Does Anti-austeriry really annoy anyone else?

NuckingFacker

There is no "austerity" in Ireland. There's dumb cuts to crucial services and the show goes on for all the wasteful expenditure. Our Political culture has no interest in "austerity". It has huge pensions to fund, quangos to pay, junkets to be taking and nutty, nutty salaries and bonuses. "Austerity" is like tax, it's for the little people and largely, it is complete bullsh1t and lip-service to real cuts in expenditure.

hatrickpatrick

Does standard of living necessarily have to be relevant to this debate? Even if I was a millionaire I'd still want to see injustice stamped out, including crooked former officials getting money from my tax payments and bankers who are well known to have committed varying levels of fraud being allowed to walk free with no repercussions.

Once again: why do I have to be suffering before I can have an objection to cronyism? This isn't just about the economy, it's about political culture - I don't want to live in a society where your social status determines whether you go to prison for breaking the law or whether you actually lose your own money instead of having others bail you out if you willingly chose to make stupid investments.

For the last time, what has MY standard of living got to do with that? I couldn't care less to be honest, I still want to see people who milked this country dry and left its economy in lives actually be held ACCOUTABLE to the people of Ireland for it. I would wan this whether I was living on a hundred or a hundred thousand euro a week. My standard of living does not have an affect on the principle of wanting to live in a society in which people who manipulate the system for personal gain are punished for it.

TheBigLebowski

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Does standard of living necessarily have to be relevant to this debate? Even if I was a millionaire I'd still want to see injustice stamped out, including crooked former officials getting money from my tax payments and bankers who are well known to have committed varying levels of fraud being allowed to walk free with no repercussions.

Once again: why do I have to be suffering before I can have an objection to cronyism? This isn't just about the economy, it's about political culture - I don't want to live in a society where your social status determines whether you go to prison for breaking the law or whether you actually lose your own money instead of having others bail you out if you willingly chose to make stupid investments.

For the last time, what has MY standard of living got to do with that? I couldn't care less to be honest, I still want to see people who milked this country dry and left its economy in lives actually be held ACCOUTABLE to the people of Ireland for it. I would wan this whether I was living on a hundred or a hundred thousand euro a week. My standard of living does not have an affect on the principle of wanting to live in a society in which people who manipulate the system for personal gain are punished for it.

Even if you could fix all of that, we would still need austerity. Personally I don't think it's a bad thing once in a while. You could even say it appears to be necessary once in a while.

Nobody is saying we should let the corrupt operators off. We can do that while also being austere.

Davy r

Fr_Dougal wrote: »

Generally you'll find that threads like this are started by people who are still in school and are living at home protected from the real world by mammy and daddy.

I agree.

hatrickpatrick

TheBigLebowski wrote: »

Even if you could fix all of that, we would still need austerity. Personally I don't think it's a bad thing once in a while. You could even say it appears to be necessary once in a while.

Nobody is saying we should let the corrupt operators off. We can do that while also being austere.

Seems to me that tons of people are saying that. Most "Anti Austerity" protests are really anti injustice if you actually go to them. People aren't just protesting about austerity in general, people are protesting about the fact that so many high ups aren't being asked to make the same level of sacrifice that everyone else is, WHILE at the same time bearing more responsibility for what has happened than the ordinary citizen - and people like the OP here are bashing them instead of joining them.

Unless Bertie & co have been milked dry I don't want a cent taken out of my pocket. They made the mess, they should pay first, and pay more.
Before you say I'm just as responsible as everyone else, I didn't have a vote in 2007 and if I had, I sure as f*ck wouldn't have voted for FF. This mess is not my fault, and while I accept that everyone must contribute to fix it, is it unreasonable to demand that the people with their hands on the tiller should be the first to lose their luxury before innocent parties have to?

If I'm paying extra tax, I want it to be for things which are important for the country. Bertie's holidays and Sean FitzPatrick's Christmas Presents do not qualify.
Once again, the only thing which surprises me is that so few people are angry enough about this to take to the streets. Money is being taken out of your pocket and thrown away paying complete w@nkers who bear a huge amount of responsibility for the fact that it has to be taken out of your pocket in the first place, and that doesn't piss you off enough to bring you out onto the streets to demand justice?

Davy r

El Spearo wrote: »

I'm still in college but I feel the hardship as much as anyone. 25 yo with extremely limited employability looking possibly at leaving the country. So I won't sit back and be told im oblivious because I'm a student.

If the country is that banjaxed why don't you all bugger off to another country and leave the ones who actually respect the government here. I'd give anything to stay here. Things aren't perfect but why the bloody hell are we complaining.

I bet half the people who complain spend a fortune on smoking while updating their anti austerity acts on facebook with top of range phones.

Your talking ****e mate. Do you still live with mammy

Anynama141

Davy r wrote: »

Your talking ****e mate. Do you still live with mammy

Perhaps he does - it might make financial sense. Some people make that kind of decision, rather than moving out and moaning about not getting enough from the tax payer to live in sufficient luxury.

Davy r

Anynama141 wrote: »

Perhaps he does - it might make financial sense. Some people make that kind of decision, rather than moving out and moaning about not getting enough from the tax payer to live in sufficient luxury.

C est la vie

Three Seasons

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Seems to me that tons of people are saying that. Most "Anti Austerity" protests are really anti injustice if you actually go to them. People aren't just protesting about austerity in general, people are protesting about the fact that so many high ups aren't being asked to make the same level of sacrifice that everyone else is, WHILE at the same time bearing more responsibility for what has happened than the ordinary citizen - and people like the OP here are bashing them instead of joining them.

Unless Bertie & co have been milked dry I don't want a cent taken out of my pocket. They made the mess, they should pay first, and pay more.
Before you say I'm just as responsible as everyone else, I didn't have a vote in 2007 and if I had, I sure as f*ck wouldn't have voted for FF. This mess is not my fault, and while I accept that everyone must contribute to fix it, is it unreasonable to demand that the people with their hands on the tiller should be the first to lose their luxury before innocent parties have to?

If I'm paying extra tax, I want it to be for things which are important for the country. Bertie's holidays and Sean FitzPatrick's Christmas Presents do not qualify.
Once again, the only thing which surprises me is that so few people are angry enough about this to take to the streets. Money is being taken out of your pocket and thrown away paying complete w@nkers who bear a huge amount of responsibility for the fact that it has to be taken out of your pocket in the first place, and that doesn't piss you off enough to bring you out onto the streets to demand justice?

Anyone who broke the law should be punished accordingly. Has anyone disagreed with that? Has justice been done to all who broke the law? No.

But regardless we need to plug the gap in exchequer.

No matter how much we milk Bertie and the likes dry it won't make much difference. We still need to plug the gap.

TINA1984

1999 - what you marching for? globalisation is a great laugh, what possibly could go wrong with the liberalisation of the free market in Europe? I hate these types, probably crusty students and commies...

2002 - What you marching for? we have to rerun the Nice treaty vote, we're important and need to be listened to by our EU partners, we are their equal afterall. I hate these types, probably crusty students and commies...

2003 - what you marching for? The Yanks wouldn't dare break international law usign Shannon airport. We're their friends shur! I hate these types, probably crusty students and commies...

2007 - what you marching for? FF/PDs have brought us nothing but prosperity? so what if Bertie is a bad egg? I hate these types, probably crusty students and commies...

Early 2008 -what you marching for? The property market will land softly relax, bubble? what bubble? I hate these types, probably crusty students and commies...

Late 2008 - what you marching for? We needed the ECB to come to our rescue to save our banks and keep our ATMs stocked! I hate these types, probably crusty students and commies...

2009 - what you marching for? We need multiple hairshirt budgets and the IMF, the saintly Brian Lenihan is on it! I hate these types, probably crusty students and commies...

2011 - what you marching for? Vote FG and everything will be ok....

Frank Black

TINA1984 wrote: »

1999 - what you marching for? globalisation is a great laugh, what possibly could go wrong with the liberalisation of the free market in Europe? I hate these types, probably crusty students and commies...

2002 - What you marching for? we have to rerun the Nice treaty vote, we're important and need to be listened to by our EU partners, we are their equal afterall. I hate these types, probably crusty students and commies...

2003 - what you marching for? The Yanks wouldn't dare break international law usign Shannon airport. We're their friends shur! I hate these types, probably crusty students and commies...

2007 - what you marching for? FF/PDs have brought us nothing but prosperity? so what if Bertie is a bad egg? I hate these types, probably crusty students and commies...

Early 2008 -what you marching for? The property market will land softly relax, bubble? what bubble? I hate these types, probably crusty students and commies...

Late 2008 - what you marching for? We needed the ECB to come to our rescue to save our banks and keep our ATMs stocked! I hate these types, probably crusty students and commies...

2009 - what you marching for? We need multiple hairshirt budgets and the IMF, the saintly Brian Lenihan is on it! I hate these types, probably crusty students and commies...

2011 - what you marching for? Vote FG and everything will be ok....

So, if I'm following your argument correctly - Marching makes **** all difference?

Anynama141

TINA1984 wrote: »

2007 - what you marching for? FF/PDs have brought us nothing but prosperity? so what if Bertie is a bad egg? I hate these types, probably crusty students and commies...

There were marches protesting against Fianna Failure at the height of the bubble? I missed those ones.

TINA1984

Frank Black wrote: »

So, if I'm following your argument correctly - Marching makes **** all difference?

Just pointing out how the hurlers on the ditch have reacted over the years when people have marched.

TINA1984

Anynama141 wrote: »

There were marches protesting against Fianna Failure at the height of the bubble? I missed those ones.

I attended a protest against FF when they held their conference down in Kerry sometime in the early naughties. Where were you?

Anynama141

TINA1984 wrote: »

I attended a protest against FF when they held their conference down in Kerry sometime in the early naughties. Where were you?

In the early noughties? Oh, you said 2007.

Can you recall what the protest was about?

TINA1984

Anynama141 wrote: »

In the early noughties? Oh, you said 2007.

Can you recall what the protest was about?

Is it your contention that there were no protests against FF in 2007?

golfball37

I don't have a problem with Austerity, we need to balance the books What I do have a problem with is the ruling classes peeing down my back and telling me its raining.

I can take austerity, just not from them

Anynama141

TINA1984 wrote: »

Is it your contention that there were no protests against FF in 2007?

I've no idea - but you said that there was. I was hoping for details of this protest/s that you remember.

TINA1984

Anynama141 wrote: »

I've no idea - but you said that there was. I was hoping for details of this protest/s that you remember.

Well for a start there is/was the annual protest at FF Ard Dheis', one of which was in 2007.

Then there was the multiple protests on issues of the day - health, education - which then usually morphed into anti-gov protests when back bench TD X/Y showed up.

Frank Black

TINA1984 wrote: »

Well for a start there is/was the annual protest at FF Ard Dheis', one of which was in 2007.

Then there was the multiple protests on issues of the day - health, education - which then usually morphed into anti-gov protests when back bench TD X/Y showed up.

Hmmm - I'd guess that none of these protests on health, education or whatever back in the day were suggesting that the Goverenment cut back on the amounts they were pumping into the public service, which is ultimately why we have such a problem balancing our books now.
I'd imagine most people at these marches were looking for more funding to be put in place.

So basically these marchers were trying to make things even worse than they are now.

Anynama141

Frank Black wrote: »

So basically these marchers were trying to make things even worse than they are now.

:pac:

TINA1984

Frank Black wrote: »

Hmmm - I'd guess that none of these protests on health, education or whatever back in the day were suggesting that the Goverenment cut back on the amounts they were pumping into the public service, which is ultimately why we have such a problem balancing our books now.
I'd imagine most people at these marches were looking for more funding to be put in place.

Still butt hurt about the public service taking your pension eh Frankie?

Anynama141

TINA1984 wrote: »

Still butt hurt about the public service taking your pension eh Frankie?

I'm sure he's delighted by your interest in his butt, but it doesn't change the fact that he sort of has a point.

Frank Black

TINA1984 wrote: »

Still butt hurt about the public service taking your pension eh Frankie?

Oh dear - sounds like someone just ran out of argument.

TINA1984

Not a bit of it. I just remember Franky making a bit of a tit of himself in previous threads, most memorably him frothing at the mouth about his pension being cut -public servants fault apparently - and his 'special' views on funding of railway services.

Tell us again how freight by rail will never work in Ireland frankie?

Frank Black

TINA1984 wrote: »

Not a bit of it. I just remember Franky making a bit of a tit of himself in previous threads, most memorably him frothing at the mouth about his pension being cut -public servants fault apparently - and his 'special' views on funding of railway services.

Tell us again how freight by rail will never work in Ireland frankie?

Sure I don't need to tell you - the figures speak for themselves.

Sounds like someones trying to open up new fronts on a lost argument.


People should have some dignity and admit when they're talking ****e.

TINA1984

Frank Black wrote: »

Sure I don't need to tell you - the figures speak for themselves.

Sounds like someones trying to open up new fronts on a lost argument.


People should have some dignity and admit when they're talking ****e.

In full agreement, so don't bother trying to paint people who were anti-FF when you were supporting them as the problem. there's a good lad;)

hatrickpatrick

Three Seasons wrote: »

Anyone who broke the law should be punished accordingly. Has anyone disagreed with that? Has justice been done to all who broke the law? No.

Until it has, or we are given an iron clad guarantee that it will be, I'm not happy about giving the government any more of my money.

But regardless we need to plug the gap in exchequer.

I agree.

No matter how much we milk Bertie and the likes dry it won't make much difference. We still need to plug the gap.

Morally and psychologically it makes a difference. It won't feel like we're being asked to pay for either incompetence or full on fraud and corruption while those who committed it pay no price.

It would make a massive difference in fact. The pill would be far less bitter if we weren't seeing the financial elite, golden circle etc walking around in new cars as if nothing had happened. They shouldn't the first ones up against the wall; only AFTER they have been fully and publicly dealt with should anyone else be asked to chip in for their mess.

As I say, it's not as simple as simply being anti budget. I'd drop most objections I have (although I still feel that a complete redesign of the entire system of currency would be a better idea) if Seanie, Bertie & co were penalised.

Hell, if any of the Anglo people are found to have committed fraud I would absolutely advocate the Criminal Assets Bureau seizing their assets and selling them to pay off our bailout loans. Just as they would have done to their customers if their customers had messed up.

Frank Black

TINA1984 wrote: »

In full agreement, so don't bother trying to paint people who were anti-FF when you were supporting them as the problem. there's a good lad;)

The people screaming for more money to be pumped into the public sector and social services in the mid-2000's were a significant part of the problem.

Most of them are just too dumb to realise it.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22213219
After two Harvard economists admitted a faulty spreadsheet calculation caused errors in a study used by numerous politicians to support their austerity policies, writer Colm O'Regan pays tribute to the power of Microsoft Excel.

They called it a "coding error". This made it sound like they were sequestered in a bunker surrounded by black screens on which a continuous parade of figures flickered past.

Instead it was just someone using Excel on a laptop who was highlighting cells for a formula and released his index finger from the left-clicky button of his mouse too soon.

The debate has raged - well raged is a strong word, perhaps sulked? - since Monday about the significance of the calculation mistake made by Reinhart and Rogoff in their 2010 paper for the American Economic Review, Growth in a Time of Debt.

Did the conclusions about debt, growth and need for painful correction send the politicians of the world to the special cabinet to dust off the scourges?

That debate is meaningless because the last five years of economic prediction have told us one thing: No one knows anything any more and the people who say they know something know even less.

The main point to take from this debacle is the truly awesome power of Excel. Not its processing ability, just its ubiquity.

Never in the field of economics has so much faith been placed by so many in the results of a spreadsheet produced by so few!