then Minister for Finance Deputy McCreevy halved the rate of capital gains tax, the Government gained four times more revenue. By having lower taxes, we were able to spend more. I quoted a figure yesterday in the House in the Deputy’s absence which proves that the average industrial wage is now €10,000 more than it was seven years ago. Even taking the tax rate then and the different tax rate now, a person on that salary is paying €300 less. This shows the success of what we do. I know that the Deputy is actually an admirer of that also.

    D. Ahern: That is our legacy.


«1

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,384 ✭✭✭Duffy the Vampire Slayer


    Some of the highlights of his first spell in the Dail...



  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,350 ✭✭✭Het-Field


    The Dail is much livelier with Joe back in the melting pot. His suggestion the Queen should pay for room and bed is hilarious and has been picked up by media all over the world..

    So the Dail should have a "class clown" ? I didnt think it was hilarious. I thought it was childish, petty, and irrelevant.
    I have respected his integrity for a long time as he is probably the only politician I know that takes the average industrial wage to live on and returns the rest of his TD's. .

    Deputy Higgins chooses to take the average industrial wage. The fact that he returns the balance to the exchequer, or to the coffers of the Socialist Party, is simply a case of Deputy Higgins making a personal choice as to what he does with his money. It is not miles apart from TD's who choose to spend spend their money in the shops, or availing of services from private professionals.

    Higgins and his cabal live in Cloud Cuckoo Land. The only real joke was the ULA's pre-election manifesto.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,031 ✭✭✭Lockstep


    Het-Field wrote: »
    Deputy Higgins chooses to take the average industrial wage. The fact that he returns the balance to the exchequer, or to the coffers of the Socialist Party, is simply a case of Deputy Higgins making a personal choice as to what he does with his money. It is not miles apart from TD's who choose to spend spend their money in the shops, or availing of services from private professionals.
    IIRC, he uses the balance to fund the Socialist Party. Certainly not something that saves the exchequer any money.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,350 ✭✭✭Het-Field


    Lockstep wrote: »
    IIRC, he uses the balance to fund the Socialist Party. Certainly not something that saves the exchequer any money.

    I knew it was one or the other !

    If that is the case then this "average industrial wage" thing is rubbish. He is funding a private organisation with his own money. It is a personal and private choice. He should get over himself.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,380 ✭✭✭✭nacho libre


    If he took his full salary his critics would be complaining he's a smoked salmon socialist. So he can't win really. While some might view him as a class clown, i think he is doing what those on the opposition benches are elected to do; hold the government to account. He just happens to have the gift of gab and is good at satire. To call him a class clown because of this is a lazy insult really borne out of bias, the man has principles and was elected to represent those who voted him in. I don't agree with his policies as it happens, because if he had his way the countries public sector wage bill would be even more out of touch with other european countries.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,031 ✭✭✭Lockstep


    If he took his full salary his critics would be complaining he's a smoked salmon socialist.

    If he wants to donate his salary, that's fine but I have no time for the endless "He takes the average industrial wage" argument. Either way, the cost to the taxpayer is the same.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,384 ✭✭✭Duffy the Vampire Slayer


    Lockstep wrote: »
    IIRC, he uses the balance to fund the Socialist Party. Certainly not something that saves the exchequer any money.

    Thats correct. I personally think that if ULA and Sinn Fein TD's want to claim they're on the average industrial wage they are going to have to start giving it back to the state rather than the party.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,565 ✭✭✭southsiderosie


    I can't say that I agree with Joe Higgins' politics, but there were very few in the Dail at the time willing to call a spade a spade. That transcript is hilarious.

    Honestly, every time I read old Dail records, I cannot believe that people can cry today about 'not knowing' what the FF government was up to. Go back and read some of the Haughey-era exchanges, particularly those from when he was Minister for Justice. The chicanery and cute hoorishness were there for all to see, yet these people were re-elected time and time again.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,488 ✭✭✭Denerick


    I've always admired Higgins, though am not personally not a socialist. He is at least a man of integrity and wit; somebody exceptional rather than the Teachers/Farmers/parish pump gombeens we usually elect as TDs.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,798 ✭✭✭Mr. Incognito


    Deputy Higgins chooses to take the average industrial wage. The fact that he returns the balance to the exchequer, or to the coffers of the Socialist Party, is simply a case of Deputy Higgins making a personal choice as to what he does with his money. It is not miles apart from TD's who choose to spend spend their money in the shops, or availing of services from private professionals.

    Someone who chooses to take the average industrial wage is not the same as a TD spending his 200,000 odd in the shops.

    It is an act of solidarity with the ordinary workers in this country. One of the massive problems with Irish politics is that TD's are so far removed from the struggles of the ordinary person in this country. A shining example is good old P Flynn on the Late Late complaining how hard is is to run three households.

    The fact he gives in to his party is indicitive of a man who puts his money where his ideals are. Most politicians take pure ****e and will happily sit on both sides of the fence when it suits them, ala the Greens and Trevor Seargent- "I" WILL NOT (but ye can) go into coalition with FF and then stepping down as leader and taking up a government Ministerial position as well as the Greens practically burning their core principals and manifesto to prop up FF.

    In the modern Irish political world where FF Ministers all resigned en masse to keep their pumped up pensions, TD's were using party funds to paint their houses, a Donegal TD claimed expenses for two conferences on the same weekend and attended neither, and we refuse to prosecute bankers who bankrupted the country and then paid themselves a 3 million bonus, the government refuse to tax the grossly inflated salaries of semi state executives I'd rather have more "class clowns" with integrity then the cute whoorism that we have always had in Irish society.

    I wish more people would "choose" to follow his example.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,663 ✭✭✭✭Mental Mickey


    Grade 1 knob. He's only playing to the cameras. Same as yer man Ming, Mick Wallace, and the uppity snob Boyd Barrett.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,380 ✭✭✭✭nacho libre


    Lockstep wrote: »
    If he wants to donate his salary, that's fine but I have no time for the endless "He takes the average industrial wage" argument. Either way, the cost to the taxpayer is the same.

    As has been pointed he takes it as an act of solidarity. You can be sure that money donated to his party is not used to cream the system like many other politicians have done and ended up costing the taxpayer a fortune due to their nod and wink mentality. As i've previously stated, i don't share his views, but i recognise he is one of the few politicians with integrity in this country.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 281 ✭✭NSNO


    Don't all party TDs give a sizable portion of their salary to their party as a condition of their party affiliation?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,031 ✭✭✭Lockstep


    As has been pointed he takes it as an act of solidarity. You can be sure that money donated to his party is not used to cream the system like many other politicians have done and ended up costing the taxpayer a fortune due to their nod and wink mentality. As i've previously stated, i don't share his views, but i recognise he is one of the few politicians with integrity in this country.

    Sounds more like a catchy sound-bite; "I take the average industrial wage and am down with the workers" and something which has absolutely no benefit to the people of Ireland. If he returned the money to the state, *that* would be commendable.

    Using taxes to fund the SP isn't something I see as noteworthy.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,183 ✭✭✭dvpower


    As has been pointed he takes it as an act of solidarity. You can be sure that money donated to his party is not used to cream the system like many other politicians have done and ended up costing the taxpayer a fortune due to their nod and wink mentality. As i've previously stated, i don't share his views, but i recognise he is one of the few politicians with integrity in this country.
    He never grows tired of telling us that he only takes the average industrial wage. He also never tells us that he donates the rest to his political party.
    Like many other politicans, half truths and obfuscation are his stock in trade.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,350 ✭✭✭Het-Field


    Someone who chooses to take the average industrial wage is not the same as a TD spending his 200,000 odd in the shops.

    It is an act of solidarity with the ordinary workers in this country. One of the massive problems with Irish politics is that TD's are so far removed from the struggles of the ordinary person in this country. A shining example is good old P Flynn on the Late Late complaining how hard is is to run three households.

    The fact he gives in to his party is indicitive of a man who puts his money where his ideals are. Most politicians take pure ****e and will happily sit on both sides of the fence when it suits them, ala the Greens and Trevor Seargent- "I" WILL NOT (but ye can) go into coalition with FF and then stepping down as leader and taking up a government Ministerial position as well as the Greens practically burning their core principals and manifesto to prop up FF.

    In the modern Irish political world where FF Ministers all resigned en masse to keep their pumped up pensions, TD's were using party funds to paint their houses, a Donegal TD claimed expenses for two conferences on the same weekend and attended neither, and we refuse to prosecute bankers who bankrupted the country and then paid themselves a 3 million bonus, the government refuse to tax the grossly inflated salaries of semi state executives I'd rather have more "class clowns" with integrity then the cute whoorism that we have always had in Irish society.

    I wish more people would "choose" to follow his example.

    Sorry. I have no reason to doubt Duffy the Vampire Slayer, and Lockstep when they say that the balance of the money he earns is returned to the coffers of the Socialist Party. I had heard it before, but I was unsure if it was actually the case.

    Essentially, he chooses to use his private funds to boost the private funds of the SP. There is NO difference between those who live off their salary, and use the funds to fund their day to day living. Both Higgins and the member use their salary in the way they choose. This does not buffer his integrity over and above that of any ordinary member of the house. If he handed it back to the exchequer, I would still be of the opinion that he is doing as he wishes with his salary. However I would see some moral distinction. In reality, there is no moral distinction between Higgins spending his money on the SP, and any other TD spending it in the shops of Ireland. In fact,the manner in which the other TD is spending his money is probably more economically beneficial.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,798 ✭✭✭Mr. Incognito


    Het-Field wrote: »
    Sorry. I have no reason to doubt Duffy the Vampire Slayer, and Lockstep when they say that the balance of the money he earns is returned to the coffers of the Socialist Party. I had heard it before, but I was unsure if it was actually the case.

    Essentially, he chooses to use his private funds to boost the private funds of the SP. There is NO difference between those who live off their salary, and use the funds to fund their day to day living. Both Higgins and the member use their salary in the way they choose. This does not buffer his integrity over and above that of any ordinary member of the house. If he handed it back to the exchequer, I would still be of the opinion that he is doing as he wishes with his salary. However I would see some moral distinction. In reality, there is no moral distinction between Higgins spending his money on the SP, and any other TD spending it in the shops of Ireland. In fact,the manner in which the other TD is spending his money is probably more economically beneficial.

    I see a large difference between someone who chooses to benchmark his own salary and donate the rest to his political party. It shows he believes in the political theory of said party,

    as opposed to a member like Charlie Haughey who used party funds to fund a private lifestyle of yaughts, private islands and french tailored suits.

    One took from a party, one gave back.

    If you cannot see which one of these gentlemen bears conviction to his political creed then no one here will be able to point that out to you.

    Politics should be more than spouting soundbites. When Bertie was sounding on about the beginnings of collective bargaining in the early 1990's he was co signing blank cheques for Charlie.

    When Joe Higgins talks about people on 35K struggling to make ends meet, I think he has more moral authority than other members on 200K effecting to give the same considerations.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,350 ✭✭✭Het-Field


    I see a large difference between someone who chooses to benchmark his own salary and donate the rest to his political party. It shows he believes in the political theory of said party,

    as opposed to a member like Charlie Haughey who used party funds to fund a private lifestyle of yaughts, private islands and french tailored suits.

    One took from a party, one gave back.

    If you cannot see which one of these gentlemen bears conviction to his political creed then no one here will be able to point that out to you.

    Politics should be more than spouting soundbites. When Bertie was sounding on about the beginnings of collective bargaining in the early 1990's he was co signing blank cheques for Charlie.

    When Joe Higgins talks about people on 35K struggling to make ends meet, I think he has more moral authority than other members on 200K effecting to give the same considerations.

    Using Haughey, Bertie and Pee Flynn is the best way to prove you point. However, they are exceptions as opposed to the rule. I choose not to presume all politicans are corrupt. I also believe most members of the Dail live within the confines of the salary which they are designated.
    They are entitled to that salary, and I simply cannot understand how you would consider them lacking the moral authority of Higgins for accepting it.

    Higgins is in reciept of the same salary as any other TD. However, he chooses to give anything above 35,000 to the Socialist Party. That is a free choice he makes, and it does NOT make him a martyr. One private individual chooses to give x amount of his salary to another private entity. That is the exact same as the TD who chooses to spend his/her salary on his living expenses.

    In case you havent noticed, Joe Higgins is a walking soundbyte. It may come from the excuse of an ideology that he proffers, but from the same ideology he has moulded a few oft-repeated soundbytes such as "ordinary working people", "ordinary taxpayer", "burning bondholders", "builders, bankers, and speculators".


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 88,972 ✭✭✭✭mike65


    I like the way he and Shane Ross end up sat beside one another, that must be the row for those with some integrity or something.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,798 ✭✭✭Mr. Incognito


    ah but you see the socialist party isn't a private entity. It is an idealistic group of individuals. what are all political manifestos if not asperational ideas.

    I too believe that all politicians are not corrupt in the sense that they are drawing down their legal salary plus expenses but there is a difference between what is legal and what is moral, what is accepted and what is acceptable.

    Bottom line, politicians and civil servants are paid too much. We all know it. Objectively they make far too much for running a small corner on the edge of Europe. Instead of getting a grip on reality they are really really removed from ordinary people. It's the reason people voted for independents in such large numbers.

    I disagree with socialist policy. If Joe had his way every corporation would be run out of Ireland and we would have an economic wasteland but I respect that he lives the courage of his convictions.

    I admire his asperations, his intelligence and his ability to call bull on a lot of things. I deplore his poor poor economic sense. His non ability to see rational economic business truths. His lack of education on International affairs and his hankering to conspiracy theory on some sort of elite illuminati. But compared to the rest of the FF crowd I admire and appreciate him a lot more for both sides of the coin.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,350 ✭✭✭Het-Field


    ah but you see the socialist party isn't a private entity. It is an idealistic group of individuals. what are all political manifestos if not asperational ideas.

    I too believe that all politicians are not corrupt in the sense that they are drawing down their legal salary plus expenses but there is a difference between what is legal and what is moral, what is accepted and what is acceptable.

    Bottom line, politicians and civil servants are paid too much. We all know it. Objectively they make far too much for running a small corner on the edge of Europe. Instead of getting a grip on reality they are really really removed from ordinary people. It's the reason people voted for independents in such large numbers.

    I disagree with socialist policy. If Joe had his way every corporation would be run out of Ireland and we would have an economic wasteland but I respect that he lives the courage of his convictions.

    I admire his asperations, his intelligence and his ability to call bull on a lot of things. I deplore his poor poor economic sense. His non ability to see rational economic business truths. His lack of education on International affairs and his hankering to conspiracy theory on some sort of elite illuminati. But compared to the rest of the FF crowd I admire and appreciate him a lot more for both sides of the coin.

    The Socialist Party are a private entity. They require registration with Standards in Public Offices Commission, and the money contributed by Higgins will belong to the SP. The SP will be capable of owning assets, and they will require the appointment of trustees who will take control of the financial affairs of the entity. Yes they are a movement, but there is expectations which they will be required to fulfil.

    There is nothing immoral about drawing one's salary in full. If you feel strongly about the remuneration of politicians, then it is important to speak to those with their "hand on the buzzer" about this issue. For what it is worth, I would be wary of a manic "race to the bottom" in terms of political remuneration. It is important to encourage all walks of society to enter the fray. Politicans can perform an effective public service, but by slashing politican & civil service pay you run the risk of disqualifying certain members of society from seeking to take on these jobs. By extension you significantly reduce the pool from which such people can be chosen. While pay decreases would be just, fair, and probably in line with best International Practice, I believe we need to be wary of any radical slashing.

    You are entitled to admire him. I agree that he is one of the few politicians who carries a fairly consistent ideology. However, I feel he does not ruffle the government, I feel his rhetoric is laced with soundbytes, and he is simply there to agitate.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,384 ✭✭✭Duffy the Vampire Slayer


    As a ULA supporter I have to concur that although giving much of his salary to his party is an admirable gesture, it is misleading to suggest he only takes the average industrial wage. Not the only TD that this applies to.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,380 ✭✭✭✭nacho libre


    Lockstep wrote: »
    Sounds more like a catchy sound-bite; "I take the average industrial wage and am down with the workers" and something which has absolutely no benefit to the people of Ireland. If he returned the money to the state, *that* would be commendable.

    Using taxes to fund the SP isn't something I see as noteworthy.

    Would you see it as a commendable if some of that money he allocated to his party is used to benefit disadvantaged communities?
    I still think he'd be coming for even more criticism if he took the full wage, as people would be saying what right has he to speak about the ordinary worker when he is on a salary twice that of the average earner.
    He might be perceived as a grandstanding on issues, but i believe he means what he says, unlike many past politicians, and is not just there to simply agitate.
    Still that said I can't argue with his critics, that if he had his policies implemented, Bertie's government would have been even more generous to a cosseted sector. Which would result in even more people suffering hardship at the present time.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,031 ✭✭✭Lockstep


    Would you see it as a commendable if some of that money he allocated to his party is used to benefit disadvantaged communities?
    Yes, but he's not using it to help the disadvantaged. He's using it to fund his political party.
    I still think he'd be coming for even more criticism if he took the full wage, as people would be saying what right has he to speak about the ordinary worker when he is on a salary twice that of the average earner.
    He might be perceived as a grandstanding on issues, but i believe he means what he says, unlike many past politicians, and is not just there to simply agitate.
    Still that said I can't argue with his critics, that if he had his policies implemented, Bertie's government would have been even more generous to a cosseted sector. Which would result in even more people suffering hardship at the present time.
    If he's so concerned about the average industrial wage then he can return the rest to the exchequer. As it stands, he's costing the taxpayer the exact same amount. The only difference being that instead of the money being used in shops, resteraunts or funding the local GAA team, it's going to a political party which most people didn't vote for.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,314 ✭✭✭BOHtox


    "The trouble with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money"- Margaret Thatcher


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,081 ✭✭✭LeixlipRed


    Lockstep wrote: »
    Sounds more like a catchy sound-bite; "I take the average industrial wage and am down with the workers" and something which has absolutely no benefit to the people of Ireland. If he returned the money to the state, *that* would be commendable.

    Using taxes to fund the SP isn't something I see as noteworthy.

    Returning the money to a state you have little faith in? All ULA TDs take home the average industrial wage and donate the rest to community projects of their choosing. At least there's a possibility that money will spent on something useful and not spent servicing a debt that can never be serviced.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,081 ✭✭✭LeixlipRed


    BOHtox wrote: »
    "The trouble with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money"- Margaret Thatcher

    The trouble with Maggie Tatcher was her fertilisation, germination, birth and life.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 634 ✭✭✭loldog


    BOHtox wrote: »
    "The trouble with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money"- Margaret Thatcher

    This statement is made under the assumption that we are all agreed on the issue of ownership. Which we're not.

    .


  • Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,830 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    loldog wrote: »
    This statement is made under the assumption that we are all agreed on the issue of ownership. Which we're not.
    I'm perfectly aware that some people have a problem with the fact that I own things, and would like to take them from me. Those people are called thieves, whatever their ideological basis for stealing from me.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,361 ✭✭✭Boskowski


    Lockstep wrote: »
    Yes, but he's not using it to help the disadvantaged. He's using it to fund his political party.

    If it's truly the disadvantaged you're concerned with I ask you this:
    What better way to help the disadvantaged than supporting the socialist party?

    I have to laugh at people trying to construe a viewpoint where doing what he does is less commendable than our well known 'squeeze every cent possible out of the system' politicians who are dominating our landscape of non-existing political culture. You may not agree with it but at least the man believes in something other than his back pocket.

    Unfortunately the thing thats called political culture is so poor in this country that people don't even recognise it, possibly not even know about it's concept.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,089 ✭✭✭✭P. Breathnach


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    I'm perfectly aware that some people have a problem with the fact that I own things, and would like to take them from me. Those people are called thieves, whatever their ideological basis for stealing from me.

    Somewhere between "Property is theft" and "Taxation is theft" there exists a zone that most people are satisfied to inhabit.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,306 ✭✭✭✭Drumpot


    Het-Field wrote: »
    I knew it was one or the other !

    If that is the case then this "average industrial wage" thing is rubbish. He is funding a private organisation with his own money. It is a personal and private choice. He should get over himself.

    Hes actually using his own funds to spread his own ideals at no extra expense to the Taxpayer. Considering the ways our bigger parties usually court their parties fundings I think this way is much more ethical and to be applauded.

    Just looked at a few of the bitter Cynical posts about Higgins. I dont agree with everything he says but he is a much welcomed fresh approached politician that has been lacking in the Dail.

    Somebody highlighted the word "chooses" in terms of the fact that he chooses to take the average industrial wage, this is vitally important to get an understanding of the kind of person he is. I dont know him personally, but I happen to think that he has generally shown that he has the courage to match his convictions.

    Perhaps if the anti Joe brigade spent more time focusing on the politicians who are not prepared to sacrifice anything for anybody, we might not be in this situation and mightnt have to be stuck with a new, but similar breed of "entitled" politicians.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,341 ✭✭✭Batsy


    The Dail is much livelier with Joe back in the melting pot. His suggestion the Queen should pay for room and bed is hilarious and has been picked up by media all over the world.

    I don't see why the Queen should pay for room and bed during her visit.

    She was invited over to Dublin by Mary McAleese and the Queen accepted the invitation. If I were to invite someone over to my house for a few days that person would rightly except me to provide them with bed and board that they shouldn't have to pay for.

    The Republic of Ireland invited the Queen over as a guest, so the Republic of Ireland should pay for her visit.

    And I can't see an insignificant politician than almost nobody in the world outside of Ireland has ever heard of would make news worldwide over his comments about the Queen. If he did, the world's newspapers are probably just reporting on what an embarrassing idiot he is.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 299 ✭✭KarmaBaby


    A lot of incorrect information in this thread from too many people to quote in a single post. It's no wonder so many are here as a result of being banned from the "other place".

    There is a limit on how much of his wage Joe can give to his party. I believe it is €6,000. Even if he wanted to he cannot give more than this. The rest is given to various charities and causes with no resulting personal financial gain. You would have to live on another planet to even suggest that Joe or the other 4 ULA members still draw their salary in full like the rest of the Dail, just because it isn't given to the exchequer. Also, unlike Sinn Fein the ULA are also not allowed to use their position to gain financially by other means, such as Gerry Adams and his book deals. If you saw the car Joe drives it would be pretty obvious that he does not put himself above the general public either in his attitude or his personal wealth.
    I admire his asperations, his intelligence and his ability to call bull on a lot of things. I deplore his poor poor economic sense. His non ability to see rational economic business truths. His lack of education on International affairs and his hankering to conspiracy theory on some sort of elite illuminati. But compared to the rest of the FF crowd I admire and appreciate him a lot more for both sides of the coin.

    You seem to be contradiction yourself here. How can he have poor economic sense if he calls bull on so much and has predicted the current crisis ahead of everyone else?

    In the SPs perspectives for 2004 it predicted that Ireland was heading for a complete catastrophe, that the housing bubble would result in 100,000 construction workers being put on the dole, that the IMF would be called in to bail us out and that the government would engage in a process of vicious austerity on the working class. And here we are.

    The suggestion that Joe has a lack of education on international affairs is complete nonsense and simply an assumption you came to in your own mind without any research. I suggest you back that up with some form of evidence including listing some of these conspiracy theories you mention.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,031 ✭✭✭Lockstep


    LeixlipRed wrote: »
    Returning the money to a state you have little faith in? All ULA TDs take home the average industrial wage and donate the rest to community projects of their choosing. At least there's a possibility that money will spent on something useful and not spent servicing a debt that can never be serviced.
    Uh huh. A state which he's happy to receive a wage off


    Any proof for your claim that it goes to a community project?
    Had a couple of lads in the ULA tell me it goes to the party itself (including a ULA supporter in this thread)

    Boskowski wrote: »
    If it's truly the disadvantaged you're concerned with I ask you this:
    What better way to help the disadvantaged than supporting the socialist party?

    I have to laugh at people trying to construe a viewpoint where doing what he does is less commendable than our well known 'squeeze every cent possible out of the system' politicians who are dominating our landscape of non-existing political culture. You may not agree with it but at least the man believes in something other than his back pocket.

    Unfortunately the thing thats called political culture is so poor in this country that people don't even recognise it, possibly not even know about it's concept.
    Mainly as the Socialist Party doesn't help the disadvantaged; their economic policy is disastrous and would just make a bad country even worse. Apparently, taxing the rich means we can reject the EU/IMF loan, reverse all public sector cuts, all welfare cuts, create loads of free public services like university and healthcare, retain all state assets and engage in a public works program.
    How on earth does this help us, or rather, will just drive us further into recession.

    He's still squeezing the same paycheque out of the system as any Fianna Fáiler, he just uses it differently and acts as if it's something awesome.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,646 ✭✭✭washman3


    joe higgins is a true gentleman and a legend in irish politcs, take a look back over the records of the house and you will see that he has been proved right in everything he said,joe was one of the few people that saw this mess coming but was advised by the "great" bertie to go commit suicide. millions were spent by FF so that Joe would be lampooned and lose his seat during the boom and allow corruption and cronyism to flourish unchallenged. how anyone could describe Joe as a class clown is beyond me,he got 96,000 votes in the Euro election, great to see him back.:)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 299 ✭✭KarmaBaby


    Lockstep wrote: »
    Any proof for your claim that it goes to a community project?

    In my short time in the SP I know for a fact that Joe gave a sum to the Laura Ashley Strikers in Dublin that were made redundant from a highly profitable company. They told me this themselves. I'm sure there are plenty of other examples but Joe is not the kind to go around boasting about it.

    If you want proof go ahead and contact the party and I'm sure someone will give you a detailed answer.
    Lockstep wrote: »
    Had a couple of lads in the ULA tell me it goes to the party itself (including a ULA supporter in this thread)

    You're complete full of it. It is ILLEGAL to give the rest of his wage to the party.
    Lockstep wrote: »
    their economic policy is disastrous and would just make a bad country even worse. Apparently, taxing the rich means we can reject the EU/IMF loan, reverse all public sector cuts, all welfare cuts, create loads of free public services like university and healthcare, retain all state assets and engage in a public works program.
    How on earth does this help us, or rather, will just drive us further into recession.

    Public service would not be "free" as you put it. They would be funded by a proper progressive tax system which this country has never had. The current system of pandering to rich elites and hoping the wealth trickles down to the bottom is failing. Not just Ireland, but the entire Western political landscape needs a dramatic shift to the left in order to recover. Redistribution of wealth is the only way that can happen. In Ireland we have the widest gap in the world between the wealth of the top 10% of earners and the other 90%, apart from the U.S.

    It's hard to fathom why you think the EU/IMF loan is beneficial to us. It is purely a means to secure the interests of foreign bondholders and investors, nothing more. Our current government is engaging in the process of selling off state assets that should be used long term to create much needed funds for the state, and even after they're sold off, we'll follow Greece and default anyway. Eircom for a example used to be a highly profitable and well run state asset. Now it's 4 Billion in debt.

    Austerity does not work. It buries us deeper. That should be obvious from the fact that neither Greece or ourselves have not been capable of meeting the targets set by the IMF/ECB.
    Lockstep wrote: »
    He's still squeezing the same paycheque out of the system as any Fianna Fáiler, he just uses it differently and acts as if it's something awesome.

    Joe supports lower salaries for TDs and higher taxes for people on those salaries, the salary that he's on, and Fianna Fail squeezed a lot more than their paychecks out of the state.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,384 ✭✭✭Duffy the Vampire Slayer


    Lockstep wrote: »
    Any proof for your claim that it goes to a community project?
    Had a couple of lads in the ULA tell me it goes to the party itself (including a ULA supporter in this thread)

    It appears I was a little misinformed on my own party :o Some of it goes to the party but anything beyond the legal limit for political donations goes to various causes and campaign which ULA TD's support. Theres some information on Joe Higgins spending here.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 278 ✭✭ICE HOUSE


    Joe Higgins is a legend.
    End of.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,646 ✭✭✭washman3


    for those who are deluded by years of FF/GREENS and eurocrats brainwashing you can get educated on the truth from karmababy's posts, i enjoy reading them. then again,irish people who speak the truth are usually lampooned by the vested interests. well done KB.:):)


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,031 ✭✭✭Lockstep


    KarmaBaby wrote: »
    In my short time in the SP I know for a fact that Joe gave a sum to the Laura Ashley Strikers in Dublin that were made redundant from a highly profitable company. They told me this themselves. I'm sure there are plenty of other examples but Joe is not the kind to go around boasting about it.

    If you want proof go ahead and contact the party and I'm sure someone will give you a detailed answer.
    So basically you've no proof and want me to source your arguments.
    Where's the fun in that?

    KarmaBaby wrote: »
    You're complete full of it. It is ILLEGAL to give the rest of his wage to the party.
    Indeed but he's donating the rest to projects and campaigns. All of this is taxpayer money. I see little enough difference between this and my local FF councillor donating money to the local rugby club.

    The cost to the taxpayer for every filthy free market capitalist TD is €93k. The exact same cost for Joe Higgins. He just chooses to use his differently.


    KarmaBaby wrote: »
    Public service would not be "free" as you put it. They would be funded by a proper progressive tax system which this country has never had. The current system of pandering to rich elites and hoping the wealth trickles down to the bottom is failing. Not just Ireland, but the entire Western political landscape needs a dramatic shift to the left in order to recover. Redistribution of wealth is the only way that can happen. In Ireland we have the widest gap in the world between the wealth of the top 10% of earners and the other 90%, apart from the U.S.
    Free at point of entry. You knew this is what I was referring to but feel free to split hairs.
    Out of interest, what would the top rate of tax be in your 'proper progressive taxation system'?
    As it stands, the entire wealth of the Irish 2008 Sunday Times Rich List would cover government spending for 5 months (ignoring the fact that the government taxes these people already)
    Then what?
    KarmaBaby wrote: »
    It's hard to fathom why you think the EU/IMF loan is beneficial to us. It is purely a means to secure the interests of foreign bondholders and investors, nothing more. Our current government is engaging in the process of selling off state assets that should be used long term to create much needed funds for the state, and even after they're sold off, we'll follow Greece and default anyway. Eircom for a example used to be a highly profitable and well run state asset. Now it's 4 Billion in debt.
    Mainly as the alternative is even worse. As it stands, every year we're taking in €18bn a less in revenue than we spend and are forced to borrow the difference. If we default on this debt, where on earth are we going to get the money to pay for all the demands that the ULA have (international bond markets aren't going to lend to us if we default)?

    KarmaBaby wrote: »
    Austerity does not work. It buries us deeper. That should be obvious from the fact that neither Greece or ourselves have not been capable of meeting the targets set by the IMF/ECB.
    Oh yes, I'm no fan of austerity. But neither am I a fan of the statist model as advocated by the ULA. If they were willing to accept existing public sector cuts and raising the higher tax band rate to fund job funds, then yeah, I could see it working. But dramatically raising government expenditure while rapidly cutting down on a business environment is foolish.


    KarmaBaby wrote: »
    Joe supports lower salaries for TDs and higher taxes for people on those salaries, the salary that he's on, and Fianna Fail squeezed a lot more than their paychecks out of the state.
    Indeed but as it stands, he's happy to take the same pay as them to fund his pet projects.
    I have no problem with TDs earning a good wage if they do a decent job but to act as if he is somehow commendable for using his pay differently is beyond me.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,769 ✭✭✭nuac


    His effort at wit sometimes get tedious.

    Enda Kenny's retort last week to the " Appalled from Castlebar" crack of "Confused from Dingle" took the wind from out of his sails.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,942 ✭✭✭20Cent


    Higgins is a legend, whatever anyone thinks about his politics he is genuine and believes in what he says and does. This is more than can be said for the two faced money grabbing, do anything for a vote crowd we have in power.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 299 ✭✭KarmaBaby


    Lockstep wrote: »
    So basically you've no proof and want me to source your arguments.

    Ehm. I've just given you the source. Contact the Laura Ashley workers. Why would you expect something like this to be published somewhere? Do you expect Google to meet all your needs? Like I said, ask the SP for the info.
    Lockstep wrote: »
    Indeed but he's donating the rest to projects and campaigns. All of this is taxpayer money. I see little enough difference between this and my local FF councillor donating money to the local rugby club.

    If you think rugby clubs are on a par that with the disadvantaged and unemployed then there's not much point in continueing to debate with you and most FF's don't even do that. Not only do they pocket the entirety of their salary, they make some extremely dubious expenses claims.

    http://thestory.ie/2010/06/02/td-expenses-2005-to-2008/
    Lockstep wrote: »
    The cost to the taxpayer for every filthy free market capitalist TD is €93k. The exact same cost for Joe Higgins. He just chooses to use his differently.

    See above. I guarantee you the ULA are on the bottom rung in terms of expenses claims by TDs which are covered by the taxpayer. Also, the "filthy free market capitalist" wants the average low paid employee to be paid less and taxed more while Joe is campaigning for higher taxes on the wealthy elite.
    Lockstep wrote: »
    Free at point of entry. You knew this is what I was referring to but feel free to split hairs.
    Out of interest, what would the top rate of tax be in your 'proper progressive taxation system'?
    As it stands, the entire wealth of the Irish 2008 Sunday Times Rich List would cover government spending for 5 months (ignoring the fact that the government taxes these people already)
    Then what?

    Actually the top 300 on Ireland's rich list made over €6 Billlion profit in 2010. We could certainly start there. We would also increase corporation Tax. I know you''ll most likely argue that this would result in further unemployment but this is myth pedaled by the right and the Irish Independent that is simply not true, since we still have the second highest unemployment in Europe and the countries with the top rate of corporation tax have the highest employment rate.

    Dell and other companies moved on regardless. The real problem is a lack of investment in indigenous industries. Putting all of our eggs in the foreign investment basket is the equivalent of putting a noose around our own necks and it should be extremely worrying to everyone in this country that we are not self sustainable. Why on earth are our farmers being paid NOT to grow produce? Why is our oil and gas being given away for free?
    Lockstep wrote: »
    Mainly as the alternative is even worse. As it stands, every year we're taking in €18bn a less in revenue than we spend and are forced to borrow the difference. If we default on this debt, where on earth are we going to get the money to pay for all the demands that the ULA have (international bond markets aren't going to lend to us if we default)?

    Where will we get the money? Do you think everyone in the country is broke? Wake up. The top 1% of the country own over 30% of the country's wealth. We'd start there. They created this mess and they can solve it.

    On our current path, ee are going to default anyway. The damage has been done. The global economy as we know is finished. The EU single currency cannot continue in its current form. The mass movements in the muslim world are just the beginning and sooner or later this will spread to the West. It's already beginning to do so.
    Lockstep wrote: »
    Oh yes, I'm no fan of austerity. But neither am I a fan of the statist model as advocated by the ULA. If they were willing to accept existing public sector cuts and raising the higher tax band rate to fund job funds, then yeah, I could see it working. But dramatically raising government expenditure while rapidly cutting down on a business environment is foolish.

    The "cutting down of the business environment" that you speak of is merely about acquiring the profits which are currently skimmed off the top of private business and shoved into the pockets of the owners, or funneled into toxic banks, just like Quinn did with Anglo to the tune of 3 Billion.

    If you take our 3rd level colleges as an example, we have private companies proftieering from students with their ownership of canteens, printing facilities, theaters and sports fields. By taking ownership of these, those profits could go back into the system and ease the burden on both students and the taxpayer.
    Lockstep wrote: »
    Indeed but as it stands, he's happy to take the same pay as them to fund his pet projects.
    I have no problem with TDs earning a good wage if they do a decent job but to act as if he is somehow commendable for using his pay differently is beyond me.

    What are these pet projects you speak of? I bet you can't provide any examples whatsoever. The truth is you have no idea what the money is spent on but your anti-socialist bias is pushing you to find something illegitimate. You won't find anything and unless you provide some evidence of wrong doing by JH in this thread then I suggest you save face by either apologising or disappearing.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,384 ✭✭✭Duffy the Vampire Slayer


    I was just looking at the old leaders questions from 21st of June 2006 when Bertie said this to Joe Higgins- 'Does Deputy Higgins wish to drag us back to a time when people had no salaries and no jobs? He has a failed ideology and the most hopeless policy pursued by any nitwit. He is a failed person who was rejected and whose political philosophy has been rejected. He will not pull people back into the failed old policies he dreamed up in south Kerry when he was a young fellow. Now go away!'

    Followed by Fine Gaels Bernard Durkan saying 'I am surprised the Taoiseach is criticizing his fellow socialist'. :pac:

    Whats particularly noteworthy is that Joe Higgins was criticizing Fianna Fail for allowing a property bubble to develop.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,031 ✭✭✭Lockstep


    KarmaBaby wrote: »
    Ehm. I've just given you the source. Contact the Laura Ashley workers. Why would you expect something like this to be published somewhere? Do you expect Google to meet all your needs? Like I said, ask the SP for the info.
    Nah, if you're going to make a claim then the onus is on you to back it up.
    Trying to fob this off and telling others to source your own claim is either lazy and/or disingenuous.

    KarmaBaby wrote: »
    If you think rugby clubs are on a par that with the disadvantaged and unemployed then there's not much point in continueing to debate with you and most FF's don't even do that. Not only do they pocket the entirety of their salary, they make some extremely dubious expenses claims.
    http://thestory.ie/2010/06/02/td-expenses-2005-to-2008/
    Ah but we're not talking about the expense accounts. We're discussing the basic salary for a TD which is what Higgins is claiming.
    He's giving the money to what he deems to be worthy causes, the net cost to the taxpayer being the same :(

    KarmaBaby wrote: »
    See above. I guarantee you the ULA are on the bottom rung in terms of expenses claims by TDs which are covered by the taxpayer. Also, the "filthy free market capitalist" wants the average low paid employee to be paid less and taxed more while Joe is campaigning for higher taxes on the wealthy elite.
    Once again, we're not talking about expense accounts here. We're talking about TD's salary which Joe is claiming, the same as everyone else, albeit he uses his differently.


    KarmaBaby wrote: »
    Actually the top 300 on Ireland's rich list made over €6 Billlion profit in 2010. We could certainly start there.
    The question is how many would remain in Ireland if we kicked up the tax rates to a level that would be needed to fund government expenditure, especially the rampant expansion that the ULA seek.


    KarmaBaby wrote: »
    We would also increase corporation Tax. I know you''ll most likely argue that this would result in further unemployment but this is myth pedaled by the right and the Irish Independent that is simply not true, since we still have the second highest unemployment in Europe and the countries with the top rate of corporation tax have the highest employment rate.
    You're making some bogus comparisons there: that other countries have high corporation taxes and lower unemployment which ignores the myriad of factors that contribute to employment such as indigenous industry. We're extremely reliant on FDI and are the Number one location for FDI jobs
    Scaring off one of the few sources of employment in Ireland during a recession is pretty silly.
    KarmaBaby wrote: »
    Dell and other companies moved on regardless. The real problem is a lack of investment in indigenous industries. Putting all of our eggs in the foreign investment basket is the equivalent of putting a noose around our own necks and it should be extremely worrying to everyone in this country that we are not self sustainable. Why on earth are our farmers being paid NOT to grow produce? Why is our oil and gas being given away for free?
    Dell are moving on low skilled jobs, whereas the high skilled jobs in Dell remained. As for encouraging indigenous industry, good luck with it. It's something that the government has been trying since independence with poor results.
    Our oil and gas isn't being given away for free. This is an extremely annoying myth. There's a 25-40% tax on our natural resource profits. Link

    KarmaBaby wrote: »
    Where will we get the money? Do you think everyone in the country is broke? Wake up. The top 1% of the country own over 30% of the country's wealth. We'd start there. They created this mess and they can solve it.
    Uh huh, whack up the tax rate exorbitantly and see how many of them remain.
    Do you honestly think that we can make €18bn a year shortfall by taxing the wealthy?
    Picture+2.png
    KarmaBaby wrote: »
    On our current path, ee are going to default anyway. The damage has been done. The global economy as we know is finished. The EU single currency cannot continue in its current form. The mass movements in the muslim world are just the beginning and sooner or later this will spread to the West. It's already beginning to do so.
    Nah, provided we show some cop on and encourage job creation we can still make it (government job creation is an area we'd agree on) to kickstart the multiplier effect. If we default, then we're royally screwed. Once again, where will we get the money to fund both our current system, as well as reversing cuts and bringing in even more government expenditure?

    KarmaBaby wrote: »
    The "cutting down of the business environment" that you speak of is merely about acquiring the profits which are currently skimmed off the top of private business and shoved into the pockets of the owners, or funneled into toxic banks, just like Quinn did with Anglo to the tune of 3 Billion.
    Supporting a pro-business environment doesn't mean supporting toxic bank bailouts. Yes businesses should be taxed and regulated, yes the banks should have been nationalised rather than bailed out, but neither should a businessman be penalised for taking a risk.
    KarmaBaby wrote: »
    If you take our 3rd level colleges as an example, we have private companies proftieering from students with their ownership of canteens, printing facilities, theaters and sports fields. By taking ownership of these those profits could go back into the system and ease the burden on both students and the taxpayer.
    If you support gyms, theatres and canteens being run by the university, I have no problem with this. However, these are run as private entitites. If they were to run as part of the universities, they would provide better services but be less efficient (as the university wouldn't have a profit motive)
    To claim that this would significantly help our economy is fairly pushing it.


    You have yet to show how you would fund the massive expenditure that the ULA propose. Once again, we are taking in far less each year than we spend with borrowing funding the difference. How do you propose we make up the difference beyond vague references to taxing the rich. Please provide some concrete examples of how you would fund the many many billions that would be needed to cover these costs. Sources would also be appreciated.

    KarmaBaby wrote: »
    What are these pet projects you speak of? I bet you can't provide any examples whatsoever. The truth is you have no idea what the money is spent on but your anti-socialist bias is pushing you to find something illegitimate. You won't find anything and unless you provide some evidence of wrong doing by JH in this thread then I suggest you save face by either apologising or disappearing.
    :/
    Duffy already provided a link noting that he gave €27k to campaigns and organisations whereas the remainder of his salary is put at the disposal of the Socialist Party

    I never said that Higgins is committing any wrongdoing, merely that the money is spent on the Socialist Party and other campaigns. You seem to think I'm accusing him of corruption. :/


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 8,601 CMod ✭✭✭✭Sierra Oscar



    Whats particularly noteworthy is that Joe Higgins was criticizing Fianna Fail for allowing a property bubble to develop.

    Indeed, and he also one of the few people in Ireland calling for the banks to be nationalised to allow for above other things easier access to credit.

    Although it became populist to do a U-turn on that line of thinking - he got his wish in the end though!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,646 ✭✭✭washman3


    what joe was telling us in 2004 and again now is not rocket science,its basically to keep it simple and not to bow to large corporations,speculators,eurocrats and corrupt politicans, he does not want us to go back to the high nellie(bicycle) or horse and cart,far from it, joe is a forward thinking honest man. he advocates equality for all. in a nutshell now who would you believe now, joe or bertie.??:D


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 299 ✭✭KarmaBaby


    Lockstep wrote: »
    Nah, if you're going to make a claim then the onus is on you to back it up.
    Trying to fob this off and telling others to source your own claim is either lazy and/or disingenuous.

    Are you saying I lied about JH contributing to the Laura Ashley Workers? What you are arguing here is that EVERYTHING can be sourced on Google. It can't, and only an imbecile would suggest otherwise. If you're not willing to pick up the phone or take the time to wrote an email then I can't help you.
    Lockstep wrote: »
    Ah but we're not talking about the expense accounts. We're discussing the basic salary for a TD which is what Higgins is claiming.
    He's giving the money to what he deems to be worthy causes, the net cost to the taxpayer being the same frown.gif

    Again you're contradicting yourself here. We are NOT just talking about salaries. The "net cost to the taxpayer" is definitely not the same when you take into account the fact that the ULA claim much lower expenses and contribute more to worthy causes than the rest of the Dail

    Lockstep wrote: »
    Once again, we're not talking about expense accounts here. We're talking about TD's salary which Joe is claiming, the same as everyone else, albeit he uses his differently.

    If we're not talking about expense accounts then what the **** are you talking about the "expense to the taxpayer" for? Some TDs claimed over half a million in a 3 year period. In the same period Joe would receive around 100K in wages and claim minimal expenses if any.

    Lockstep wrote: »
    The question is how many would remain in Ireland if we kicked up the tax rates to a level that would be needed to fund government expenditure, especially the rampant expansion that the ULA seek.

    Have you seen our current emigration figure? I would imagine if we stopped putting the burden of the economic crisis on the poorests in society such as students and minimum wage workers and started taxing wealthy elites properly then emigration would no longer be a problem.

    Lockstep wrote: »
    You're making some bogus comparisons there: that other countries have high corporation taxes and lower unemployment which ignores the myriad of factors that contribute to employment such as indigenous industry. We're extremely reliant on FDI and are the Number one location for FDI jobs Scaring off one of the few sources of employment in Ireland during a recession is pretty silly.

    Bingo. See my previous response on investing in "indigenous wealth" as opposed to putting everything into foreign direct investment. How many other countries do you know give away their natural resources for a song like we do?

    Who would we "scare off" and where would they go? Dell went to Poland briefly before moving to Taiwan even with the low corporate tax rate. If you want Irish people to work for <100€ a week to compete with the likes of Singapore, Taiwan and Malaysia then I think you have a problem because they wont, but the current government would love it if we would.

    Lockstep wrote: »
    Dell are moving on low skilled jobs, whereas the high skilled jobs in Dell remained. As for encouraging indigenous industry, good luck with it. It's something that the government has been trying since independence with poor results.

    This is bull. As an IT graduate from Raheen in Limerick myself, with plenty of contacts with former Dell employees (many now on the dole) I can assure you Dell let go of a hell of a lot of highly qualified people. You can't sack 2,500 staff and expect them all to be uneducated. That is a ludicrous assumption.

    We have a hell of a lot of highly skilled, educated and experienced people currently out of work. If you don't think we can't create indigenous wealth out of that then think harder. Why didn't we create an indigenous IT company from the workforce that Dell left behind?
    Lockstep wrote: »
    Our oil and gas isn't being given away for free. This is an extremely annoying myth. There's a 25-40% tax on our natural resource profits. Link

    Shell write off billions in exploration costs against taxes on existing production. The state has earned **** all from shell thus far. There is also the matter of the indigenous fishing and tourism industry of Mayo being destroyed.

    The oil and gas isn't being given away just yet, but when it is, the ordinary Irish citizen will then buy back Irish oil from a Norwegian company and pay tax on it.

    You're also ignoring the fact that we would be the only country in the world with this over generous arrangement.

    By the way 25-40% tax seems extraordinarily vague. Why is this figure not specific since the difference between 25% and 40% on such an asset is astronomical.
    Lockstep wrote: »
    Uh huh, whack up the tax rate exorbitantly and see how many of them remain.
    Do you honestly think that we can make €18bn a year shortfall by taxing the wealthy?

    One man (Quinn) was responsible for wasting 1/6th of that figure. Are you really naive enough to believe the money isn't out there? The money made in the boom wasn't set on fire. A serious chunk of it can be recovered from senior bondholders whom we continue to protect.
    Picture+2.png
    Lockstep wrote: »
    Nah, provided we show some cop on and encourage job creation we can still make it (government job creation is an area we'd agree on) to kickstart the multiplier effect. If we default, then we're royally screwed. Once again, where will we get the money to fund both our current system, as well as reversing cuts and bringing in even more government expenditure?

    It's not a question of "If" we default, it's a matter of "when". Like I said, how stupid would it be to sell of state assets, then default anyway and end up in a bigger hole.
    Lockstep wrote: »
    Supporting a pro-business environment doesn't mean supporting toxic bank bailouts. Yes businesses should be taxed and regulated, yes the banks should have been nationalised rather than bailed out, but neither should a businessman be penalised for taking a risk.

    Are you joking? Of course it does. Who else were the biggest debtors to Anglo than private business? Businessmen SHOULD be penalised for taking a risk with their employees futures and they should not be given 250K a year walking around money by NAMA!
    Lockstep wrote: »
    If you support gyms, theatres and canteens being run by the university, I have no problem with this. However, these are run as private entitites. If they were to run as part of the universities, they would provide better services but be less efficient (as the university wouldn't have a profit motive) To claim that this would significantly help our economy is fairly pushing it.

    The idea that a profit motive creates efficiency is one of the biggest fallacies the right loves to wave about willy-nilly. If you take our water supply as an example one could say that we didn't provide a very good service when our pipes froze last winter and that would be true. However, if you look at Nothern Ireland's Water supply which is semi state, they had much bigger problems and in Wales where the water supply is fully private the problem even was worse again.
    Lockstep wrote: »
    You have yet to show how you would fund the massive expenditure that the ULA propose. Once again, we are taking in far less each year than we spend with borrowing funding the difference. How do you propose we make up the difference beyond vague references to taxing the rich. Please provide some concrete examples of how you would fund the many many billions that would be needed to cover these costs. Sources would also be appreciated.

    I have showed you many examples. If you don't accept that there is considerable elitist wealth to be taxed while we continue to protect senior bondholders and big business then there is no point in debating further.
    Lockstep wrote: »
    :/
    Duffy already provided a link noting that he gave €27k to campaigns and organisations whereas the remainder of his salary is put at the disposal of the Socialist Party

    Like I said the SP can only take 6K of Joe's salary. If you want to know where the rest goes ask them.
    Lockstep wrote: »
    I never said that Higgins is committing any wrongdoing/

    I beg to differ. Look 3 inches above this reply and tell me you're not implying "wrongdoing" with regard to his wage.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,949 ✭✭✭The Waltzing Consumer


    washman3 wrote: »
    joe higgins is a true gentleman and a legend in irish politcs, take a look back over the records of the house and you will see that he has been proved right in everything he said,joe was one of the few people that saw this mess coming but was advised by the "great" bertie to go commit suicide. millions were spent by FF so that Joe would be lampooned and lose his seat during the boom and allow corruption and cronyism to flourish unchallenged. how anyone could describe Joe as a class clown is beyond me,he got 96,000 votes in the Euro election, great to see him back.:)

    Firstly, he is not a true gentleman, and anyone living in his constituency would know that. He is a nice guy, but he is as crafty as any other politician and does not deserve the "gentleman" tag.

    Secondly, he has not been proved right in anything. He has probably made thousands of claims in his socialist lifetime, he might have gotten one or two right, well done there. You know what he has never made? ONE JOB, NOT ONE. As long as he can defend the scroungers and call people comrade, that's his job done.

    Thirdly, FF did not spend millions so Joe would lose his seat. It was Leo Varadkar who got his seat not a FFer. You really don't live in this constituency do you?

    Lastly, yeah people voted for him in the Euro elections, and what does the ungrateful man do? He quits as soon as the elections came up leaving our area with some unelected person to take his spot. Actions of a class clown indeed!


  • Advertisement
Advertisement