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

The Fiscal Treaty Yes or No

  • 27-04-2012 3:43pm
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 219 ✭✭


    Who is voting for and against the Fiscal Treaty. Its time for the debate


«134567

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,077 ✭✭✭Finnbar01


    I'm voting NO.

    I want the government to get serious with our spending problem.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 739 ✭✭✭bradknowell


    Who is voting for and against the Fiscal Treaty. Its time for the debate

    What are you voting yourself?


    I think I'll do what I normally do when it comes voting time.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 207 ✭✭Kracken


    i'll be voting No unless they can provide accurate and comprehensive information in laymans terms that explain why I should vote Yes.

    The current government is doing what BIFFO did with the Lisbon Treaty and treating us as with ignorance.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,781 ✭✭✭clappyhappy


    I hate to admit this but I have no idea what its about, I need to do some research into it. Will keep an open mind on it.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,745 ✭✭✭StupidLikeAFox


    I have no idea what it is about yet, but I hope people are voting on the actual treaty and not just voting no as a two fingers to the government. This crisis started long before they were around and the consequences of a yes or no vote will be here long after they are gone, so in a sense the treaty is bigger than them


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,990 ✭✭✭longshanks


    It seems to me that all the politicians etc. who are pushing for the yes vote are more representative of business, banks and Europe than ordinary people. Those who claim to represent ordinary people, seem to be pushing for the no vote.
    Mixed in with that are the same head nodding sheep who want us to vote yes to everything, and the usual shitehawks who want us to vote no to everything.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,101 ✭✭✭MitchKoobski


    I'll be voting yes.



  • Moderators, Education Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 24,056 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sully


    Finnbar01 wrote: »
    I'm voting NO.

    I want the government to get serious with our spending problem.

    Your voting no for the wrong reasons so. The government are, according to the troika anyway, on track with our spending problems. Its more the employment issue which is on many minds at the moment.

    We are being bailed out because we over spent. We didn't have money to meet ends meet. The EU/IMF gave us money on certain conditions. The idea of this treaty is to go someway of preventing such a disaster (nothing will be fully proofed, as with anything, but it goes a way of addressing it) and guarantee us access to bailout funds if we need them in the future.

    By rejecting the treaty, we put Ireland at a big risk and don't exactly send a strong signal across Europe which doesn't help our financial situation either.
    Kracken wrote: »
    i'll be voting No unless they can provide accurate and comprehensive information in laymans terms that explain why I should vote Yes.

    The current government is doing what BIFFO did with the Lisbon Treaty and treating us as with ignorance.

    The campaign has yet to get started properly on either side. Its due to kick start very soon and a copy of the treaty is being sent to every home by the government. The referendum committee will be making a report shortly and their website will go live shortly also. The government has their own website on the treaty already launched ahead of the official campaign start stabilitytreaty.ie.

    Sinn Fein launched their campaign the other day. They had a leaflet selectively quoting economists, who they labelled as experts. Those economists were negative on parts of the treaty but said in conclusion and in balance the treaty was better for Ireland. Sinn Fein excluded the positive part of the quote and just quoted the negative aspects, causing a lot of red faces within Sinn Fein as people called them out on it by the economists, government politicians and people who spotted it.

    Its early days yet to run campaigns at full strength. Strange - I know!
    longshanks wrote: »
    It seems to me that all the politicians etc. who are pushing for the yes vote are more representative of business, banks and Europe than ordinary people. Those who claim to represent ordinary people, seem to be pushing for the no vote.
    Mixed in with that are the same head nodding sheep who want us to vote yes to everything, and the usual shitehawks who want us to vote no to everything.

    Well, those who claim to represent the ordinary people told us during every single EU referendum it was bad for us and we are screwed. Sinn Fein included, who have objected to every treaty including Ireland joining the EU and the formation of the Euro. Were we ****ed? Clearly not. The EU have been very beneficial for Ireland over the years and we are much more modern society, much more developed and a society with more fairer and balanced laws. We have moved forward thanks to Europe who have been giving us big money to improve the country on items such as water, sewage, roads, transport etc.

    The same groups who claim to "represent the ordinary people" are far from that. They claim the same expenses and get the same wage as every TD. Some even claim very high expenses, yet claim to represent the ordinary people.

    We have had a mixed reaction by unions - some saying No, some saying Yes, some saying they wont say either way. Plenty of economists, experts as Sinn Fein called them, are in favour of the treaty. This includes the current Central Bank governor, who was an economist before, who is in favour of the treaty.

    Today, Standard & Poor's the rating agency have said they will not be downgrading Ireland's credit rating but it will be downgraded in the event of a No vote.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,081 ✭✭✭ziedth


    I don't care how short sighted and childish it is..........screw the government I'm voting no.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,622 ✭✭✭blue note


    Kracken wrote: »
    i'll be voting No unless they can provide accurate and comprehensive information in laymans terms that explain why I should vote Yes.

    The current government is doing what BIFFO did with the Lisbon Treaty and treating us as with ignorance.

    Why no? Why not vote yes if you don't understand it? Or why not abstain?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,077 ✭✭✭Finnbar01


    Sully wrote: »
    Your voting no for the wrong reasons so. The government are, according to the troika anyway, on track with our spending problems. Its more the employment issue which is on many minds at the moment.

    We are being bailed out because we over spent. We didn't have money to meet ends meet. The EU/IMF gave us money on certain conditions. The idea of this treaty is to go someway of preventing such a disaster (nothing will be fully proofed, as with anything, but it goes a way of addressing it) and guarantee us access to bailout funds if we need them in the future.

    By rejecting the treaty, we put Ireland at a big risk and don't exactly send a strong signal across Europe which doesn't help our financial situation either.

    I'm not voting No for the wrong reasons. The last thing we need to do is continue to borrow more money. What we really need to do is default and drop out of the eurozone.

    We're not being bailed out either. That money we get has to be paid back with interest.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,622 ✭✭✭blue note


    Finnbar01 wrote: »
    Sully wrote: »
    Your voting no for the wrong reasons so. The government are, according to the troika anyway, on track with our spending problems. Its more the employment issue which is on many minds at the moment.

    We are being bailed out because we over spent. We didn't have money to meet ends meet. The EU/IMF gave us money on certain conditions. The idea of this treaty is to go someway of preventing such a disaster (nothing will be fully proofed, as with anything, but it goes a way of addressing it) and guarantee us access to bailout funds if we need them in the future.

    By rejecting the treaty, we put Ireland at a big risk and don't exactly send a strong signal across Europe which doesn't help our financial situation either.

    I'm not voting No for the wrong reasons. The last thing we need to do is continue to borrow more money. What we really need to do is default and drop out of the eurozone.

    We're not being bailed out either. That money we get has to be paid back with interest.

    So if they don't loan us money, should we just cut public spending to make up the difference? All public sector salaries, pensions, hospital supplies? But seriously, what should we do about the deficit if we cannot borrow?


  • Moderators, Education Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 24,056 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sully


    Finnbar01 wrote: »
    Sully wrote: »
    Your voting no for the wrong reasons so. The government are, according to the troika anyway, on track with our spending problems. Its more the employment issue which is on many minds at the moment.

    We are being bailed out because we over spent. We didn't have money to meet ends meet. The EU/IMF gave us money on certain conditions. The idea of this treaty is to go someway of preventing such a disaster (nothing will be fully proofed, as with anything, but it goes a way of addressing it) and guarantee us access to bailout funds if we need them in the future.

    By rejecting the treaty, we put Ireland at a big risk and don't exactly send a strong signal across Europe which doesn't help our financial situation either.

    I'm not voting No for the wrong reasons. The last thing we need to do is continue to borrow more money. What we really need to do is default and drop out of the eurozone.

    We're not being bailed out either. That money we get has to be paid back with interest.

    If we don't borrow the money, how else do we pay for all the services and pay the bills that need paying? We need the money and it would have been a disaster without it. Even Sinn Fein know this.

    A bailout can be with or without interest.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 124 ✭✭Tom Cruise


    We are all ****ed no matter what we do so lets piss the **** off in power and say NO


  • Moderators, Education Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 24,056 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sully


    blue note wrote: »
    Finnbar01 wrote: »
    Sully wrote: »
    Your voting no for the wrong reasons so. The government are, according to the troika anyway, on track with our spending problems. Its more the employment issue which is on many minds at the moment.

    We are being bailed out because we over spent. We didn't have money to meet ends meet. The EU/IMF gave us money on certain conditions. The idea of this treaty is to go someway of preventing such a disaster (nothing will be fully proofed, as with anything, but it goes a way of addressing it) and guarantee us access to bailout funds if we need them in the future.

    By rejecting the treaty, we put Ireland at a big risk and don't exactly send a strong signal across Europe which doesn't help our financial situation either.

    I'm not voting No for the wrong reasons. The last thing we need to do is continue to borrow more money. What we really need to do is default and drop out of the eurozone.

    We're not being bailed out either. That money we get has to be paid back with interest.

    So if they don't loan us money, should we just cut public spending to make up the difference? All public sector salaries, pensions, hospital supplies? But seriously, what should we do about the deficit if we cannot borrow?

    We also can't do that because we don't have money to pay much for very long, so its better to get fully back on track (I expect a mini loan at the very end) before going it alone.

    Plus rejecting the money and the treaty wont help investment into the country as we will be seen as unstable and they wont care if we have the two fingers to Europe or not because their focus is on their business.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 182 ✭✭twistyj


    We're damned if we do.
    We're damed if we dont.


  • Moderators, Education Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 24,056 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sully


    twistyj wrote: »
    We're damned if we do.
    We're damed if we dont.

    How are we damned if we do? Could it not be to our benefit to have another body keep watch on our budgets to try prevent a mess? We will only have austerity if its abused, much like without it?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,319 ✭✭✭Trick of the Tail


    The referendum is effectively about whether we allow foreigners to have more non-elected control of our country, or not.

    The reason there IS a referendum is that the constitution prohibits a government handing control of the country to a foreign body without the agreement of the populace.

    Every time Ireland hands even more control over to foreigners, I feel a little sad, since Ireland fought long and hard for it's independence. Now we're giving that independence away, little by little.

    Ireland being in the EU has not been a universal Good Thing. If we weren't in the Euro we could have devalued our currency a couple of years ago, and that would have helped our economy hugely.

    If there wasn't the cushion of European funds, our governments might not have been so wasteful and profligate over the years: Imagine, if you had an uncle who you knew would lend you money anytime you needed it, you might not be so careful about your housekeeping.

    Instead of saying we need to keep Uncle happy, we should instead be saying that we need to get our own house in order. That means starting to run the country more efficiently by forcing the civil service into the 21st century, and forcing them to stop being so wasteful.

    Our current government have given up trying to save money by making their end of things more efficient, but instead they're grabbing more and more money off us. Instead of trimming their outgoings, they are trying to increase their incomings.

    However - until the government convince me that its best to hand over more control of the country to people we haven't voted to run our country, I'll be voting no.

    *

    Except. I really don't think there are any politicians in Ireland who are either not corrupt or possess the ability to manage the company that is Ireland Ltd. proficiently. All recent governments, whatever colour, have shown that they are either completely incompetent, or dishonest, or both.

    Maybe foreigners would do it better.

    So what to do?

    :(

    Andy


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 360 ✭✭witless1


    Sully wrote: »
    How are we damned if we do?


    Because Kenny committed us to it and signed something that he didn't have the mandate to under our constitution?

    Because if 12 countries ratify it, it will come into force.


    It makes the vote a bit of a joke really, like Nice, like Lisbon, they will ask us once, get a No, ask us twice and hope for a yes, if they don't get it who says they won't ask a third time. If they get 12 countries on board will they even bother asking us a second time?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 829 ✭✭✭forfuxsake


    If you are on the dole or PS wages you have two options:

    Vote Yes: Your dole payment/PS wage will not be cut immediately. It will however continue to be cut over the next few budgets as this will be necessary to reduce borrowings. At the same time there will be tax rises and higher household charges/water charge etc meaning that you will be effectively much worse off. There is unlikely to be much employment created and unemployment could get worse.

    Vote no: Who knows, could endanger future bailouts meaning the dole/PS wages might fall quite quickly and sharply. Ireland could have to leave the euro. On the plus side, after such a heavy fall then growth could begin meaning that new jobs would be created.

    Private sector will probably mostly vote yes to maintain current wages etc. Many I know will vote NO, hoping to collapse the welfare system and Croke Park.

    I am voting YO


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,319 ✭✭✭Trick of the Tail


    witless1 wrote: »
    Because Kenny committed us to it and signed something that he didn't have the mandate to under our constitution?

    Because if 12 countries ratify it, it will come into force.


    ...but only within the countries that voted for it. Its not an EU-wide thing already, as the UK isn't taking part.

    I hate the way they bandy phrases around, like 'fiscal compact' - that no-one knows the meaning of.

    A compact is a thing ladies keep face powder in.

    What I think it means in this context is that the fiscal 'world' within the EU will be 'compacted' as the unelected European Commission (or actually a subset of) will have more control of all partaking countries' economies.

    Now, the EU is totally and institutionally corrupt. They won't even agree to have their own financial affairs publicly audited - probably because all the waste, inefficiency and corruption would then become all to obvious, and the whole shooting match would collapse.

    So I'm not sure I trust that shower to spend my pocket money for me, let along run a country's economy.


    A.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,809 ✭✭✭Stokolan


    Wont be voting. Shall b e in Spain that week :D


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,521 ✭✭✭jmcc


    When you've a loaded gun pointed at a terrorist's head, you've got to be prepared to pull the trigger without hesitation. The bunch of wimps and failed school teachers in government haven't got that killer instinct. That's why Merkozy and the scum in Brussels walk all over them. Want us to be be good little Europeans? Well guess what - I'm Irish. And the polite response, better than the harsh Anglo-Saxon one that they deserve, is this: No!

    Regards...jmcc


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,020 ✭✭✭BlaasForRafa


    I'm amazed that no-one has mentioned debt reduction yet. This bs that the government is trying to peddle regarding the promissory notes and kicking the can till 2024 is ridiculous. Tell the troika that unless there is a SERIOUS amount of debt reduction that there is a very good chance there will be a no vote.

    If this referendum is passed we'll still be under the cloud of a massive amount of debt and while that is there the government will not be able to put forward a meaningful funded economic stimulus strategy. We'll be stuck in austerity for the foreseeable future.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 566 ✭✭✭millie35


    Out of respect for our ancestors who gave their lives for a free ireland, it has to be a no vote.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,395 ✭✭✭danjo-xx


    It's all kind of a damp squib for the ordinary punter because it only needs a few countries to vote it in. Also if France gets a new leader the whole thing may be dumped or renegotiated.

    Brendan Hoooooowlin:D said that we have to accept this treaty to be part of Europe and
    we don't want to be just part of europe but we want to help solve all it's problems.

    oh holy jesus..... the Abba song Money Money Money springs to mind,

    "IT'S A RICH MAN'S WORLD"



    Apart from the above I refuse to do business with anyone that holds a gun to my head.

    I'll be voting no


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 219 ✭✭insight_man


    What are you voting yourself?


    I think I'll do what I normally do when it comes voting time.

    I'm voting no, but I'd like a good honest debate about it so people can make an informed decision.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 219 ✭✭insight_man


    I hate to admit this but I have no idea what its about, I need to do some research into it. Will keep an open mind on it.

    Fair comment. Hopefully this debate will help you decide


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 219 ✭✭insight_man


    longshanks wrote: »
    It seems to me that all the politicians etc. who are pushing for the yes vote are more representative of business, banks and Europe than ordinary people. Those who claim to represent ordinary people, seem to be pushing for the no vote.
    Mixed in with that are the same head nodding sheep who want us to vote yes to everything, and the usual shitehawks who want us to vote no to everything.

    True, so you will have to look consider both arguments and see which best suits you before you vote. This thread will get a lot of comments on it before the vote


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 219 ✭✭insight_man


    I'll be voting yes.


    Very funny


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 219 ✭✭insight_man


    Sully wrote: »
    Your voting no for the wrong reasons so. The government are, according to the troika anyway, on track with our spending problems. Its more the employment issue which is on many minds at the moment.

    We are being bailed out because we over spent. We didn't have money to meet ends meet. The EU/IMF gave us money on certain conditions. The idea of this treaty is to go someway of preventing such a disaster (nothing will be fully proofed, as with anything, but it goes a way of addressing it) and guarantee us access to bailout funds if we need them in the future.

    By rejecting the treaty, we put Ireland at a big risk and don't exactly send a strong signal across Europe which doesn't help our financial situation either.



    The campaign has yet to get started properly on either side. Its due to kick start very soon and a copy of the treaty is being sent to every home by the government. The referendum committee will be making a report shortly and their website will go live shortly also. The government has their own website on the treaty already launched ahead of the official campaign start stabilitytreaty.ie.

    Sinn Fein launched their campaign the other day. They had a leaflet selectively quoting economists, who they labelled as experts. Those economists were negative on parts of the treaty but said in conclusion and in balance the treaty was better for Ireland. Sinn Fein excluded the positive part of the quote and just quoted the negative aspects, causing a lot of red faces within Sinn Fein as people called them out on it by the economists, government politicians and people who spotted it.

    Its early days yet to run campaigns at full strength. Strange - I know!



    Well, those who claim to represent the ordinary people told us during every single EU referendum it was bad for us and we are screwed. Sinn Fein included, who have objected to every treaty including Ireland joining the EU and the formation of the Euro. Were we ****ed? Clearly not. The EU have been very beneficial for Ireland over the years and we are much more modern society, much more developed and a society with more fairer and balanced laws. We have moved forward thanks to Europe who have been giving us big money to improve the country on items such as water, sewage, roads, transport etc.

    The same groups who claim to "represent the ordinary people" are far from that. They claim the same expenses and get the same wage as every TD. Some even claim very high expenses, yet claim to represent the ordinary people.

    We have had a mixed reaction by unions - some saying No, some saying Yes, some saying they wont say either way. Plenty of economists, experts as Sinn Fein called them, are in favour of the treaty. This includes the current Central Bank governor, who was an economist before, who is in favour of the treaty.

    Today, Standard & Poor's the rating agency have said they will not be downgrading Ireland's credit rating but it will be downgraded in the event of a No vote.

    Be fair in the comment, the Central Bank governor is also on the board of the ECB. Hardly impartial now is he. Just so other users know the score!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 219 ✭✭insight_man


    blue note wrote: »
    Why no? Why not vote yes if you don't understand it? Or why not abstain?

    The rule of thumb has always been - if you don't know, vote no. You wouldn't sign a contract without knowing what it all meant.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 219 ✭✭insight_man


    blue note wrote: »
    So if they don't loan us money, should we just cut public spending to make up the difference? All public sector salaries, pensions, hospital supplies? But seriously, what should we do about the deficit if we cannot borrow?

    As a nation you must borrow, this includes Germany, France etc. Its not like a household budget where you try to match spending with income. Every household and every country operate broadly the same. The deficit must be tackled in two ways, investment in the domestic econmy ie creating jobs etc and cutting back on unnessary spending.

    A balanced budget for an economy is poor economics and counter to what John Maynard Keynes, one of the world leading ecoomists of 20th century said..you cannot cut your way out of a recession, you grow your way out, while watching national spending. The opposite is cutting back endlessly, more jobs losses, higher amounts going out on social spending, less money for people to spend, then the domestic economy contracts further leading to more cuts etc...you get the picture I'm sure. Refloating the economy is the rational, economically sound theory to firstly, stablise the economy, then gradually grow the domestic economy thus reducing the debt burden to sustainable levels.

    This can be a bit 'heavy' I know but its the basis of most if not all modern economics


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 219 ✭✭insight_man


    Sully wrote: »
    We also can't do that because we don't have money to pay much for very long, so its better to get fully back on track (I expect a mini loan at the very end) before going it alone.

    Plus rejecting the money and the treaty wont help investment into the country as we will be seen as unstable and they wont care if we have the two fingers to Europe or not because their focus is on their business.

    Getting more money is not so difficult. The current programme is in place until late 2013 and under it a roll over loan is already guaranteed under the programme. So what does this mean?..it means that we can apply for more funding before then and we must get it, as it is not part of and seperate to the ESM fund. The latest scorecard from the troika yesterday said we have fulfilled all obgliations so far, so market confidence in Ireland is getting better, and the government has repeatidly said that we won't need a second bailout anyway, so its accedemic. Consider also IMF funding, US funding or money from China or a combination of these. All very posssible means of future funding without the straight jacket of the Fiscal compact treaty also known as the Austerity Treaty.

    There are always alternatives...its which alternative is best suited to the needs of the people as a whole versus the needs of a privilaged few, namely bondholders, bankers and even some politicians who see their interests best served by a certain vote result. A very big decision ahead.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 219 ✭✭insight_man


    forfuxsake wrote: »
    If you are on the dole or PS wages you have two options:

    Vote Yes: Your dole payment/PS wage will not be cut immediately. It will however continue to be cut over the next few budgets as this will be necessary to reduce borrowings. At the same time there will be tax rises and higher household charges/water charge etc meaning that you will be effectively much worse off. There is unlikely to be much employment created and unemployment could get worse.

    Vote no: Who knows, could endanger future bailouts meaning the dole/PS wages might fall quite quickly and sharply. Ireland could have to leave the euro. On the plus side, after such a heavy fall then growth could begin meaning that new jobs would be created.

    Private sector will probably mostly vote yes to maintain current wages etc. Many I know will vote NO, hoping to collapse the welfare system and Croke Park.

    I am voting YO

    Good comment and I agree mostly with your analysis. A no vote I think is the better option and like you I'm voting no too. However the collapse might not be as fast as you suggest, even without ESM money other sources are available and most likely at cheaper rates.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 219 ✭✭insight_man


    alinton wrote: »
    ...but only within the countries that voted for it. Its not an EU-wide thing already, as the UK isn't taking part.

    I hate the way they bandy phrases around, like 'fiscal compact' - that no-one knows the meaning of.

    A compact is a thing ladies keep face powder in.

    What I think it means in this context is that the fiscal 'world' within the EU will be 'compacted' as the unelected European Commission (or actually a subset of) will have more control of all partaking countries' economies.

    Now, the EU is totally and institutionally corrupt. They won't even agree to have their own financial affairs publicly audited - probably because all the waste, inefficiency and corruption would then become all to obvious, and the whole shooting match would collapse.

    So I'm not sure I trust that shower to spend my pocket money for me, let along run a country's economy.


    A.

    Brilliant stuff. Short and sweet. It doesen't come much better than that.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 219 ✭✭insight_man


    jmcc wrote: »
    When you've a loaded gun pointed at a terrorist's head, you've got to be prepared to pull the trigger without hesitation. The bunch of wimps and failed school teachers in government haven't got that killer instinct. That's why Merkozy and the scum in Brussels walk all over them. Want us to be be good little Europeans? Well guess what - I'm Irish. And the polite response, better than the harsh Anglo-Saxon one that they deserve, is this: No!

    Regards...jmcc

    You know where you stand. Great stuff and a clear analysis.


  • Moderators, Education Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 24,056 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sully


    alinton wrote: »
    The referendum is effectively about whether we allow foreigners to have more non-elected control of our country, or not.

    The reason there IS a referendum is that the constitution prohibits a government handing control of the country to a foreign body without the agreement of the populace.

    Every time Ireland hands even more control over to foreigners, I feel a little sad, since Ireland fought long and hard for it's independence. Now we're giving that independence away, little by little.

    Ireland being in the EU has not been a universal Good Thing. If we weren't in the Euro we could have devalued our currency a couple of years ago, and that would have helped our economy hugely.

    If there wasn't the cushion of European funds, our governments might not have been so wasteful and profligate over the years: Imagine, if you had an uncle who you knew would lend you money anytime you needed it, you might not be so careful about your housekeeping.

    Instead of saying we need to keep Uncle happy, we should instead be saying that we need to get our own house in order. That means starting to run the country more efficiently by forcing the civil service into the 21st century, and forcing them to stop being so wasteful.

    Our current government have given up trying to save money by making their end of things more efficient, but instead they're grabbing more and more money off us. Instead of trimming their outgoings, they are trying to increase their incomings.

    However - until the government convince me that its best to hand over more control of the country to people we haven't voted to run our country, I'll be voting no.

    *

    Except. I really don't think there are any politicians in Ireland who are either not corrupt or possess the ability to manage the company that is Ireland Ltd. proficiently. All recent governments, whatever colour, have shown that they are either completely incompetent, or dishonest, or both.

    Maybe foreigners would do it better.

    So what to do?

    :(

    Andy

    We have been handing power to "foreigners" since we joined Europe, just like everyone else. You cant operate in a union without abiding by certain rules, regulations and structures. The treaty is all about preventing us spending significantly more than we take in on a given year (60%) - something we have proven throughout history not to be able to manage independently. The reason we are in the mess that has caused so much austerity is because we have over spent so much. This time, we did it again but much worse that we needed a bailout.

    As part of the bailout we were told - "If you want our money, its because your finances are a mess. We are not here to give you money to continue overspending. You must cut down. We suggest X, Y and Z". Fianna Fail, as the previous government, agreed to a full package to get the deal and try refinance the country.

    What's the harm in having a third party which our spending habits, and issue sanctions if we go overboard? Yes it hands more independence away, but is it not for our own good? Whatever about future bailouts if we vote no, there is nothing at all stopping any future government for overspending to such a point where its royally screwed and very harsh (much harsher) austerity needs to be brought in - they go it alone, without the help of Europe.

    The treaty reinforces older treaties with tighter control and more punishment, while giving us access to bailouts if we need it in future. Who knows, maybe in 2015/2016 a mini-top up might be needed to keep the ship steady? We are battling a very tough economic crisis caused by reckless spending - lets not forget that and I think we could do with avoiding it again.
    witless1 wrote: »
    Because Kenny committed us to it and signed something that he didn't have the mandate to under our constitution?

    Because if 12 countries ratify it, it will come into force.


    It makes the vote a bit of a joke really, like Nice, like Lisbon, they will ask us once, get a No, ask us twice and hope for a yes, if they don't get it who says they won't ask a third time. If they get 12 countries on board will they even bother asking us a second time?

    It cant become law unless we say so. They can not force the treaty upon us. Our constitution protects us from that as does the treaty itself which states in Article 14 that each country will ratify the Treaty according to its own requirements.

    Plus, people were asked to vote again because it was very much a case of a campaign which was 80% misinformation, extreme scaremongering (abortion, conscription, etc), a anti-government vote (not caring about the treaty but wanting to reflect the anger this way) and because previous administrations made little or no effort to explain the treaty. Lets be realistic here, its well known we reject referendums not because of the contents of the treaty but because we want to get at the government.
    forfuxsake wrote: »
    If you are on the dole or PS wages you have two options:

    Vote Yes: Your dole payment/PS wage will not be cut immediately. It will however continue to be cut over the next few budgets as this will be necessary to reduce borrowings. At the same time there will be tax rises and higher household charges/water charge etc meaning that you will be effectively much worse off. There is unlikely to be much employment created and unemployment could get worse.

    Vote no: Who knows, could endanger future bailouts meaning the dole/PS wages might fall quite quickly and sharply. Ireland could have to leave the euro. On the plus side, after such a heavy fall then growth could begin meaning that new jobs would be created.

    Private sector will probably mostly vote yes to maintain current wages etc. Many I know will vote NO, hoping to collapse the welfare system and Croke Park.

    I am voting YO

    Your mostly correct for voting Yes, bar employment issue. Employment is creeping up and the government have said they don't expect there to be much rise in that department for a few years yet. Nobody expects a downward spiral but instead a more positive upward growing jobs market which is clearly being indicated at the moment through job announcements like Microsoft, Apple, Google, Facebook, Paypal and so on.

    If you vote No, everything you said will happen if we vote Yes will happen anyway including employment issues. Ireland will be seen as risky, unsteady and after strong improvements they have seriously rocked the boat. Firms will think twice before investing into Ireland, many holding back until the economic crisis facing the country stabilizes. Thus, less jobs and even more austerity by voting No (partly on the assumption we need future bailouts and cant meet our over spending problem but investment still a risk at being rocked by a No vote).
    alinton wrote: »
    ...but only within the countries that voted for it. Its not an EU-wide thing already, as the UK isn't taking part.

    I hate the way they bandy phrases around, like 'fiscal compact' - that no-one knows the meaning of.

    A compact is a thing ladies keep face powder in.

    What I think it means in this context is that the fiscal 'world' within the EU will be 'compacted' as the unelected European Commission (or actually a subset of) will have more control of all partaking countries' economies.

    Now, the EU is totally and institutionally corrupt. They won't even agree to have their own financial affairs publicly audited - probably because all the waste, inefficiency and corruption would then become all to obvious, and the whole shooting match would collapse.

    So I'm not sure I trust that shower to spend my pocket money for me, let along run a country's economy.


    A.

    Jargons are widespread in treaties alright, but this treaty is that bit easier (and smaller) to understand. Also, the governments information website has a mini jargon buster on terms - that and the website, plus a 40 page booklet (which includes the treaty itself) is being sent out to every home next week. That, is one massive improvement on any other administration attempts at communicating with us on a treaty! http://www.stabilitytreaty.ie/index.php/en/media/article/jargon_buster/

    Anyway, re; your concerns about how the EU spend your pocket money / run your economy. Right now, we are meeting all our targets from a partly re-negotiated agreement on how we spend our money in certain areas. There are signs of improvement. This agreement is from the EU / IMF. Seems to be working relatively well at the moment.

    We have let the government run our own economy, and we still will in many ways, in the past. How many times have we gotten into a big mess? This time, its the EU/IMF bailing us out and putting us on the road to recovery. So far so good. There not that bad!

    The EU has given Ireland MASSIVE financial gain since we joined. The money the EU has which is shared out for stuff like roads and infrastructure has done Ireland wonders.

    Finally, lets not forget that the EU as a whole is not corrupt and its a bit unfair to say its corrupt. Fair enough some of the bigger members are not playing nicely and are pushing their weight around a bit, but there largely ignored and they operate on their own Independence and not as the EU.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,077 ✭✭✭Finnbar01


    Sully wrote: »
    Finally, lets not forget that the EU as a whole is not corrupt and its a bit unfair to say its corrupt. Fair enough some of the bigger members are not playing nicely and are pushing their weight around a bit, but there largely ignored and they operate on their own Independence and not as the EU.


    The EU is an undemocratic corrupt entity. The sooner it collapses ( and it will) the better.


    Maybe it's time that this country stand on its own two feet without the begging bowl.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 229 ✭✭Silverado


    There are always alternatives...its which alternative is best suited to the needs of the people as a whole versus the needs of a privilaged few, namely bondholders, bankers and even some politicians who see their interests best served by a certain vote result. A very big decision ahead.

    I find it very resentful when somebody says to me you have to do it or else.... Our Government wants us to vote Yes because we have no alternative in the event of another bail out being necessary. There are other places to go for money, their rates may not be great but maybe we won't need to go there at all.

    Just at present the EU is in a strange state of flux and my feeling is that it is too early to decide on our votes just at the moment. The French election may well result in Sarkozy being ousted and Hollande being elected - and he favours another look at the Fiscal Compact. This could well change the European fiscal goalposts, especially if the Dutch start favouring the anti austerity route ahead of their election in September. Merkel has an election next year and she may well have to change her tune well in advance of it when she sees the EU going against her austerity policy. We could be key players here so our vote is very important.

    The bottom line is that they need to cut us some slack and ease up on the austerity which is plainly not working. We seem to be all getting poorer (including the UK) to suit the Germans who aren't.

    Right now my vote is No until I see more help coming our way first. The plain no to the Promissory Note issue showed us what the ECB think about us - do they think we are fools. We badly need some easing of this austerity policy which is causing trouble everywhere, and that includes the US and the Chinese.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 360 ✭✭witless1


    Sully wrote: »
    Plus, people were asked to vote again because it was very much a case of a campaign which was 80% misinformation, extreme scaremongering (abortion, conscription, etc), a anti-government vote (not caring about the treaty but wanting to reflect the anger this way) and because previous administrations made little or no effort to explain the treaty. Lets be realistic here, its well known we reject referendums not because of the contents of the treaty but because we want to get at the government.

    That attitude (government not yours!) pretty much ****s all over democracy though. We get one chance to vote in a government and have to deal with them until such a point we can vote them out. If people use referendums as a platform then so be it. Regarding misinformation, that is very much true for both yes and no campaigns, we aren't exactly swimming with jobs after the last EU treaty and the yes vote. I don't like the fact that anything voted down can keep coming back to us using one of the above reasons. It's a typical Irish solution though.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 219 ✭✭insight_man


    There is a misconception about Irelands debt to GDP ratio being too high and caused by reckless spending. This is not the case and doesen't stand up to economic analysis. In 2009 Irelands deficit was around €11.4 billion and very managable.

    Yet in 2012 it is around €25 billion. This is a result of bailing out the banks and taking on huge amounts of private debt and turning it into public debt. So the argument that we spend too much on teachers, nurses, social welfare etc and its this that has caused the massive deficit, is a flawed argument.

    It is quite normal for countries to run deficits, I said this in an earlier post. Its how much of a deficit is appropriate and what the borrowed money is used for is the real question.

    You cannot run a country just like a household budget. When there is a downturn in the economy the government must invest in job creation schemes and begin to reinflate the domestic economy. As the domestic economy starts to recover and grow the debt to GDP ratio falls. In other words you get a 'bigger bang for your buck' from investing in the local economy rather than introducing major cuts, which have the effect of deflating the economy.

    The economic principle is you can't cut your way out of a crisis. The 'balanced budget' idea behind the fiscal treaty / permenent austerity treaty is therefore fundamentally flawed and will choke what little life is left in the Irish economy. Essentially it is a one way road to extensive poverty, pain and suffering for millions of people and their families.


  • Moderators, Education Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 24,056 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sully


    Finnbar01 wrote: »
    The EU is an undemocratic corrupt entity. The sooner it collapses ( and it will) the better.


    Maybe it's time that this country stand on its own two feet without the begging bowl.

    Examples? Its not going to collapse anytime soon and if anything this recession will strengthen the union.

    Sure, we could say "G'Luck" to Europe (which, may I add, this isn't what the treaty is about and would result in if we said No) and thank them for all the money and investment over the years, not just the bailout (plus everything else that Ireland has massively benefited from).

    Expect Ireland to go down a very slippery slope, get a complete lack of investment (due to Ireland being seen as unstable, which it will be. Investment Ireland is calling out for at the moment and its only slowly increasing) causing unemployment to rise, and result in more austerity (the funny thing about the No vote is that if we went away from the European / IMF bailout fund, it means basically going to a loanshark which much higher rates, not just partly higher. Clearly, this will cause austerity as we try make up the shortfall and payback the loan asap).

    Ireland can not afford to stand on its own to feet at the moment, nor can it afford to go to someone else with a begging bowl and it certainly has to go to someone with a begging bowl! Its hilarious people think the alternative to the EU/IMF bailout would be better for Ireland and that the austerity they hate so much would be easier if we went elsewhere and paid a much higher price.

    Silverado wrote: »
    I find it very resentful when somebody says to me you have to do it or else.... Our Government wants us to vote Yes because we have no alternative in the event of another bail out being necessary. There are other places to go for money, their rates may not be great but maybe we won't need to go there at all.

    Its not just about the bailout money though, which in itself is clearly a big reason. Its about implementing measures to prevent overspending which would result in a bailout (from whoever) being needed and another round of heavy austerity for Ireland.

    Its also about giving a clear signal that Ireland is a stable country, working to pay its debts, working to get back to a healthy financial status and ready for investment. Already, one of the rating agencies on our credit has said if we vote No our credit rating will drop. When our credit rating drops, its harder to get money and the interest rate increases.
    Just at present the EU is in a strange state of flux and my feeling is that it is too early to decide on our votes just at the moment. The French election may well result in Sarkozy being ousted and Hollande being elected - and he favours another look at the Fiscal Compact. This could well change the European fiscal goalposts, especially if the Dutch start favouring the anti austerity route ahead of their election in September. Merkel has an election next year and she may well have to change her tune well in advance of it when she sees the EU going against her austerity policy. We could be key players here so our vote is very important.

    Its an interesting theory and some of what Hollande has said is right (and backed by Enda Kenny yesterday IIRC). But the changes may only be minor, and there may be work outside of the treaty that he wishes to look at instead. Europe will stand firm and move forward regardless of who is elected, that much is clear. Things may change, for better or for worse, but Ireland has a tiny role in a very big play. We can vote No all we like, but it wont make a difference because everyone else can continue (did it make a difference for England when they pulled out? Europe continued) with or without us.
    The bottom line is that they need to cut us some slack and ease up on the austerity which is plainly not working. We seem to be all getting poorer (including the UK) to suit the Germans who aren't.

    Austerity appears to be working in Ireland. Not everywhere, but its widely accepted that the Irish is much better at managing their finances and that the measures introduced are showing sings that they are working. Every country is different, and austerity will always be there and is the only solution - its how how you go about it and implement it that is key.
    Right now my vote is No until I see more help coming our way first. The plain no to the Promissory Note issue showed us what the ECB think about us - do they think we are fools. We badly need some easing of this austerity policy which is causing trouble everywhere, and that includes the US and the Chinese.

    The current government has successively, despite being told we couldn't, renegotiated parts of the EU/IMF deal which has seen us save us €10billion through interest rates. The promissory notes, which we were told had to be paid in March and we would never be able to get any deal on it, has been deferred and made into a long term bond. Small steps, big help.

    Of course, the ECB and others are going to say "No". They did the same about deferring the promissory notes - but we got it. I do believe that the promissory notes wont be scraped, but will be addressed in part to ease the burden even further on Ireland but its a long term goal and wont be achieved in the short term.

    We can say no to the treaty all we like. What does Europe care? They can continue without us in that regard, just like the UK.


  • Moderators, Education Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 24,056 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sully


    witless1 wrote: »
    That attitude (government not yours!) pretty much ****s all over democracy though. We get one chance to vote in a government and have to deal with them until such a point we can vote them out. If people use referendums as a platform then so be it. Regarding misinformation, that is very much true for both yes and no campaigns, we aren't exactly swimming with jobs after the last EU treaty and the yes vote. I don't like the fact that anything voted down can keep coming back to us using one of the above reasons. It's a typical Irish solution though.

    It might suck and be ****ty, but what do you expect the government to do? Take the rejection on the chin and move away from Europe despite knowing that it was a rejection not on the treaty but on the government. They go back again, the people vote Yes in higher numbers. If the Irish didn't want the treaty, they would keep saying No.

    You cant use referendums as a platform to stick the fingers at the government. That's what protests are for and that's what local and general elections are for. Not a referendum.

    As for swimming in jobs - that's not exactly what the Lisbon Yes reason was about. The point behind that was if we vote No, we are pushing further away from Europe and creating a very unsteady ground causing a hesitation in investment and job creation. Thus, by voting Yes, we keep steady and continue the flow of investment - which has happened.
    There is a misconception about Irelands debt to GDP ratio being too high and caused by reckless spending. This is not the case and doesen't stand up to economic analysis. In 2009 Irelands deficit was around €11.4 billion and very managable.

    Yet in 2012 it is around €25 billion. This is a result of bailing out the banks and taking on huge amounts of private debt and turning it into public debt. So the argument that we spend too much on teachers, nurses, social welfare etc and its this that has caused the massive deficit, is a flawed argument.

    It is quite normal for countries to run deficits, I said this in an earlier post. Its how much of a deficit is appropriate and what the borrowed money is used for is the real question.

    You cannot run a country just like a household budget. When there is a downturn in the economy the government must invest in job creation schemes and begin to reinflate the domestic economy. As the domestic economy starts to recover and grow the debt to GDP ratio falls. In other words you get a 'bigger bang for your buck' from investing in the local economy rather than introducing major cuts, which have the effect of deflating the economy.

    The economic principle is you can't cut your way out of a crisis. The 'balanced budget' idea behind the fiscal treaty / permenent austerity treaty is therefore fundamentally flawed and will choke what little life is left in the Irish economy. Essentially it is a one way road to extensive poverty, pain and suffering for millions of people and their families.

    The bank bailout was a different administration who got punished for that (and other stuff). But either way, the treaty puts in protection to avoid the overspending and gives us access to future funding if we need it.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,077 ✭✭✭Finnbar01


    Sully wrote: »
    Examples? Its not going to collapse anytime soon and if anything this recession will strengthen the union.

    Examples? Here's one. The EU hasn't audited its own accounts for years because of corruption.
    Expect Ireland to go down a very slippery slope, get a complete lack of investment (due to Ireland being seen as unstable, which it will be. Investment Ireland is calling out for at the moment and its only slowly increasing) causing unemployment to rise, and result in more austerity (the funny thing about the No vote is that if we went away from the European / IMF bailout fund, it means basically going to a loanshark which much higher rates, not just partly higher. Clearly, this will cause austerity as we try make up the shortfall and payback the loan asap).

    No we wouldn't have to go to any loan sharks, all we need to do is balance our books and accept deep cuts.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 229 ✭✭Silverado


    Sully wrote: »
    Austerity appears to be working in Ireland.

    You do appear to have a very closeted view of the Irish situation. Do you get out much?

    All I can see are closed up shops, more immigration and rising dole queues. Even the Americans realised that austerity just wasn't working and decided to print more dollars. We need to do the same and make money available for business expansion. Have you tried to get an overdraft or business loan recently? No, funny that, you know what the answer will be.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 219 ✭✭insight_man


    Just another piece of information to put to everyone. You will have heard the phrase 'its just like taking out an insurance policy'..sounds reasonable. Insurance policies costs money...right.

    The cost to Ireland of approving the treaty is €11.1 BILLION. Yes €11.1 BILLION. This is our contribution to the ESM fund in order to establish it. This is in addition to all the interest payments that will have to be made.

    Now Ireland doesen't have the money to pay this...so what happens?

    Ireland borrows the money at high interest rates from the Germans, French banks etc and then we pay vast amounts back in repayments. So a country that is essentially broke, if you believe that wisdom, gets into even deeper and deeper debt, while trying to get out of debt. The very same goes for Greece, Portugal and Italy and fairly soon Spain too.

    However the Germans and the French and Dutch, because of their strong credit rating, simply has to put up guarantees but no hard cash, so it doesent cost them anything, but their banks and bond holders make billions of euro from the countries they are supposedly helping out like good neighbours.

    A very very expensive insurance policy. The saying goes 'Beware of wolves in sheeps clothing'.


  • Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 28,536 Mod ✭✭✭✭Cabaal


    The rule of thumb has always been - if you don't know, vote no. You wouldn't sign a contract without knowing what it all meant.

    Its your job as a citizen of Ireland to inform yourself though, your failing in your duty if you can't even be arsed to read up on what the vote is actually for.

    Its ironic that people will bitch and moan about the government (regardless of party) not doing this and that with the same people often can't be arsed enough to inform themselves about such matters.


  • Moderators, Education Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 24,056 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sully


    Finnbar01 wrote: »
    Examples? Here's one. The EU hasn't audited its own accounts for years because of corruption.

    I don't think you fully understand how that works, and are being misinformed. The accounts have been audited and is done by the European Court of Auditors. Its that they have not been signed off. They are required to provide a "Declaration of Assurance" which is a certificate to state that the annual budged can be accounted for. The problem is, that even minor errors must result in the certificate not being issued. Scaremongering kicks in declaring that the accounts are riddled with fraud, because the certificate was not given. How the court must audit and present certificates is different to places like the US and it is thought that while fraud may be present, its a very small percentage and that overall its down to just minor errors. (Google the EAC reports to read about this)

    In general, its thought that the standards are very high and that's why the certificates are not given. For example, the 2009 EU Budget, agriculture and regional spending were not been signed off on and remain "materially affected by error." Overall the 2009 accounts were declared "true and fair".
    No we wouldn't have to go to any loan sharks, all we need to do is balance our books and accept deep cuts.

    Again, I don't think you fully understand. Its not like a small business or a house budget where you can just cut down on spending and survive. Bills still need to be paid here, and no amount of cutting and taxation will address the problem with immediate effect.

    Therefore, you need to get money from someone to allow you pay the bills while making cuts and increasing taxes to ease the budget deficit and get things back on track so that you don't need the bailout anymore.

    Also, you seem to think that people will accept harsher austerity. Your not living in reality if you think people will take much harsher austerity!


  • Moderators, Education Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 24,056 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sully


    Silverado wrote: »
    You do appear to have a very closeted view of the Irish situation. Do you get out much?

    Never. I live in a dark room with a computer that has internet access. I get fed through a little gap in the door. Call for help, when you get the chance. Its horrible :(
    All I can see are closed up shops, more immigration and rising dole queues. Even the Americans realised that austerity just wasn't working and decided to print more dollars. We need to do the same and make money available for business expansion. Have you tried to get an overdraft or business loan recently? No, funny that, you know what the answer will be.

    Depends where you look. A lot more jobs are being created by smaller and bigger firms, slowly but surely. Unemployment is dropping slightly also. The outlook reported yesterday by the finance minister wasn't nice, and e doesn't expect a massive improvement but it has been noted gradual improvements (and I don't think many expect a mass exit from the dole queues and mass jobs being created so soon).

    Immigration, is partly down to choice (basing this on a recent survey and knowing a lot of people who are planning on leaving or have already left) and partly down to the economic downfall, but mostly by choice.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement