Socially and Economically Liberal Party in Ireland

AngryLips

Hi all. Firstly, I'm not a follower of this forum so apologies if this is something that has come up before. I was wondering are there any political parties in this country that are both socially liberal and economically liberal? Yes, I get that FG/FF are broadly populist parties but they are more socially conservative and economically liberal if I were to try and make sense of them. Is this a space left unoccupied since the collapse of the PDs (and yes, I know they grew ever more socially conservative towards the end). Also, is the absence of such a party common across Europe or are we some sort of anomaly?

comongethappy

Open to correction, but I don't think there is a libertarian party.

I doubt one would be a success, the myriad of left parties would cry "far right".

As a non-native I'd love to see such a party, but since the PDs rise I cannot see it happening.

I know its a generalisation, however I think Irish people for the most part love a bigger & bigger state, involving itself in more & more of their lives.

hfallada

I think there is certainly a vacuum for one in Dublin and other cities. There is so many wealthy,educated people in Ireland, who cant understand why issues such as a prenup is completely ignored, but necessary in a modern economy. Why same-sex marriage is taking so long to be legalised despite having majority support, why issues such as abortion cant be debated in a rational manner. The fact no a single political party will discuss the fact it takes so long to get a divorce in Ireland, despite a majority of young people seeing nothing wrong with it.

A lot of wealthy people are sick of having some of the highest marginal rates of income tax in Europe, at such a low threshold. But yet get very little in return. How our welfare system creates a system of entitlement and little incentive to work. Most middle class families are sick of having to pay for such a large amount of the population, who dont contribute anything to society.

Most young people believe the role of the state should be greatly limited and significantly reduced. You are more likely to hear a young person giving out about state involvement in something, rather than their lack of involvement in something. You will find very few young people who agree with a nanny state. State involvement in the private sector has been a disaster for the last 15 years. Bank Bailouts, property incentives, building unnecessary infrastructure, etc. has been incredible expensive and has lower the Irish standard of living.

Its very hard to argue, that a large state involvement in the economy is benefit-able. Individuals like Michael Porter, believe businesses are better at solving societal issues, than a government. That is clearly the case in Ireland

Manach

From my reading of various theorists, such as Dahl, there is certain flexibility on the core beliefs of parties. They tend to operate on a referencial scale instead of adhering to absolute values. As well, these values are two fold, one set to appeal to core voters and another set to appeal to a wider base. Hence the shift at election time both to perceived centralise popular positions to maximise votes.

comongethappy

comongethappy wrote: »

Open to correction, but I don't think there is a libertarian party.

Actually..... From another thread (along similar lines)
https://m.facebook.com/LiberalIreland?_rdr

AngryLips

hfallada wrote: »

Most middle class families are sick of having to pay for such a large amount of the population, who dont contribute anything to society.

I think you've touched on an interesting point here because this is where the lines between social and economical become blurred I think. Doesn't part of being socially liberal also involve having a welfare state puts the protection of the marginalised first while at the same time supporting free enterprise?

comongethappy

AngryLips wrote: »

I think you've touched on an interesting point here because this is where the lines between social and economical become blurred I think. Doesn't part of being socially liberal also involve having a welfare state puts the protection of the marginalised first while at the same time supporting free enterprise?

Libertarians would favour the individual taking care of themselves in hard times.

Or at least having a welfare system that reflects the contribution someone makes & ending the situation where non contributors receive the same SW as someone paying a lot of PRSI

road_high

comongethappy wrote: »

Libertarians would favour the individual taking care of themselves in hard times.

Or at least having a welfare system that reflects the contribution someone makes & ending the situation where non contributors receive the same SW as someone paying a lot of PRSI

Unfortunately big government has created learned helplessness among Irish society.. Self reliance gone out the window far as I can see

AngryLips

comongethappy wrote: »

Libertarians would favour the individual taking care of themselves in hard times.

I don't think so. That's more an economically liberal attitude towards social policy but I don't think it's consistent with liberal social policy in the sense that it's in pursuit of the personal and public good.

In an Irish context, I wonder if we'll see a shift to more liberal social policies amongst any of the main parties consistent with their populist tendencies now that the decline of the church is well and truly cemented and as conservative attitudes are disappearing

Manach

AngryLips wrote: »

... the decline of the church is well and truly cemented and as conservative attitudes are disappearing

Sorry mate, but we've not gone away ...

AngryLips

Manach wrote: »

Sorry mate, but we've not gone away ...

Lucinda? Is that you again?

Manach

Ah the cutting wit and the unique sense of reality - so nice to meet you Mr. Gilmore.

Karl Stein

hfallada wrote: »

A lot of wealthy people are sick of having some of the highest marginal rates of income tax in Europe, at such a low threshold. But yet get very little in return.

That's like saying the biggest fish in the lake are not getting any benefit from it which requires total suspension of reason.

You've got to hand it to propaganda makers, they really do have some utterly convinced that those who benefit most from the economy get little or nothing in return... well, the poor dupes who buy into their bullshit, at least.

I could choose to tell my story this way: 'I arrived with $250 in my pocket, and got where I am based entirely on my hard work.' This is true, but it's not the whole truth .... Every day I benefit from schools, hospitals, roads, bridges, parks, and civic amenities that were built and paid for by previous generations who were much less well off than we are today."

-Arul Menezes, Microsoft Millionaire

How our welfare system creates a system of entitlement

Yes, yes let's focus our welfare lens on those at the bottom of the heap to divert attention away from the massive corporate welfare programs.

hmmm

The PDs would have been economically conservative however, i.e. empowering individuals, reducing tax rates, reducing government spending. Economically liberal and socially liberal would be a left-wing party in my book.

Personally I think there is easily 20% of the electorate who would easily fall into the economically conservative/socially liberal category and there certainly is a gap. Unfortunately Ireland is such a small country that we're reliant on the same small group of people to fill those parties, and people like successful businesspeople have no interest in getting involved in frontline politics. If you can make millions in business, you don't want to be listening to whinging from people who want free houses and a monorail in every village.

Karl Stein

hmmm wrote: »

The PDs would have been economically conservative however ... reducing government spending..

Weren't they governing while government spending ballooned?

comongethappy

Karl Stein wrote: »

Weren't they governing while government spending ballooned?

They weren't in charge of the finances.

That was FF policy.

comongethappy

Karl Stein wrote: »

Yes, yes let's focus our welfare lens on those at the bottom of the heap to divert attention away from the massive corporate welfare programs.

A libertarian is opposed to corporate welfare in any form.

Corporate welfare being a distortion of the market.

Karl Stein

comongethappy wrote: »

They weren't in charge of the finances.

That was FF policy.

I see, you're trying to create a 'moat of virtue' around the PD's.

They were in government when that government was spending euros like they were going out of fashion and that included inflating the size of the public sector and its costs.

Karl Stein

comongethappy wrote: »

A libertarian is opposed to corporate welfare in any form.

Yet 'libertarians' tend to whinge and moan about social welfare in favour of corporate welfare.

Corporate welfare being a distortion of the market.

Corporations themselves, inasmuch as they exist at all, are distortions of the fabled 'free market', are opt-in, and are granted privileges by the laws of the state.

comongethappy

Karl Stein wrote: »

Yet 'libertarians' tend to whinge and moan about social welfare in favour of corporate welfare

Example?

I haven't read much corporate welfare endorsement here?

Karl Stein

comongethappy wrote: »

Example?

Nah, I'd rather not trawl the posts of people who step in and out of the 'cloak of libertarian virtue' to see how many times they've whinged about social welfare in favour of corporate welfare, public sector unions in favour of professional associations etcetera, etcetera.

I haven't read much corporate welfare endorsement here?

It's camouflaged but it's there.

comongethappy

Karl Stein wrote: »

It's camouflaged but it's there.

Triffic, thats me convinced!

Anyway, back on message.
Is there anything wrong with a social/economic liberal choice for the Irish electorate?

Karl Stein

comongethappy wrote: »

Triffic, thats me convinced!

Oh that's handy because I couldn't be bothered wallowing through a mind-numbingly tedious back-and-forth with 'libertarians'.

Enjoy.

Manach

comongethappy wrote: »

Anyway, back on message.
Is there anything wrong with a social/economic liberal choice for the Irish electorate?

Well there is the EU. In that even if a Free Market party (a la Miles/Hyeck)would be elected, then it most operate in an environment shaped by Brussels. This is one where there are significant levels of regulation present. On one hand, this could be the price of being part of the European project - but these have overriding authority over Irish law and cannot be pared away.
So the central plank of the lib-platform would be un-emplementable?

riffmongous

Well there are economically liberal parties running for election in Austria at the moment, approaching it from both pro-EU and anti EU positions.

Good loser

road_high wrote: »

Unfortunately big government has created learned helplessness among Irish society.. Self reliance gone out the window far as I can see

Yesterday on Joe Duffy heard this lady who was losing her rented house say that to get a replacement she 'had contacted 20 TDs' and was waiting for some of them to 'get back to her'.

Idbatterim

I could choose to tell my story this way: 'I arrived with $250 in my pocket, and got where I am based entirely on my hard work.' This is true, but it's not the whole truth .... Every day I benefit from schools, hospitals, roads, bridges, parks, and civic amenities that were built and paid for by previous generations who were much less well off than we are today."

-Arul Menezes, Microsoft Millionaire

That's like saying the biggest fish in the lake are not getting any benefit from it which requires total suspension of reason.

You've got to hand it to propaganda makers, they really do have some utterly convinced that those who benefit most from the economy get little or nothing in return... well, the poor dupes who buy into their bull****, at least.

Hang on, I or one of the other 1.9 million workers in the country contribute anything from a few euro a week to a few thousand a week in income taxes, those that dont work or never have, receive everything that has been listed above, in fact the more you earn, you lose a lot of "entitlements" so the more you contribute, the more you get shafted, pretty counter intuitive. My point being, my taxes dont get me anything that somebody not working gets, in fact they rule me out of a host of benefits and perks...

Karl Stein

Idbatterim wrote: »

Hang on, I or one of the other 1.9 million workers in the country contribute anything from a few euro a week to a few thousand a week in income taxes

Ignoring all the taxes, levies and flat charges that affect the less well-off more, and focussing on income taxes alone, is a ridiculously reductive way of considering who pays what, relative to their means, and what they receive in return.

It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion

Adam Smith

those that dont work or never have, receive everything that has been listed above,

How many of these 'never worked' people have businesses, or lifestyles, that receive great benefit from motorways, ports, airports, police, courts, prisons, schools, university graduates etc? The motorways are going to serve a business with a fleet of HGV's far far more than they're going to serve some single parent living in a flat with a child.

in fact the more you earn, you lose a lot of "entitlements" so the more you contribute,

I was quoting someone who cited the wealthy and I suspect you're alluding more to the squeezed middle. I agree that the middle class is being squeezed hard but the above still applies.

My point being, my taxes dont get me anything that somebody not working gets, in fact they rule me out of a host of benefits and perks...

They get you an entire economic 'ecosystem' that's all around you.

I'm conscious that the thread is being dragged off topic and heading in a direction that's not going to be helpful to the debate. If you feel compelled to continue this line of discussion then let's do it by PM.

Idbatterim

I was quoting someone who cited the wealthy and I suspect you're alluding more to the squeezed middle. I agree that the middle class is being squeezed hard but the above still applies.

I was in the main referring to the squeezed middle yes. I just dont agree with the setup here whatsoever, of course there need to be some form of social supports and a safety net, but it just goes too far here IMO... I far prefer the German model, but we are comparing a reckless feckless short term vision country with pretty much the other extreme there, so I wont get my hopes up... I just dont agree here at all with the wealth distribution.

Lou.m

hfallada wrote: »

I think there is certainly a vacuum for one in Dublin and other cities. There is so many wealthy,educated people in Ireland, who cant understand why issues such as a prenup is completely ignored, but necessary in a modern economy. Why same-sex marriage is taking so long to be legalised despite having majority support, why issues such as abortion cant be debated in a rational manner. The fact no a single political party will discuss the fact it takes so long to get a divorce in Ireland, despite a majority of young people seeing nothing wrong with it.

A lot of wealthy people are sick of having some of the highest marginal rates of income tax in Europe, at such a low threshold. But yet get very little in return. How our welfare system creates a system of entitlement and little incentive to work. Most middle class families are sick of having to pay for such a large amount of the population, who dont contribute anything to society.

Most young people believe the role of the state should be greatly limited and significantly reduced. You are more likely to hear a young person giving out about state involvement in something, rather than their lack of involvement in something. You will find very few young people who agree with a nanny state. State involvement in the private sector has been a disaster for the last 15 years. Bank Bailouts, property incentives, building unnecessary infrastructure, etc. has been incredible expensive and has lower the Irish standard of living.

Its very hard to argue, that a large state involvement in the economy is benefit-able. Individuals like Michael Porter, believe businesses are better at solving societal issues, than a government. That is clearly the case in Ireland

The reason is very few people are voting ....voter turnout for FF and FG is low and the people who always vote regardless and can be persuaded to vote of for anyone on an issue are the crazy far right wing nut jobs. They might lose the referendum on their issue but they will continue to vote for the politicians who fought on their side and against those who didn't whereas the majority will not.

They may not be many but they are more reliable than the majority.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

alastair

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Hmm. You don't need to be any sort of economic liberal to object to bailouts or new taxes. The social issues are more mainstay leftist issues, and I doubt you'll find too many young people opposed to 'powerful unions' or 'expansive welfare'. In fact I'd say quite the opposite.

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Wow - these kids are really happening - man! Not like those insular, inhibited, dull, and enslaved left-of-centre kids in their gulags, eh?

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Down with hijabs, taxes and unemployment! Up with dancing in the street to Pharrell Williams and his associated opposition to social support mechanisms!

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

It does beg the question however - why do these street-dancing, Internet-enabled, champions of personal freedoms continue to vote for primarily non-libertarian parties then? It's as if there was some manner of flaw in this particular narrative?

Idbatterim

vote of for anyone on an issue are the crazy far right wing nut jobs.

Who are these crazy far right wing nut jobs voting for? Our idea of of right wing here is hilarious!

Tabnabs

The closest thing to a "successful" party with these credentials in Europe, is the Danish Liberal Alliance party

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_Alliance_%28Denmark%29#Politics

conorhal

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

What you're describing is the narcissism of a sociopathic society that has collapsed all forms of social cohesion, ironically the adherents of such a model fail to realize what easy prey it makes them for the sociopathic corporatists and oligarchs that want to strip them of any kind of rights at all.
The socialists used to say of social cohesion 'five fingers makes a fist', but when you atomize a society and spread the metacarpals and metatarsals of it's corpse across the graveyard of the state, you won't even be able to raise a single finger when you find yourself working a zero hour contract job with too few or two many hours to afford you the care free life you aspire to, because I assure you that lifestyle only exists in conjunctions with peoples ability to stand up for themselves.

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Just as one swallow doesn’t make a summer, one Arab girl dancing to ‘happy’ does not make an Arab spring.
If anything the Arab Spring UNDERLINED how fast the twitter generations revolution could be ground under the heel of an organization like the Muslim Brotherhood that had the organization and people on the ground, everybody that thought a new day had dawned were quickly disabused of the notion. No doubt in Iran, that girl will quickly learn that technology can be used just as effectively to sniff out dissent as it can be to spread it.

AngryLips

Tabnabs wrote: »

The closest thing to a "successful" party with these credentials in Europe, is the Danish Liberal Alliance party

Someone suggested the NEO party in Austria ...but I don't know much about them.

Tabnabs

AngryLips wrote: »

Someone suggested the NEO party in Austria ...but I don't know much about them.

http://europa.neos.eu/ But you'll have to run it through google translate.

Idbatterim

If the appeal of social and economic liberalism is on the rise is Britain, it is almost certainly on the rise in Ireland too, given our shared culture. It's not hard to find young people who object to the country's banking bailouts, high taxes, expansive welfare state, and powerful unions, who also object to state regulations on abortion, divorce, and gay marriage.

Yeah that hits me nail on the head, my brother also... Im 30, he's 25...

Karl Stein

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

'Shared culture'. Such stomach churning platitudes to our former colonists.

But young people today are far more individualistic, far less likely to fall prey to priests, nationalists, and socialists who want them to serve collectivist abstractions like Church, Nation, or Society.

This is really quite funny coming from someone who ceaselessly preaches of the evils of 'statism'.

All over the world, media, technology, trade, cheap travel, and free-flow of information are hastening the end of the collectivist era.

Except in all those collectivist oriented countries where it isn't.

Young people want opportunities, they want excitement, they want to have fun and to be free,

They always have.

and they want the government to get the f*** out of the way.

Perhaps the one's indoctrinated, like the Tea Party dupes, by your creed say such meaningless propagandistic sound bites.

Young Iranian women are ditching their hijabs and dancing in the streets to Pharrell Williams.

*cringe*

GaelMise

comongethappy wrote: »

Example?

I haven't read much corporate welfare endorsement here?

No, but you did attack welfare for the poor, while ignoring corporate welfare. Which suggests to me that you see one as being a problem and the other not so much.

comongethappy

GaelMise wrote: »

No, but you did attack welfare for the poor, while ignoring corporate welfare. Which suggests to me that you see one as being a problem and the other not so much.

Did I?

Can't I take issue with both?

Does every post seeking a curb on the welfare state HAVE to explicitly seek a curb on corporate assistance?

p1akuw47h5r3it

Karl Stein wrote: »

'Shared culture'. Such stomach churning platitudes to our former colonists.

Stomach churning platitudes? It's simply a fact.

SupaNova2

Karl Stein wrote: »

*cringe*

Why *cringe* ?

jank

alastair wrote: »

and I doubt you'll find too many young people opposed to 'powerful unions' or 'expansive welfare'. In fact I'd say quite the opposite.

I am 33 and I do not know anyone either in Ireland or Australia or NZ that I know of or my friends that are either a member of a union or involved. The idea of a unions for your average educated 20-30 something is just far fetched in this day and age. The only place where unions are getting new recruits are in places like the PS e.g. teachers, Gardai and so on. This is not only an Irish phenomenon, it is happening all over the western world.

As old world union heavy industry gives way to service oriented new industries like media, IT, pharma, biotech then unions will go the way of the dodo. They are holding out in state services but in private industry they are almost all but gone.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/columnists/membership-fall-crisis-for-unions/story-fnbkvnk7-1226343081983

Roll on 20 years where these 20-30 somethings will become the leaders of the next generation, where do you think the new leaders of unions will come from?

jank

Karl Stein wrote: »

'Shared culture'. Such stomach churning platitudes to our former colonists.

Are you denying that Ireland has a long and shared history and culture with the British and UK? We are more like them than any other nation on earth. Your hatred of them cannot get in the way of that fact.

alastair

jank wrote: »

I am 33 and I do not know anyone either in Ireland or Australia or NZ that I know of or my friends that are either a member of a union or involved. The idea of a unions for your average educated 20-30 something is just far fetched in this day and age. The only place where unions are getting new recruits are in places like the PS e.g. teachers, Gardai and so on. This is not only an Irish phenomenon, it is happening all over the western world.

As old world union heavy industry gives way to service oriented new industries like media, IT, pharma, biotech then unions will go the way of the dodo. They are holding out in state services but in private industry they are almost all but gone.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/columnists/membership-fall-crisis-for-unions/story-fnbkvnk7-1226343081983

Roll on 20 years where these 20-30 somethings will become the leaders of the next generation, where do you think the new leaders of unions will come from?

There's still an awful lot of people in unions - even in the private sector, and why assume that those of us who aren't in unions are opposed to union membership for others? I've never joined a union, but support those who do. I'd rather unions were powerful than weak, if only because I see nothing wrong in collective representation for workers. The defence of worker's rights isn't an issue that's going to go away, and therefore, the need for trade union's isn't either.

jank

alastair wrote: »

There's still an awful lot of people in unions - even in the private sector, and why assume that those of us who aren't in unions are opposed to union membership for others? I've never joined a union, but support those who do. I'd rather unions were powerful than weak, if only because I see nothing wrong in collective representation for workers. The defence of worker's rights isn't an issue that's going to go away, and therefore, the need for trade union's isn't either.

Vast majority of people are not in unions however, and the trend is clearly in falling membership. Classic case is the auto industry in the US.

If you support powerful unions in Ireland then you support the gombeenism, clientism and vested interests dictating terms and conditions to democratically elected representatives. You support inflated public sector wages and pensions and therefore you support taxing private industry to pay for these 'entitlements'. Hence why Ireland is so taxes yet the average working man/woman sees very little in benefit from this.

People should of course be free to join a union, out of their own accord and free will, however in some industries one has to join a union even if they do not want to. In my opinion a teacher should be able to negotiate their own wages and contracts with their school, collective bargaining creates dinosaurs.

Regarding workers rights. When did unions really care about 'workers' rights other than their own members and ultimately their own pay packet. Didn't a public sector union recently state that their own wages should be restored to pre GFC levels above any tax cuts to workers. i.e give a small protectived sector a pay increase on the backs of those on the min wage... workers rights..:rolleyes:

alastair

jank wrote: »

Vast majority of people are not in unions however.

35% unionised vs 65% non-unionised of the workforce - seems like a substantial representation to me.

jank wrote: »

and the trend is clearly in falling membership. Classic case is the auto industry in the US.
If you support powerful unions in Ireland then you support the gombeenism, clientism and vested interests dictating terms and conditions to democratically elected representatives. You support inflated public sector wages and pensions and therefore you support taxing private industry to pay for these 'entitlements'.

I have to support these things, do I? Oh, wait - I don't. Unions have every right to lobby politicians on behalf of their members, and Labour have an equal right have union affiliates. Public sector wages are, in the main, not inflated, and public sector pensions are no longer quite as desirable as they once were - though all pension provision would be better off improved.

jank wrote: »

Hence why Ireland is so taxes yet the average working man/woman sees very little in benefit from this.

Taxes aren't particularly high here. Try pretty much anywhere else in Europe for higher taxes.

jank wrote: »

People should of course be free to join a union, out of their own accord and free will, however in some industries one has to join a union even if they do not want to.

Which industries would these be then?

jank wrote: »

In my opinion a teacher should be able to negotiate their own wages and contracts with their school, collective bargaining creates dinosaurs.

Your opinion as you say. Not one I share.

jank wrote: »

Regarding workers rights. When did unions really care about 'workers' rights other than their own members and ultimately their own pay packet.

When they voted to support other union's campaigns? When they co-ordinate campaigns under the banner of Congress? Pretty much on a regular basis?

jank wrote: »

Didn't a public sector union recently state that their own wages should be restored to pre GFC levels above any tax cuts to workers. i.e give a small protectived sector a pay increase on the backs of those on the min wage... workers rights..:rolleyes:

You don't want a union to lobby for the best pay for their workers? As I say - you've your opinions, but I don't share them.

Idbatterim

You don't want a union to lobby for the best pay for their workers? As I say - you've your opinions, but I don't share them.

if its private industry I dont really care, that said I am sick of hearing abut Aer Lingus and their strikes, even a union rep said the public are sick of it! In relation to public servants, no I dont think it is in my interest to have the unions trying to cream off as much possible for as little work as possible, funnily enough. There is a cost to that to the rest of society. If somebody gains, somebody loses...

The unions are actually just damaging the company and ergo its employees, they may profit from it in the short term, which is pretty much where any vision here starts and ends... Funny how hundreds of thousands of us in the private sector dont need them, they are nothing but **** stirrers and ignorant as they come, I wouldnt trust the union reps to run a tuck shop...

alastair

Idbatterim wrote: »

if its private industry I dont really care...
they are nothing but **** stirrers and ignorant as they come, I wouldnt trust the union reps to run a tuck shop...

Seems like not only do you care, but you're rather intimidated by the prospect of collective representation. I'm also curious about your theory that no-one can gain without someone losing - who's losing as a consequence of your salary then?

Idbatterim

people arent forced to buy what I sell. I.e if it doesn't effect me or I have choice I dont really care. My point with government spending is, its like dividing up a cake, you want a big slice, someone else is getting a smaller one...