Why would you vote SF?

Laois_Man

maccored wrote: »

I cant see the DUP getting cleared. Arlene introduced it and they were basically paying people to burn the fuel (may as well have been since the price was cheaper than the cost) - absolute con or complete stupidity one of the two. Where SF meant to sit there and say nothing?

March 2017 was when article 50 was triggered. This whole hoohaa came to light in Oct/Nov 2016. you'll be telling me SF are psychic next

The scheme had already been closed 9 months before that in February 2016 - due to people abusing it! It came to light in the Summer of 2015...investions started.....and it was closed due to abuse four and a half months before the Brexit referendum. Then after "leave" won, SF suddenly got antsy about it!

January 2017 was when Stormont went down! SF must have been the only people in the entirety of the developed world who didn't know Article 50 was soon to be triggered! Psychic? :rolleyes:

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

Why do you think they probably will be?

Is it probably, or hopefully?

I am not in the slightest but arsed about the DUP!

McMurphy

Laois_Man wrote: »

I am not in the slightest but arsed about the DUP!

I didn't say you were arsed about the DUP, but there's what I can only describe as an emerging pattern around here where posters want to see things happen (or not as in some cases) as long as it's seen a getting one over on the shinners regardless of what it is.

McMurphy

Seth Brundle wrote: »

I understand this SF's stance.
I just don't get why people would rather have no representation in NI when it matters.
People in NI complain about Brexit for example yet voted for a group that would not defend the views of the majority in NI on the matter. Now they're complaining that whilst NI voted to remain,it looks like they're being forced to leave against their wishes. Someone should be representing these people, not necessarily SF but someone!

In fairness representation for nationalists counts in Westminster also.
Due to the lack of engaged representation for nationalists in NI wihtin Westminster, the DUP are now actively seeking the removal of NI from Europe!

You don't get it because you probably don't want to get it.

Nationalists/Republican people in the north do not wish to be represented by a party in what they see as a foreign government.

S.F as an all island party abstain from what they view as a foreign Parliament, people vote for them (overwhelmingly up there) with full knowledge of that.

The SDLP do take their seats, they're also a Nationalist party, but they're roundly rejected by the electorate.

Why this is frequently "misunderstood" is quite bemusing to me to be honest.

Why don't people understand that some folk on the island view the British govt as a foreign govt, and do not wish their chosen political party to partake in same is beyond me.

Apart from that, it has been done to death on here already that their seats taken/untaken would mean shag all anyway in parliament, and for by that, nationalists already have representation in Brexit talks regardless.

Aren't both the EU and Irish govt representing them?

Seth Brundle

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

You don't get it because you probably don't want to get it.

Nationalists/Republican people in the north do not wish to be represented by a party in what they see as a foreign government.

S.F as an all island party abstain from what they view as a foreign Parliament, people vote for them (overwhelmingly up there) with full knowledge of that.

The SDLP do take their seats, they're also a Nationalist party, but they're roundly rejected by the electorate.

Why this is frequently "misunderstood" is quite bemusing to me to be honest.

Why don't people understand that some folk on the island view the British govt as a foreign govt, and do not wish their chosen political party to partake in same is beyond me.

Apart from that, it has been done to death on here already that their seats taken/untaken would mean shag all anyway in parliament, and for by that, nationalists already have representation in Brexit talks regardless.

Aren't both the EU and Irish govt representing them?

Ok then they've absolutely no right to complain that they're leaving the EU. The nationalist people of NI want to engage with the UK via both referenda and elections but don't want to go any further. That's their choice and that's fine, in fact both sides of the dysfunctional place is that both sides are choosing the more extreme parties creating a more polarised society politically.
But because nationalists choose someone that won't represent them, let's not hear them complain about the difficulties arising from leaving the EU because that is, as you say, exactly what they want.

Laois_Man

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

I didn't say you were arsed about the DUP, but there's what I can only describe as an emerging pattern around here where posters want to see things happen (or not as in some cases) as long as it's seen a getting one over on the shinners regardless of what it is.

I don’t usually partake in Shinner bashing - but at the same time, I can call their current stance regarding devolved parliament as the tactical positioning I see it as!

McMurphy

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Ok then they've absolutely no right to complain that they're leaving the EU. The nationalist people of NI want to engage with the UK via both referenda and elections but don't want to go any further. That's their choice and that's fine, in fact both sides of the dysfunctional place is that both sides are choosing the more extreme parties creating a more polarised society politically.
But because nationalists choose someone that won't represent them, let's not hear them complain about the difficulties arising from leaving the EU because that is, as you say, exactly what they want.

But they have someone representing them - the EU and Irish govt (I already said this) even if SF took their seats it wouldn't make a blind bit of difference in Westminster, you seem to be ignoring this fact, even though it has been posted over and over and over again in the various Brexit threads.

The nationallists/Republicans consider themselves Irish citizens first and foremost, so what's wrong with them being represented by the Irish govt and EU collectively, who undoubtedly have more clout in the negotiations than SF could ever have in Westminster anyway?

The shinners are playing a blinder imo by sitting back, doing exactly what they said they'd do and watch the DUP make a haimes of things, and the UK self implode.

Seth Brundle

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

But they have someone representing them - the EU and Irish govt (I already said this) even if SF took their seats it wouldn't make a blind bit of difference in Westminster, you seem to be ignoring this fact, even though it has been posted over and over and over again in the various Brexit threads.

I didn't suggest they vote for SF or that SF shoukd take their seats in WM. I questioned why NI nationalists chose an abstentionist party knowing the Brexit car crash was coming rather than a party such as the SDLP who would echo their concerns within WM.
Now the nationalists have made their bed, they can lie in it despite the efforts by the EU pushed by (somewhat ironically) FG.

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

The nationallists/Republicans consider themselves Irish citizens first and foremost, so what's wrong with them being represented by the Irish govt and EU collectively, who undoubtedly have more clout in the negotiations than SF could ever have in Westminster anyway?

Because as well they know it, Dublin and Brussels does not oversee their day to day lives.

jm08

Laois_Man wrote: »

The scheme had already been closed 9 months before that in February 2016 - due to people abusing it! It came to light in the Summer of 2015...investions started.....and it was closed due to abuse four and a half months before the Brexit referendum. Then after "leave" won, SF suddenly got antsy about it!

January 2017 was when Stormont went down! SF must have been the only people in the entirety of the developed world who didn't know Article 50 was soon to be triggered! Psychic? :rolleyes:

I actually think its to Sinn Fein's credit that they hung that long with the DUP in an effort to make the Assembly work. I think Arlene (who wasn't long in the job) got a bit too arrogant and should have stepped aside while the enquiry was going on. She refused. In the meantime, there were other problems as well with the Irish Language Act. I think Sinn Fein would have hung in there, but for the mean spirited way the Liofa grants were withdrawn a few days before Christmas (all of about £60Ks worth) was the straw that broke the camel's back with Irish Language supporters and moderate nationalists.

Lets not forget that Sinn Fein had agreed a deal with the DUP to go back into Stormont, but for the DUP to back out (apparently the Orange Order and the Loyalists had a word in their ear).

McMurphy

Seth Brundle wrote: »

I didn't suggest they vote for SF or that SF shoukd take their seats in WM. I questioned why NI nationalists chose an abstentionist party knowing the Brexit car crash was coming rather than a party such as the SDLP who would echo their concerns within WM.
Now the nationalists have made their bed, they can lie in it despite the efforts by the EU pushed by (somewhat ironically) FG.


Because as well they know it, Dublin and Brussels does not oversee their day to day lives.

Which was answered already,

Nationalists/Republican people in the north do not wish to be represented by a party in what they see as a foreign government.

S.F as an all island party abstain from what they view as a foreign Parliament, people vote for them (overwhelmingly up there) with full knowledge of that.

You are seemingly questioning why people in the north wont put aside their principles and suddenly seek representation in a government they view as foreign and having no right to be in Ireland (in their view)

SF receive many of their votes because they choose abstenionism from Britains Parliament, I don't think anyone, not even you would suggest that they suddenly either discard that policy, or alternatively, U-turn on it once elected.

It's not hard to understand IMO.

Seth Brundle

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

Which was answered already,

You are seemingly questioning why people in the north wont put aside their principles and suddenly seek representation in a government they view as foreign and having no right to be in Ireland (in their view)

SF receive many of their votes because they choose abstenionism from Britains Parliament, I don't think anyone, not even you would suggest that they suddenly either discard that policy, or alternatively, U-turn on it once elected.

It's not hard to understand IMO.

Not once in this thread have I suggested that SF discard their policy of abstention yet you choose to read it that way.
What I said was that I don’t understand why the people of NI chose a party that would not attend WM given what is currently happening.
Now the people of NI face exclusion from the EU partly because of their elected choices.

Junkyard Tom

Seth Brundle wrote: »

People in NI complain about Brexit for example yet voted for a group that would not defend the views of the majority in NI on the matter.

It never ceases to amaze me how little thought people put into their musings. Has nobody who comments on this issue ever played chess or poker?

Regardless, let's say that 5/6 votes will be the difference in Westminster. So SF rock up to 'save the day'. Can you imagine the complete uproar in Westminster when the political wing of the IRA march to their seats with big smiley heads on them?

What do you think that would cause? That 5/6 votes balance would evaporate and the side SF decided to go with would suffer a major defeat.

Think for goodness sake.

uck51js9zml2yt

Matt Barrett wrote: »

For me I've given them the nod off and on depending on what else is on offer.
They never used tax payer monies for sweet deals, lost the tax payer monies on bad deals or 'looked after their own' with state appointments. Also they never were responsible for the economy crashing or ignoring growing crises to concentrate on a proven to be flawed economic system. So I'd vote SF long before I'd vote FF/FG.

They were never in government to have the opportunity to do these things.
What's your point?

Seth Brundle

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

Regardless, let's say that 5/6 votes will be the difference in Westminster. So SF rock up to 'save the day'. Can you imagine the complete uproar in Westminster when the political wing of the IRA march to their seats with big smiley heads on them?

What do you think that would cause? That 5/6 votes balance would evaporate and the side SF decided to go with would suffer a major defeat.

Where did I suggest that SF attend WM?
Is it a SF followers thing to read something which has been repeated multiple times yet not get the message?

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Not once in this thread have I suggested that SF discard their policy of abstention yet you choose to read it that way.
What I said was that I don’t understand why the people of NI chose a party that would not attend WM given what is currently happening.
Now the people of NI face exclusion from the EU partly because of their elected choices.

riddles

SF engage in the politics of protest. This is the easiest stage of all to operate. We are all experts at pointing out things that are wrong and indulging in mock indignation but creating positive solutions is the challenging part. This is SF’s greatest challenge.

They reached a budget impasse in the north and pulled down the assembly under the disguise of the Irish language issue and the cash for ash stuff. It probably suited the DUP also to ensure they keep the budget subvention coming.

Even with record highs numbers in employment there they have a personal debt crisis and need 10-11 billion a year budget top up.

In short SF in power is most likely a fast track to become the next Venezuela. They lack any basic grounding in the realities of how mobile financial capital is and our dependency on inward investment. The pond life who vote for them here and in the North don’t realize the SF ‘free everything’ mantra is just nonsense.

blackwhite

maccored wrote: »

I cant see the DUP getting cleared. Arlene introduced it and they were basically paying people to burn the fuel (may as well have been since the price was cheaper than the cost) - absolute con or complete stupidity one of the two. Where SF meant to sit there and say nothing?

March 2017 was when article 50 was triggered. This whole hoohaa came to light in Oct/Nov 2016. you'll be telling me SF are psychic next

The Brexit vote was in the summer of 2016. I doubt there was anybody on this or the neighbouring island who didn't realise that Article 50 was going to be invoked in the 12-18 months following the vote.

I'm no fan of SF, but even I wouldn't go so far as to claim they were unaware of the results of the Brexit Referendum

ancapailldorcha

If this turns into a hotbed of trench warfare and petty sniping, it will be locked. No more oneupmanship please.

ancapailldorcha

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

If this turns into a hotbed of trench warfare and petty sniping, it will be locked. No more oneupmanship please.

Posts deleted and sanctions issued.

jmayo

Seth Brundle wrote: »

I understand this SF's stance.
I just don't get why people would rather have no representation in NI when it matters.
People in NI complain about Brexit for example yet voted for a group that would not defend the views of the majority in NI on the matter. Now they're complaining that whilst NI voted to remain,it looks like they're being forced to leave against their wishes. Someone should be representing these people, not necessarily SF but someone!

Actually being totally pedantic there is someone and yes it is a ONE.
Sylvia Hermon MP for North Down is the only voice of reason representing NI in Westminister.

She voted remain and has openly said DUP to not speak for majority in NI.

blackwhite

Matt Barrett wrote: »

For me I've given them the nod off and on depending on what else is on offer.
They never used tax payer monies for sweet deals, lost the tax payer monies on bad deals or 'looked after their own' with state appointments. Also they never were responsible for the economy crashing or ignoring growing crises to concentrate on a proven to be flawed economic system. So I'd vote SF long before I'd vote FF/FG.

In the limited time they had in power in NI, they managed to do at least one of the things you've claimed they never did.


That aside - I can fully understand why nationalists in NI would vote SF. The nature of northern politics, combined with the structure of devolved Govt in Stormont (before the rug was pulled) was always going to result in voting for the nationalist and unionist communities moving to the more extreme parties rather than the parties of pragmatism and compromise.

If unionists are shifting towards the DUP, then nationalists have no choice but to shift to SF for fear that the SDLP get railroaded.
Similar logic applies for unionists looking at Alliance or UUP candidates.

Throw in the system which incentives having one big party on "your side" instead of many smaller parties, and it's a recipe for a shift to the more hardline uncompromising parties.

James Brown

blackwhite wrote: »

In the limited time they had in power in NI, they managed to do at least one of the things you've claimed they never did.


That aside - I can fully understand why nationalists in NI would vote SF. The nature of northern politics, combined with the structure of devolved Govt in Stormont (before the rug was pulled) was always going to result in voting for the nationalist and unionist communities moving to the more extreme parties rather than the parties of pragmatism and compromise.

If unionists are shifting towards the DUP, then nationalists have no choice but to shift to SF for fear that the SDLP get railroaded.
Similar logic applies for unionists looking at Alliance or UUP candidates.

Throw in the system which incentives having one big party on "your side" instead of many smaller parties, and it's a recipe for a shift to the more hardline uncompromising parties.

My apologies, either I missed the [Northern Ireland] prefix or it was added later. When I entered the discussion it was on southern politics, which was my comment.

I'm speaking on giving appointments out to 'their own' not elected officials and brazenly saying such. I wouldn't have as much knowledge on the north in that regard.
If you're suggesting anyone moving to one all encompassing hardline party will only embolden same on the opposite side, you have a point.

nuac

bilbot79 wrote: »

Presumably they hold the only real hope of reuniting the country, a romantic idea that few want to let go of

Nothing romantic about the likely cost to R of I taxpayers

blanch152

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

It never ceases to amaze me how little thought people put into their musings. Has nobody who comments on this issue ever played chess or poker?

Regardless, let's say that 5/6 votes will be the difference in Westminster. So SF rock up to 'save the day'. Can you imagine the complete uproar in Westminster when the political wing of the IRA march to their seats with big smiley heads on them?

What do you think that would cause? That 5/6 votes balance would evaporate and the side SF decided to go with would suffer a major defeat.

Think for goodness sake.

Doesn't that just tell you how divisive a political force Sinn Fein are?

Their mission should be to reach across the community in the North and into Britain to build support for a united Ireland yet they just divide people with their stunts.

maccored

blanch152 wrote: »

Doesn't that just tell you how divisive a political force Sinn Fein are?

Their mission should be to reach across the community in the North and into Britain to build support for a united Ireland yet they just divide people with their stunts.

eh? SF go to the seat of power of the government they've been opposing and you expect them to be welcomed?

Junkyard Tom

blanch152 wrote: »

Their mission should be to reach across the community in the North and into Britain to build support for a united Ireland yet they just divide people with their stunts.

As you well know SF have been reaching out for a long time now and it was returned with sneering and vindictiveness.

No more appeasement.

blanch152

maccored wrote: »

eh? SF go to the seat of power of the government they've been opposing and you expect them to be welcomed?

The Scottish National Party seem to be able to do it with conviction and authority.

BonnieSituation

blanch152 wrote: »

The Scottish National Party seem to be able to do it with conviction and authority.

Explain to me when the British government sent the army to SNP strongholds and murdered citizens?

Or when were Scottish nationalists denied the right to vote?

Scottish independence and the route to same isn't as fraught a road as Irish independence.

An SRA isn't likely to develop now is it?

How you keep a straight face while comparing apples and oranges on multiple threads is beyond me.

maccored

blanch152 wrote: »

The Scottish National Party seem to be able to do it with conviction and authority.

I think i can say i can safely ignore most things you say from now on to be honest

BalcombeSt4

Wtf ? wrote: »

Still a wasted vote tho, Nobody down here would go into Government with them and I see why. Their history does them no favors either. Their current mouthpiece does not help either, They just oppose everything and do nothing. Waste of space of a hopefully gone era.

So just like Fine Gael & Fianna Fail then. All have dodgy histories, none of their current mouthpieces does them any favours & all are a waste of space.

Having 3 parties in Ireland who's main ideology is Irish Nationalism is a waste. Ireland is one of the few countries that doesn't have a Social Democrat or Socialist party as one of the countries 3 major parties.

And from what I remember SF did not oppose the abortion or gay marriage refs, the GFA, Irish unity, so saying they oppose everything shows you clearly don't know what your talking about.

BalcombeSt4

blanch152 wrote: »

Doesn't that just tell you how divisive a political force Sinn Fein are?

Their mission should be to reach across the community in the North and into Britain to build support for a united Ireland yet they just divide people with their stunts.

This might be true, but the DUP & hardline UUP members are just as gulity if not more so of dividing people with stunts, from Paisley declaring his support for the UVF & setting up Ulster Resistance, to blocking gay marriage rights, to Trimble at Drumcree, to Roberts declaring his support for bigoted hate preachers and trusting Muslims to buy him a paper but nothing more.

blanch152

BalcombeSt4 wrote: »

This might be true, but the DUP & hardline UUP members are just as gulity if not more so of dividing people with stunts, from Paisley declaring his support for the UVF & setting up Ulster Resistance, to blocking gay marriage rights, to Trimble at Drumcree, to Roberts declaring his support for bigoted hate preachers and trusting Muslims to buy him a paper but nothing more.

Yes, the DUP are just as guilty, if not more so, but they don't claim to speak for me.

BalcombeSt4

BalcombeSt4 wrote: »

This might be true, but the DUP....

Whataboutery much?

ancapailldorcha

Topgear on Dave wrote: »

Whataboutery much?

Serious comments only please.

Good loser

I would never vote for SF.


Their nationalism is a turn off, as is that of the DUP, and the English nationalist Brexiteers. In any case the heydey of nationalism has passed.


Their economic policies are pretty infantile. Opposition to water charges and property tax and now the carbon tax are mind boggling for a socialist-leaning party. They support a 'wealth tax' though 75% of all wealth is in residential property! Each year at budget time they produce a so-called costed budget and when challenged about spending figures revert to the 'costed budget'. This budget is riddled with anomalies and omissions which journalists are too lazy to interrogate.


Their housing proposals are circular and never related to the true costs.


In the last weeks at least three votes in the HOC were lost by lest than 7 votes. If they were concerned with the economic interests of their voters SF would have attended. If they don't want to attend why not refuse to stand in the elections. They are elected to represent all their constituents not just their own voters. The greatest cheerleaders for their abstention policies must be their political enemies - Farage, ERG, Brexiteer Tories, DUP. Or are they?

What chance a peerage for Mary Lou?

blanch152

Good loser wrote: »

I would never vote for SF.


Their nationalism is a turn off, as is that of the DUP, and the English nationalist Brexiteers. In any case the heydey of nationalism has passed.


Their economic policies are pretty infantile. Opposition to water charges and property tax and now the carbon tax are mind boggling for a socialist-leaning party. They support a 'wealth tax' though 75% of all wealth is in residential property! Each year at budget time they produce a so-called costed budget and when challenged about spending figures revert to the 'costed budget'. This budget is riddled with anomalies and omissions which journalists are too lazy to interrogate.


Their housing proposals are circular and never related to the true costs.


In the last weeks at least three votes in the HOC were lost by lest than 7 votes. If they were concerned with the economic interests of their voters SF would have attended. If they don't want to attend why not refuse to stand in the elections. They are elected to represent all their constituents not just their own voters. The greatest cheerleaders for their abstention policies must be their political enemies - Farage, ERG, Brexiteer Tories, DUP. Or are they?

What chance a peerage for Mary Lou?

Have to agree with all of this.

You forgot that they also wish to tax unicorns and rainbows and other similarly tangible assets.

It is really difficult to find a single concrete achievable objective that Sinn Fein favour. Either their goals are unachievable or cost an awful lot more than the fantasy costs provided.

James Brown

Good loser wrote: »

I would never vote for SF.


Their nationalism is a turn off, as is that of the DUP, and the English nationalist Brexiteers. In any case the heydey of nationalism has passed.


Their economic policies are pretty infantile. Opposition to water charges and property tax and now the carbon tax are mind boggling for a socialist-leaning party. They support a 'wealth tax' though 75% of all wealth is in residential property! Each year at budget time they produce a so-called costed budget and when challenged about spending figures revert to the 'costed budget'. This budget is riddled with anomalies and omissions which journalists are too lazy to interrogate.


Their housing proposals are circular and never related to the true costs.


In the last weeks at least three votes in the HOC were lost by lest than 7 votes. If they were concerned with the economic interests of their voters SF would have attended. If they don't want to attend why not refuse to stand in the elections. They are elected to represent all their constituents not just their own voters. The greatest cheerleaders for their abstention policies must be their political enemies - Farage, ERG, Brexiteer Tories, DUP. Or are they?

What chance a peerage for Mary Lou?

Would you not see elements of nationalism within the support for a Brexit? It's hardly had it's day

blanch152

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Would you not see elements of nationalism within the support for a Brexit? It's hardly had it's day

I would think that we are on the cusp.

There has been a determined resurgence in nationalism from the extremes, be that Trump supporters, Brexiteers, Irish nationalists, Northern unionists, parties in France, Germany, Italy etc.

The choice facing us now is regression and acceptance of that old-style nationalism or moving forward with international (indeed non-national) projects like the EU. For me, taking a full part in Europe takes priority over any national ambition.

tipptom

riddles wrote: »

SF engage in the politics of protest. This is the easiest stage of all to operate. We are all experts at pointing out things that are wrong and indulging in mock indignation but creating positive solutions is the challenging part. This is SF’s greatest challenge.

They reached a budget impasse in the north and pulled down the assembly under the disguise of the Irish language issue and the cash for ash stuff. It probably suited the DUP also to ensure they keep the budget subvention coming.

Even with record highs numbers in employment there they have a personal debt crisis and need 10-11 billion a year budget top up.

In short SF in power is most likely a fast track to become the next Venezuela. They lack any basic grounding in the realities of how mobile financial capital is and our dependency on inward investment. The pond life who vote for them here and in the North[/B] don’t realize the SF ‘free everything’ mantra is just nonsense.

Amazing this is let go while a couple of posts later the mod says he has removed any offensive posts!!!, while this comment was also thanked by at least two Mods.
Pond life indeed

James Brown

blanch152 wrote: »

I would think that we are on the cusp.

There has been a determined resurgence in nationalism from the extremes, be that Trump supporters, Brexiteers, Irish nationalists, Northern unionists, parties in France, Germany, Italy etc.

The choice facing us now is regression and acceptance of that old-style nationalism or moving forward with international (indeed non-national) projects like the EU. For me, taking a full part in Europe takes priority over any national ambition.

With the exception being a united Ireland. I see that as a positive. Holding on to the current situation is regressive. There are different forms of nationalism. I wouldn't put Brexit/Trump/unionist/far right as covering what nationalism is.
Either way, whatever ones view or politics, with Trump/Brexit etc. it's not near to having passed it's heyday. Nationalism can be a positive IMO, misused by some as is everything else.

James Brown

tipptom wrote: »

Amazing this is let go while a couple of posts later the mod says he has removed any offensive posts!!!, while this comment was also thanked by at least two Mods.
Pond life indeed

The usual scaremongering. So putting SF in power will make us bankrupt, (been there, the party responsible invited into bed by FG) and the current state of N.I. is an example of SF's mismanagement, the party who would completely change the way it's currently governed if they had their way?

Ironically mentioning that the SF 'free everything' is nonsense.

christy c

Matt Barrett wrote: »

The usual scaremongering. So putting SF in power will make us bankrupt, (been there, the party responsible invited into bed by FG)

That's the usual "look over there" response when SF's economic policies are mentioned. What's your view on them leaving aside your views on FF & FG?

Personally I wouldn't go near them due to the nonsense they proposed around the time of the bailout. If we had taken that approach we would be in a far worse position than we are now IMO, even taking in to account our current problems.

road_high

I’ve no idea why anyone in the south would vote SF. In the north they have a clearly defined purpose and role. Unless you’re a life long dole head then they offer absolutely nothing and even then given their Zaney “economics” such people are better off under FG FF regimes which have broadly offered economic stability

hmmm

bilbot79 wrote: »

Presumably they hold the only real hope of reuniting the country, a romantic idea that few want to let go of

No unionist is going to vote for an 32 county Ireland if they think SF will be in power. We've tried the IRA approach of ethnic slaughter of unionists to force them into a United Ireland and it failed. A Marxist republic isn't going to be attractive either.

The best hope for getting unionists to agree (and it has to an agreement) is through convincing them that they will be economically better off & their culture will be respected in a United Ireland, neither of which are SF strong points.

bilbot79

christy c wrote: »

Personally I wouldn't go near them due to the nonsense they proposed around the time of the bailout. If we had taken that approach we would be in a far worse position than we are now IMO, even taking in to account our current problems.

Theres no way of knowing that. There was definitely an argument at the time for burning bondholders and only Gerry Adams was advocating it. We would definitely have had the 'nuclear winter's of job losses etc that Brian Lenihan predicted but lots of problems would have been solved.

Today's economy seems great because millennials are spending deposit money on coffee and burgers. The bottom will soon fall out of that and we may wish we'd gone Icelandic

bilbot79

hmmm wrote: »

No unionist is going to vote for an 32 county Ireland if they think SF will be in power. We've tried the IRA approach of ethnic slaughter of unionists to force them into a United Ireland and it failed. A Marxist republic isn't going to be attractive either.

The best hope for getting unionists to agree (and it has to an agreement) is through convincing them that they will be economically better off & their culture will be respected in a United Ireland, neither of which are SF strong points.

100% agree. But we're it not for SF the moderate Irish parties would probably just drop the idea of a United ireland

Wanderer78

bilbot79 wrote:

Today's economy seems great because millennials are spending deposit money on coffee and burgers. The bottom will soon fall out of that and we may wish we'd gone Icelandic

Bond holders should have taken some sort of hit, and austerity is failing, not only in this country, we should be asking ourselves some serious questions regarding our financial sector, but we re largely not. This approach has lead to events such as trump, Brexit and a rise of the right. Millennials are getting screwed by these actions, as they have lead to further asset price inflation, low wage inflation and overall increasing worker insecurity, but thankfully some millennials have had enough, and are taking action, it ll be interesting to see how successful they are.

christy c

bilbot79 wrote: »

Theres no way of knowing that. There was definitely an argument at the time for burning bondholders and only Gerry Adams was advocating it. We would definitely have had the 'nuclear winter's of job losses etc that Brian Lenihan predicted but lots of problems would have been solved.

True, there's no way of knowing what would have happened, we can only make reasonable assumptions based on what we were told they would do.

I don't remember Gerry saying his proposals would lead to any nuclear winter of job losses or anything of the sort, maybe I missed that but I do remember soundbites like "a fairer way".

Geuze

I agree with SF's desire for a united Ireland.

I agree with them that housing, healthcare and income inequality are problems.

I don't agree with their planned solutions.

They plan fairly large income tax increases on many earners over 35k approx.

OK, I would be reluctantly willing to agree to this if the funds were spent on infrastructure.

Not welfare increases for able-bodied adults.

Not excessive increases in PS numbers.

However, I can't trust them on that.

BalcombeSt4

Topgear on Dave wrote: »

Whataboutery much?

Yes, and? If the point is true so what? That's a SF came up with no? I don't support Sinn Fein.

James Brown

bilbot79 wrote: »

100% agree. But we're it not for SF the moderate Irish parties would probably just drop the idea of a United ireland

SF don't own the idea of a united Ireland. Enda Kenny was getting all teary eyed at the prospect on his way out. If it looks to be popular FF/FG will start to get louder about it.

road_high wrote: »

I’ve no idea why anyone in the south would vote SF. In the north they have a clearly defined purpose and role. Unless you’re a life long dole head then they offer absolutely nothing and even then given their Zaney “economics” such people are better off under FG FF regimes which have broadly offered economic stability

Yet we keep forgiving FF for actually destroying the economy and FG for overseeing record breaking societal crises. A car careening off a cliff is stable until it runs out of road.
Also do you truly believe any party advocates welfare for those, to quote Ned Flanders, 'Just don't want to work, God bless 'em'?

BalcombeSt4

christy c wrote: »

That's the usual "look over there" response when SF's economic policies are mentioned. What's your view on them leaving aside your views on FF & FG?

Personally I wouldn't go near them due to the nonsense they proposed around the time of the bailout. If we had taken that approach we would be in a far worse position than we are now IMO, even taking in to account our current problems.

I would vote Sinn Fein over FF & FG but I'd rather vote for a real Labour party that actually benefits the working class & unions.

A lot of people are slamming SF's economic policy but haven't actually said pointed out what parts will "bankrupt" us. Could it be worse than Dev's backward trade war with Britian, or the policies that led to mass immigration from the 1950's - 80's.

Like does SF support

• Nationalization of industries
• Workers councils
• Collectivism
• Mixed economy
• Workers control over production
• Calculation in Kind
• State capitalism
• Cooperatives
• Planned economy

Like what is there economic philosophy?