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
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/

Would you consider voting a Majority Fianna fail for the next government?

1…1314161819…25

Comments

  • #452
    MilanPan!c
    Site Banned Posts: 4,415 ✭✭✭MilanPan!c


    Cody Pomeray wrote: »
    Of course not, that wasn't the point. I was talking about registered Ltds.


    link?

    It's been posted multiple times in this thread already, but here you go, again:


    https://peopleforeconomicjustice.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/door-notice.jpg


  • #453
    Cody Pomeray
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,648 ✭✭✭Cody Pomeray


    Anynama141 wrote: »
    Well, to be exact, he said:

    It turns out that, amongst other complications, depositors in the banks are considered to be on the same tier of security as senior bond holders and burning the senior bond holders but protecting depositors could have opened the government to legal challenges.
    That's funny because as part of the first Cyprus deal, pari passu securities were not to be touched but deposits were.

    In fact, DGS deposits also rank pari passu with non insured deposits, yet the Cypriot government is proceeding to levy one and not the other without legal difficulty.

    Being able to make the law is often a useful tool thing when you're a Government, it stops the law from being a brick wall.


  • #454
    Mr Tibbs
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 420 ✭✭Mr Tibbs


    Now if I got an invite to the tent at the Galway Races and someone stuffed a brown envelope in me back pocket full of lolly
    you never know I just might give them me number one. It might be smelly though.


  • #455
    MilanPan!c
    Site Banned Posts: 4,415 ✭✭✭MilanPan!c


    Here's the guy Ben is pushing:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3lf3tABI7s


  • #456
    Anynama141
    Closed Accounts Posts: 964 ✭✭✭Anynama141


    Cody Pomeray wrote: »
    That's funny because as part of the first Cyprus deal, pari passu securities were not to be touched but deposits were.
    They were not touching the bondholders at all? I'm surprised by that.
    Cody Pomeray wrote: »
    In fact, DGS deposits also rank pari passu with non insured deposits, yet the Cypriot government is proceeding to levy one and not the other without legal difficulty.

    Being able to make the law is often a useful tool thing when you're a Government, it stops the law from being a brick wall.
    Well, I wouldn't say 'without legal difficulty'...
    Church of Cyprus wins bailout lawsuit
    By Michael Stothard in Nicosia and Roman Olearchyk in Kiev

    The ink was barely dry on the bailout of the Cypriot banking system last week when the legal challenges began rushing in, with local lawyers backed by influential business figures already winning some small victories.
    The first serious challenge was launched by the Church of Cyprus, which has big business interests on the island, questioning the legality of shareholders in the Bank of Cyprus having their equity stakes taken as part of the bailout mechanism.

    “The expropriation of property is contrary to the constitution of Cyprus and the European Declaration of Human Rights,” said Kypros Chrysostomides, partner at local tax firm Dr K Chrysostomides.
    The Church, which owns equity in the Bank of Cyprus, successfully petitioned the government through the courts to reverse the decision last Thursday. As a result, all shareholders in the Bank of Cyprus would be issued new Class D shares that had few voting rights, the government said on Sunday.
    Late on Friday, a group of local lawyers from Stelios Americanos said they had won an interim injunction to block the haircut on the deposits of its plaintiffs in the Bank of Cyprus, which is the very heart of the bailout mechanism.
    Officials said that this would probably be resolved without it going to court, as the finance ministry and the central bank have the right to appear before the Supreme Court to try to lift the injunctions.
    But if not, it could take months or even years to resolve, further complicating the bailout process. “Usually the courts will take more than a year to decide such an issue,” said Alecos Markides, the former Cypriot attorney-general and member of parliament and now a partner at Markides, Markides & Co, the local law firm.


  • Advertisement
  • #457
    Cody Pomeray
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,648 ✭✭✭Cody Pomeray


    Anynama141 wrote: »
    They were not touching the bondholders at all? I'm surprised by that.

    Well, I wouldn't say 'without legal difficulty'...
    They are getting around the expropriation argument via the use of levy. A levy i a legitimate tool of Governance and it would be hard to see how it could be de-legitimized. If the Cypriot deal falls apart on foot of a legal challenge, I think everyone would be amazed. And yet they showed disregard for pari passu covenants.


  • #458
    MilanPan!c
    Site Banned Posts: 4,415 ✭✭✭MilanPan!c


    Cody Pomeray wrote: »
    They are getting around the expropriation argument via the use of levy. A levy i a legitimate tool of Governance and it would be hard to see how it could be de-legitimized. If the Cypriot deal falls apart on foot of a legal challenge, I think everyone would be amazed. And yet they showed disregard for pari passu covenants.

    Hey Cody, did you see I posted that link for you?


  • #459
    Anynama141
    Closed Accounts Posts: 964 ✭✭✭Anynama141


    Cody Pomeray wrote: »
    They are getting around the expropriation argument via the use of levy. A levy i a legitimate tool of Governance and it would be hard to see how it could be de-legitimized. If the Cypriot deal falls apart on foot of a legal challenge, I think everyone would be amazed. And yet they showed disregard for pari passu covenants.
    It could be a case of death by a thousand cuts - if the early legal challenges see any success (and it seems they may have), then every man and his dog will be off to the courts. The legal quagmire could go on for years.

    I think you are right though, they will probably find some way around it - but I'm willing to bet it won't be very popular.


  • #460
    Cody Pomeray
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,648 ✭✭✭Cody Pomeray


    MilanPan!c wrote: »
    Hey Cody, did you see I posted that link for you?
    I saw the link but I assume you're making a supposition about his use of the term trademark. I'm not nitpicking but when you said "He claims that simply putting a trademark symbol after his name protected him from paying his mortgage." I thought you had an actual link to that claim. Maybe you do, but that wasn't it and a google search didn't turn it up either.
    Anynama141 wrote: »
    It could be a case of death by a thousand cuts - if the early legal challenges see any success (and it seems they may have), then every man and his dog will be off to the courts. The legal quagmire could go on for years.
    I don't doubt that there may be endless legal challenges, what I'm doubting is any substantive change to the emergency measures.

    I have no idea how the Cypriot constitution works, but others do, and I'm just reasoning that if it were a valid threat, you'd expect a little more concern. So far, everyone seems pretty content, bar the depositors.


  • #461
    MilanPan!c
    Site Banned Posts: 4,415 ✭✭✭MilanPan!c


    Cody Pomeray wrote: »
    I saw the link but I assume you're making a supposition about his use of the term trademark. I'm not nitpicking but when you said "He claims that simply putting a trademark symbol after his name protected him from paying his mortgage." I thought you had an actual link to that claim. Maybe you do, but that wasn't it and a google search didn't turn it up either.

    You should probably stop making assumptions about me Cody.

    First you assumed he was using a ltd. and that I was just mistaken, now this.

    Tell us, do you think that document he posted is legally meaningful? Would it stand up in a court of law?


  • Advertisement
  • #462
    Mike 1972
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,018 ✭✭✭Mike 1972


    Poll question doesnt even make any sense. How can any individual voter choose a "majority" government over a minority/coalition/hung parliament ?


  • #463
    darkhorse
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,274 ✭✭✭darkhorse


    Anynama141 wrote: »
    He's a liar so. Black and white.

    What did he lie about?


  • #464
    darkhorse
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,274 ✭✭✭darkhorse


    Anynama141 wrote: »
    Because they weren't used to dealing with Freeman bullshít, but they are getting used to it now - its profile has been raised. If it's not horsecrap, why did it NOT work the next week when the bailiffs came back?

    Coz maybe there was no-one there when the bailiffs came back.


  • #465
    MilanPan!c
    Site Banned Posts: 4,415 ✭✭✭MilanPan!c


    darkhorse wrote: »
    What did he lie about?

    Hey, you came crawling back.

    He claimed he wasn't connect, even though he pushes a freeman con man, to this day, on his website, as well as hosting a freeman "stay off my property" sign. As well as being the poster boy for their cause on all their social media sites.

    There's much much more.

    But before I tell you more, why not answer that other question from earlier. The one that had you running off scared.


  • #466
    MilanPan!c
    Site Banned Posts: 4,415 ✭✭✭MilanPan!c


    darkhorse wrote: »
    Coz maybe there was no-one there when the bailiffs came back.

    Nope.

    All the people he helped have lost their property. Because freeman crap is just a load of bs.


  • #467
    darkhorse
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,274 ✭✭✭darkhorse


    Phoebas wrote: »
    That is not the norm. Defaulting would be a major decision with major and undoable consequences. They should be offering the people a choice before making this major change if they are to be true to their core principal.

    Once you default, you cannot just undo that action if the legal advise determines the bailout to be legal.

    Look, suspending payments pending an investigation into the legality of something would not be defaulting, it would be posponing or deferring, ya know, like you can defer payment of property tax for example.
    Anyway, when you are the government, you can do anything that is deemed to be for the good of the country, or not. Now, having said that, and just glance at your post above and tell me, did either goverment give the people a choice before they made any of the major changes which affected the population of the country?


  • #468
    darkhorse
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,274 ✭✭✭darkhorse


    Anynama141 wrote: »
    Darkhorse, he's right: if you don't keep the repayment schedule, you have defaulted. This is the case even if you pay in full at a later date.

    I can't agree with ya.


  • #469
    darkhorse
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,274 ✭✭✭darkhorse


    Phoebas wrote: »
    I don't have a particular problem with putting the question to a vote, once the full set of consequences of each option is spelled out in advance, but that's not the system we have now, so it isn't at all surprising that we didn't get a referendum on the question.

    Agreed. But the point of a democratic system is, that as soon as Lenihan received this well talked about but never seen threatening letter from Trichet, he, or a representative of the then government, should have immediately had said letter published, and immediately call a referendum, and allow the people to decide. Instead, he, along with his government, decided that the people of Ireland were not even worthy of this information, even though they knew that the same people were going to have these debts foisted upon them, their children and possibly their grandchildren. We all know at this stage, that they did'nt even put it to a Dail vote, the rest, as they say is history.


  • #470
    MilanPan!c
    Site Banned Posts: 4,415 ✭✭✭MilanPan!c


    darkhorse wrote: »
    Agreed. But the point of a democratic system is, that as soon as Lenihan received this well talked about but never seen threatening letter from Trichet, he, or a representative of the then government, should have immediately had said letter published, and immediately call a referendum, and allow the people to decide. Instead, he, along with his government, decided that the people of Ireland were not even worthy of this information, even though they knew that the same people were going to have these debts foisted upon them, their children and possibly their grandchildren. We all know at this stage, that they did'nt even put it to a Dail vote, the rest, as they say is history.

    That's is quite obviously not, "the point of a democratic system".


  • #471
    Anynama141
    Closed Accounts Posts: 964 ✭✭✭Anynama141


    darkhorse wrote: »
    I can't agree with ya.
    It doesn't matter what you think - what matters is what the rest of the world thinks. The rest of the world, and the law, agrees with me.

    Look it up.

    Actually, I'll save you the bother.
    In finance, default occurs when a debtor has not met his or her legal obligations according to the debt contract, e.g. has not made a scheduled payment, or has violated a loan covenant (condition) of the debt contract. A default is the failure to pay back a loan.[1] Default may occur if the debtor is either unwilling or unable to pay his or her debt. This can occur with all debt obligations including bonds, mortgages, loans, and promissory notes.


  • Advertisement
  • #472
    darkhorse
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,274 ✭✭✭darkhorse


    MilanPan!c wrote: »
    I thinks it's more likely that Ben and his buddy Marcus will be in front of a judge within three years.

    What would he be in front of a judge for? No, don't tell me. You predict that he will commit a crime.


  • #473
    shedweller
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,023 ✭✭✭shedweller


    To answer the op. A big fat NO!!!!!
    Not ever. Does that clear things up?


  • #474
    Anynama141
    Closed Accounts Posts: 964 ✭✭✭Anynama141


    darkhorse wrote: »
    Coz maybe there was no-one there when the bailiffs came back.
    Every time? Or is it more likely that - as is fact - the bailiffs were told that Gilroy was spouting sh!t at them and to go back and carry out the repossession?


  • #475
    darkhorse
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,274 ✭✭✭darkhorse


    MilanPan!c wrote: »
    And hey, what about the money given to Ireland that's already been spent?

    Are we not going to try and repay that?

    But, are we not already paying it. It would'nt be right to start cutting the elite at this stage, ya know, people like politicians, ex politicians, nama developers, county managers people in charge of Quango's etc, lets keep them in the lifestyle to which they have become accustomed. Oh Yeah, we are certainly repaying that. Did I leave out the odd banker that may be on €10,000 or more per week.


  • #476
    darkhorse
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,274 ✭✭✭darkhorse


    MilanPan!c wrote: »
    During the boom EVERYONE was greedy.


    Just to clarify, where was the boom?


  • #477
    darkhorse
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,274 ✭✭✭darkhorse


    Anynama141 wrote: »
    Fianna Failure, chosen by the people, sold themselves on policies that bankrupted us. They did listen to what people wanted: people wanted it ALL, and they wanted it NOW.

    Labour/FG are actually pursuing policies to dig us out of the Fianna Failure hole*, and they are getting murdered for it by the press and public. What does that tell you about the wisdom of our voters? :confused:

    *although the fact is that we are still spending waaaaay too much, and need more spending cuts/tax rises

    Yeah, also, in hindsight, EK/EG should have burned the bondholders, I thought for a minute that one of that actually wanted to do just that. But no, we won't have defaulter stamped on our foreheads, under any circumstances.


  • #478
    darkhorse
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,274 ✭✭✭darkhorse


    Srianadh wrote: »
    Point of information: It was Leo Varadkar that said "not another red cent" and he was talking about the banks at the time. (ie: no additional funding over what was already pumped in at that stage - he lied)

    Another point of information. When Gilmore said Labours way or Frankfurts way
    ??????


  • #479
    darkhorse
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,274 ✭✭✭darkhorse


    MilanPan!c wrote: »
    That's is quite obviously not, "the point of a democratic system".

    So, is it to keep the citizens of the country in the dark on issues that will effect them?


  • #480
    Anynama141
    Closed Accounts Posts: 964 ✭✭✭Anynama141


    darkhorse wrote: »
    So, is it to keep the citizens of the country in the dark on issues that will effect them?
    Why is Gilroy trying to keep the Irish people in the dark about his Sovereign Citizen/Freeman beliefs?


  • Advertisement
  • #481
    darkhorse
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,274 ✭✭✭darkhorse


    MilanPan!c wrote: »
    Hey, you came crawling back.

    He claimed he wasn't connect, even though he pushes a freeman con man, to this day, on his website, as well as hosting a freeman "stay off my property" sign. As well as being the poster boy for their cause on all their social media sites.

    There's much much more.

    But before I tell you more, why not answer that other question from earlier. The one that had you running off scared.

    Consider yourself lucky that I'm engaging with you at all, Coz I hate fcuking Psychics.
    Oh, and I crawl nowhere.


Advertisement