Young Persons Political Party

coolemon

KingBrian2 wrote: »

since nobody is considering revolutionary endeavours it would seem counter productive to be advocating a second republic.

Firstly, to get a "second republic" would not require revolution. Rather, it requires a new constitution.

Secondly, there are people advocating revolution. Me being one. But that's beside the point.

No one is calling for Paris style student riots which ended that countries Republic.

I am.

but in reality this country is pretty well governed on the whole.

Governed by an oligarchy. If that is "pretty well governed" then good luck to you.

I want democracy. We have an incredibly unequal society and the second highest percentage of low paid jobs in the OECD after the USA.

That's not well governed. That's a ****hole for those on the bottom portion of it.

compare that to Ireland in which not only are demonstrations allowable but we allow just about anyone organise a march against minor taxation increases.

Because the Irish are horse blinkered and subsumed in an ideologically hegemonic English speaking discourse where "the left" barely exists throughout the realm - the UK, the USA, Ireland, Australia, New-Zealand, and so on. Outside of the English speaking world there exists real opposition rather than the faux FF-FG-LP-SF mafia cabal that exists here. And the levels of social inequality reflect that.

Ideas and identity formation are heavily controlled and contained in the English speaking world.

I don't see Garda beating the crap out of pedestrians or cyclists for breaking the many traffic violations thankfully.

They don't need to. Fines and other penalties are used.

Have a walk around Dublin and see if you can spot any communicated political ideas outside of those governed by money.

Murals and political messages are commonplace in France, Spain, Greece and about anywhere else on mainland Europe. Try it here and the Gawrds will come down on you like a tonne of bricks.

You could get away with an awful lot more in France, Spain and Greece in terms of exercising political expression.

Riot is standard practice. And the powers that be will act accordingly.

Playboy

oscarBravo wrote: »

I take it you're blissfully unaware of what percentages of total income taxes are paid by what bands of earners in this country. Don't worry, you're far from alone in not knowing that - and that's precisely why your idea would be a catastrophic failure.

Why would you assume that?

oscarBravo wrote: »

Great. While we're at it, let's have a hypothetical conversation about why we should have a society that's predicated on free, unlimited energy, and just blithely assume that we can find a solution to the fact that such a thing doesn't exist.

because there isn't a massive difference between a secure online voting system and free unlimited energy right?

oscarBravo wrote: »

If you're going to propose that the country should be run in a particular way, you don't get to hand-wave away the minor technical detail that it's impossible to do so.

So we cant discuss alternatives to the current system without having a detailed plan that implementable .. right!

oscarBravo wrote: »

In the two and a half decades I've been voting, everything I've seen has indicated precisely the opposite.

In the nearly two decades (not sure why that matters) I have been voting I have observed corrupt and devious behaviors in the majority of our politicians who seem to be more concerned with self preservation and pandering to corporate interests. A change would be nice

KingBrian2

Playboy wrote: »

How many bills pass though parliament every year where all representatives vote? It seems like half the time the place is empty.

Totally agree with you the place is scarcely inhabited during sessions. TD's should be attending parliament as that is their job. Probably too busy looking after constituencies but what is the point if you barely show up and barely participate in any debates. It is a debating chamber for a reason and arguments are suppose to persuade people to your point of view. It is not supposed to be a echo chamber.

KingBrian2

coolemon wrote: »

Firstly, to get a "second republic" would not require revolution. Rather, it requires a new constitution.

Secondly, there are people advocating revolution. Me being one. But that's beside the point.



I am.



Governed by an oligarchy. If that is "pretty well governed" then good luck to you.

I want democracy. We have an incredibly unequal society and the second highest percentage of low paid jobs in the OECD after the USA.

That's not well governed. That's a ****hole for those on the bottom portion of it.



Because the Irish are horse blinkered and subsumed in an ideologically hegemonic English speaking discourse where "the left" barely exists throughout the realm - the UK, the USA, Ireland, Australia, New-Zealand, and so on. Outside of the English speaking world there exists real opposition rather than the faux FF-FG-LP-SF mafia cabal that exists here. And the levels of social inequality reflect that.

Ideas and identity formation are heavily controlled and contained in the English speaking world.



They don't need to. Fines and other penalties are used.

Have a walk around Dublin and see if you can spot any communicated political ideas outside of those governed by money.

Murals and political messages are commonplace in France, Spain, Greece and about anywhere else on mainland Europe. Try it here and the Gawrds will come down on you like a tonne of bricks.

You could get away with an awful lot more in France, Spain and Greece in terms of exercising political expression.

Riot is standard practice. And the powers that be will act accordingly.

Calm down I agree with some of your views but not all. Democracy is completely different to inequality. Britain is a democracy though it is deeply unequal unlike the rest of Europe which is why I admire European countries like Germany, Sweden, Finland, Netherlands, Belgium and so on. They all appreciate the importance of social welfare. Irish lack of democracy as you put it is down to selfishness on the part of politicians who pander to voters instead of defending Irish interests. I would opt for the social model practised by this countries but Irish politicians prefer voter friendly gestures.

oscarBravo

Playboy wrote: »

Why would you assume that?

Because you seem to assume that the lower paid pay a disproportionate share of taxes.

because there isn't a massive difference between a secure online voting system and free unlimited energy right?

Well, neither is currently feasible, so we may as well base a discussion on one than the other.

So we cant discuss alternatives to the current system without having a detailed plan that implementable .. right!

I'd settle for "vaguely plausible" for starters.

In the nearly two decades (not sure why that matters) I have been voting I have observed corrupt and devious behaviors in the majority of our politicians who seem to be more concerned with self preservation and pandering to corporate interests. A change would be nice

That's the tired trope that any change from a bad situation would necessarily be an improvement. It's like saying "something must be done; this is something, therefore this must be done" - there's a gaping chasm in the logic involved.

Playboy

oscarBravo wrote: »

Because you seem to assume that the lower paid pay a disproportionate share of taxes.

Where did I assume that? What I know is that a small minority have a vastly unequal share of resources, more in fact than they will ever be able to spend in lifetimes. Taxation is one method for reducing that inequality

OscarBravo wrote:

Well, neither is currently feasible, so we may as well base a discussion on one than the other. I'd settle for "vaguely plausible" for starters.

Sure.. One isn't more plausible than the other. It's not like we don't have any security online, that we don't process billions ever day in online payments?

oscarBravo wrote:

That's the tired trope that any change from a bad situation would necessarily be an improvement. It's like saying "something must be done; this is something, therefore this must be done" - there's a gaping chasm in the logic involved.

So this is as good as it gets? Why are you afraid of discussing or exploring alternatives... Just dismiss them outright because radical change is unrealistic?

oscarBravo

Playboy wrote: »

Sure.. One isn't more plausible than the other. It's not like we don't have any security online, that we don't process billions ever day in online payments?

Online voting isn't the same thing as online banking. If you think it is, it's because you haven't thought about the problem.

So this is as good as it gets?

I didn't say that.

Why are you afraid of discussing or exploring alternatives... Just dismiss them outright because radical change is unrealistic?

We are discussing one alternative. Discussing doesn't mean uncritically accepting a deeply flawed proposal.

Your idea is unworkable in practice, because secure voting over the Internet is, if not impossible, then at least completely infeasible - if you disagree, then the onus is on you to outline a voting system that's immune to the very many attacks to which it would be subjected - and undesirable in principle, because the idea that every citizen is sufficiently engaged and informed to vote on every proposal is, frankly, ludicrous.

micosoft

youngpolitico wrote: »

I'm not saying it would have to be solely young people. More like a young party. Brand new, a new opinion on things. But yes I think people in their 20s in this country would be well capable of setting up such a party and making it work.

The fact they haven't would indicate otherwise.

And you've now moved to a "young party". The reason why new parties are not appearing in Ireland has been done to death but fundamentally there is no demand for one from the electorate.

micosoft

oscarBravo wrote: »

That's the tired trope that any change from a bad situation would necessarily be an improvement. It's like saying "something must be done; this is something, therefore this must be done" - there's a gaping chasm in the logic involved.

This! It's the actual answer to most of the "ideas" and "changes" raised in Politics forum. Because despite what some people think, it's ALWAYS possible to make a situation worse. Especially if it clearly has not been thought through.

micosoft

Playboy wrote: »

In the nearly two decades (not sure why that matters) I have been voting I have observed corrupt and devious behaviors in the majority of our politicians who seem to be more concerned with self preservation and pandering to corporate interests. A change would be nice

And who knowingly votes in these corrupt politicians? I see Michael Lowry being elected in again and again by the good burghers of Tipperary. Perhaps we should look at the corrupt and devious behaviours of our electorate who deliberately vote in hucksters with an eye on getting something for nothing from the state. Maybe, just maybe if we started a discussion on how we can make the electorate accountable for their nearly criminal decisions (42% voted for FF in 2007 lest we forget) we might see a change in Irish politics. But tinkering with the means of democracy won't solve the fundamental issue in Ireland - the electorate that votes them in.

laoch na mona

youngpolitico wrote: »

I came across Lucinda Creighton on Vincent Browne last night. She is starting a new party and I will be supporting it. Thanks for your feedback.

wait I thought you were unhappy with established parties, but you're going to join continuity Fine Gael?

plenty of young people are politically active many just aren't into student politics, to what degree they are in it for the career varies from party to party (as you would expect since some parties are more suited to careerists).

VinLieger

The main problem with a young persons party surely is obvious isn't it? People get older and their views on the world change depending on their age, unless you are going to impose an age limit of who can run and be a member of such a party the whole thing is pointless as it will just end up being full or old men who haven't a clue how young people think

hmmm

The reason we have a representative system of democracy, rather than everyone voting on every issue, is that most people do not have the time to spend looking through issues and bills in details - whereas the politicians we elect do. If everyone voted on every issue, you'd end up with people with an incredibly superficial understanding of issues voting on something they don't understand, and they'd probably end up relying on what they were told to do by some talking heads in the media.

Another issue raised in this thread is that the "rich" are under-taxed. Tell that to someone on 36k a year, who has to pay 52 cents of every euro they earn to the government, not to mention property tax, tv license, motor tax, bin charges etc. The problem with the Irish tax system is the massive clump of people who pay nothing.

laoch na mona

36k is not rich, progressive tax based on income is the most logical way to create equality by ensure those who can afford to pay more do so

Yiikes

coolemon wrote: »

You just have to look at the leadership of the student unions. Careerist carpet baggers.

Just last week UCC SU steamrolled a vote on our membership of USI. It was quite sickening to watch as only 15% of students voted. I had no idea there was a vote until the voting started. I like to be informed but there was no unbiased material from the SU. There was no "No" side visible on campus. How they claim to represent students is laughable. Puts you right off student politics unless you are a member of it. Doubt they have a positive effect in increasing student interest in actual politics. Doubt Ill bother voting on SU matters anymore while in UCC, bad habit to get into as a young adult but Ill be in the majority of being apathetic.

ezra_pound

hmmm wrote: »

The reason we have a representative system of democracy, rather than everyone voting on every issue, is that most people do not have the time to spend looking through issues and bills in details - whereas the politicians we elect do. If everyone voted on every issue, you'd end up with people with an incredibly superficial understanding of issues voting on something they don't understand, and they'd probably end up relying on what they were told to do by some talking heads in the media.

Another issue raised in this thread is that the "rich" are under-taxed. Tell that to someone on 36k a year, who has to pay 52 cents of every euro they earn to the government, not to mention property tax, tv license, motor tax, bin charges etc. The problem with the Irish tax system is the massive clump of people who pay nothing.

On 36 k you don't pay near 52c on every euro earned.

BoJack Horseman

ezra_pound wrote: »

On 36 k you don't pay near 52c on every euro earned.

Indeed, its around 20% on that wage.

(Plus a €400 income tax decrease for the year 2015 vs 2014)

For Reals

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Indeed, its around 20% on that wage.

(Plus a €400 income dax decrease for the year 2015 vs 2014)

A decrease in Dax Sheppard? Nice.

laoch na mona

Yiikes wrote: »

Just last week UCC SU steamrolled a vote on our membership of USI. It was quite sickening to watch as only 15% of students voted. I had no idea there was a vote until the voting started. I like to be informed but there was no unbiased material from the SU. There was no "No" side visible on campus. How they claim to represent students is laughable. Puts you right off student politics unless you are a member of it. Doubt they have a positive effect in increasing student interest in actual politics. Doubt Ill bother voting on SU matters anymore while in UCC, bad habit to get into as a young adult but Ill be in the majority of being apathetic.

surely its up to the no side to make themselves visible? on what grounds were they looking to leave the usi?

p1akuw47h5r3it

laoch na mona wrote: »

surely its up to the no side to make themselves visible? on what grounds were they looking to leave the usi?

Probably on the grounds that the USI is a gigantic waste of time and money.

Yiikes

laoch na mona wrote: »

surely its up to the no side to make themselves visible? on what grounds were they looking to leave the usi?

There was no material. A guy gave a 2 minute speech at the start of one my lectures. But making a campaign visible when the SU basically covered campus in chalk graffiti, banners. T-shirts and leaflets placed in every seat of every lecture hall. There was also a pro yes vote speech by the SU before every single lecture I had during the voting days.

UCC gives the USI €120,000. The No side argued this is a waste and could be better spent here. Their FB is here facebook.com/UCCNo2USI

There was no source of unbiased information which was pretty bad and a 15% turnout shows how little the SU cares about the complete disconnect as long as those who vote do so with them. I voted no simply because of this.

When students are apathetic to these issues and the union doesnt care its easy to see why young people are far less likely to care about national issues and vote.

Tbh after this I wish there was a way to leave the UCC SU and keep the money. It would help reduce the burden of a further increase in fees next year.

laoch na mona

Yiikes wrote: »

There was no material. A guy gave a 2 minute speech at the start of one my lectures. But making a campaign visible when the SU basically covered campus in chalk graffiti, banners. T-shirts and leaflets placed in every seat of every lecture hall. There was also a pro yes vote speech by the SU before every single lecture I had during the voting days.

UCC gives the USI €120,000. The No side argued this is a waste and could be better spent here. Their FB is here facebook.com/UCCNo2USI

There was no source of unbiased information which was pretty bad and a 15% turnout shows how little the SU cares about the complete disconnect as long as those who vote do so with them. I voted no simply because of this.

When students are apathetic to these issues and the union doesnt care its easy to see why young people are far less likely to care about national issues and vote.

Tbh after this I wish there was a way to leave the UCC SU and keep the money. It would help reduce the burden of a further increase in fees next year.

i really wish there was an alternative to usi that actually put effort into fighting fees and protecting students living in poverty, SUs are a good idea USI is just really **** at being a union

IrishTrajan

I was contemplating making a run for TD in the 2020 elections (I don't meet the age requirement to sit as a TD yet), so I would be interested in supporting a new party. Unfortunately, I think that most people will vote on a party name basis, and not really look at the policies. There are people who vote FG, FF, SF, Labour just because that's how their parents voted. You'd probably need to represent an area with a lot of young people, and appeal to the middle to young voters.

Yiikes

IrishTrajan wrote: »

I was contemplating making a run for TD in the 2020 elections (I don't meet the age requirement to sit as a TD yet), so I would be interested in supporting a new party. Unfortunately, I think that most people will vote on a party name basis, and not really look at the policies. There are people who vote FG, FF, SF, Labour just because that's how their parents voted. You'd probably need to represent an area with a lot of young people, and appeal to the middle to young voters.

The current set up where the state coffers fund party campaigns makes it hard for any new party. And thats the way the big partys like the status quo

jmayo

Playboy wrote: »

I think you underestimate the electorate here. People are smart enough to understand that there has to be a balance.

I can't believe you actually believe that.

A good chunk of the people have proved time and again they aren't smart enough to be allowed make big decisions.
If they were then we would never have had the excesses and the property bubble we ended up having.
We would not have the health system we have today and there would have been mass protests over bailouts, payoffs, political corruption, etc.

Added to that the vast majority of people are only interested in their own interests and couldn't give two cra** about the greater good.

And before anyone claims anything, this is just not Ireland.
How else could anyone explain the likes of sarah palin in the US or the current leader of Greece.

The problem with the electorate is that it is made up of people and people can be stupid, greedy, self interested, etc.

Lantus

We don't need another political party. The system, while a good idea 100 years ago is no longer fit for purpose. The monetary system is corrupt and politicians only want to say what we want to hear.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DkwP9TXGfdI

If we want to see real improvements to the lives of ALL people on this planet we need to start thinking as a single collective and use our technology and innovation to address the real problems we have. Not the opinions and abstract thoughts of politicians who are not educated in science and technology.

"If voting changed anything. They would make it illegal."
-Emma Goldman

laoch na mona

Yiikes wrote: »

The current set up where the state coffers fund party campaigns makes it hard for any new party. And thats the way the big partys like the status quo

ya but the alternative is private funding which would allow business interests to influence elections, state funding helps maintain a more level playing field

imo a cap on election spending would be the best way to ensure equal opportunity for parties

donaghs

youngpolitico wrote: »

There's no voice for students in Dáil Éireann. People between the ages of 18-30 don't really take part in politics and a lot don't even exercise their right to vote, which I believe is a very important duty as a citizen of this country.

You don't need to be a student to feel that none of the parties appeal to you. It's a common complaint.

youngpolitico wrote: »

Ireland has some of the best universities in the world, but the brains that these universities develop are being used by other nations around the world as the graduates that come from them are emigrating. Huge multi national companies seek Irish brains to further their businesses. Why can't these brains be used to better this country?

I'm not being snide here, but that's what happens during recessions. There aren't enough jobs for everyone, and some will emigrate if there are better opportunities abroad. Naturally, it's harder for people without work experience to find jobs in such an economy. When the economic cycle picks up again, there are more jobs. No-one is owed a job simply because they went to college. There's limits to what government can do to encourage "job creation", but successive Irish governments have been quite good at this when it comes to attracting multinationals who hire large numbers of people.

youngpolitico wrote: »

Huge multi national companies seek Irish brains to further their businesses. Why can't these brains be used to better this country?

Interesting question but a tad vague. Do you mean people starting their own indigenous businesses and enterprises? Nothing stopping them.
But, the government could possibly do more to encourage this by with incentives like tax breaks, reducing red tape/paperwork for new startups, etc.

youngpolitico wrote: »

Please let me know what your thoughts on a new party are. I'd love to see if people think I'm mad, or if they actually think this could be possible, just like I do.

I think new parties are a great idea. As long as they can clearly spell out there policies and ideas. Not so sure Lucinda's doing that.

IrishTrajan

youngpolitico wrote: »

I came across Lucinda Creighton on Vincent Browne last night. She is starting a new party and I will be supporting it. Thanks for your feedback.

I don't like her, she's too conservative for me. She seems like just another TD. She hasn't even released any of her policies, but her "four points" seem kinda... empty. She's for "independence", "freedom of thought"... But also opposes abortions in any and all forms (even when not aborting would result in the death of the mother, like she voted against in the Dail).

I think pragmatism and openness to change is more important than conservatism and idealism.

Brussels Sprout

IrishTrajan wrote: »

But also opposes abortions in any and all forms (even when not aborting would result in the death of the mother, like she voted against in the Dail).

That's her personal opinion but the new party has said that it will allow its members a free vote on any issues like abortion. Eddie Hobbs who's the other key figure in that party has the opposite opinion on abortion to her.