Why do people consider FG right wing

Eric Cartman

I dont know how people consider FG right wing , they havent lowered taxes or helped the middle class one iota. For welfare recipients theyve given them the christmas bonus, HAP increases and now this, 12 months on the dole without being hastled if you claim to be an artist. FG are doing more for welfare leeches and welfare dependent migrants than for any business owner or middle class professional. On social issues theyre left of centre and increasingly presenting left wing economic policies.

glenfieldman

With that slimy prick as the head of the snake, FG will never be right wing. They are so far left it’s embarrassing

is_that_so

We have no right wing parties, just centrists and lefties. They are right of centre in areas like crime and fiscal responsibility but still retain a left of centre wing which is strong on social issues. A lot of people just use the label as an expression of dislike, mostly I think in frustration that people will not vote for their favoured left fringe crackpots.

Augme

Fine Gael would love to be right wing but the problem is they haven't been given the mandate from the people of Ireland to be right wing. Irish people have no interest in a right wing government.

Eric Cartman

Augme wrote: »

Fine Gael would love to be right wing but the problem is they haven't been given the mandate from the people of Ireland to be right wing. Irish people have no interest in a right wing government.

There is definitely an interest in it. If FG came out tomorrow and said they were going to knock 10% off income tax at the expense of welfare you’d have most of the country delighted.

riffmongous

They've kept property prices high and on track to get higher and higher, this will ultimately benefit the middle and upper classes more. The dole increases and bonus are nothing compared to the increase in value of property

McMurphy

is_that_so wrote: »

We have no right wing parties, just centrists and lefties. They are right of centre in areas like crime and fiscal responsibility but still retain a left of centre wing which is strong on social issues. A lot of people just use the label as an expression of dislike, mostly I think in frustration that people will not vote for their favoured left fringe crackpots.

Except when it's involving some of their own.

Specifically insurance fraud.

Sleeper12

Can't say if FG is right wing or not but many of their supporters are right wing. Just watch how they post on threads about immigration, homelessness, social welfare etc, etc.

is_that_so

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

Except when it's involving some of their own.

Specifically insurance fraud.

Not defending the lady in question but she didn't actually get to commit any fraud.

riffmongous

Their youth wing is also much more textbook right wing (all youth wings are of course)

McMurphy

is_that_so wrote: »

Not defend the lady in question but she didn't actually get to commit any fraud.

Would you defend an armed robber because they were stopped in their tracks too?

Didn't get to commit fraud because she was exposed, not because she had a change of heart.

Sleeper12

is_that_so wrote:

Not defend the lady in question but she didn't actually get to commit any fraud.

Thanks to the Irish independent for highlighting the issues and forcing her to withdraw the case. Fingers crossed she'll have to pay the hotels legal fees

sameoldname

Eric Cartman wrote: »

There is definitely an interest in it. If FG came out tomorrow and said they were going to knock 10% off income tax at the expense of welfare you’d have most of the country delighted.

Right up until the next recession when those exact same people will be demanding welfare increases and mortgage forgiveness. Just until they get back on their feet of course, then they'll be complaining about high taxes and mortgage interest rates.

is_that_so

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

Would you defend an armed robber because they were stopped in their tracks too?

Well that's a different crime in progress -illegal possession of a weapon. She was taking a civil case, which she subsequently dropped. There were no charges real or implied against her so no crime. I think she was foolish, quite possibly greedy but no harm no foul.

McMurphy

is_that_so wrote: »

Well that's a different crime in progress -illegal possession of a weapon. She was taking a civil case, which she subsequently dropped. There were no charges real or implied against her so no crime. I think she was foolish, quite possibly greedy but no harm no foul.

Doesn't appear that way according to FGs own report.

Fine Gael swing fall probe finds Maria Bailey's claim overstated impact of injuries

batgoat

Eric Cartman wrote: »

There is definitely an interest in it. If FG came out tomorrow and said they were going to knock 10% off income tax at the expense of welfare you’d have most of the country delighted.

While it might be popular, it wouldn't actually be addressing the issues in Ireland. Eg untenable rental markets, ever increasing house prices, homelessness. I say this as a person in the high tax bracket, I'd prefer if they began to deal properly with the above issues over lowering my income tax.

I would classify Fine Gael as a bit right on economic issues. And a bit left on social issues.

is_that_so

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

Doesn't appear that way according to FGs own report.

Fine Gael swing fall probe finds Maria Bailey's claim overstated impact of injuries

Yeah, that comes under being stupid and greedy. Put it down to dubious behaviour at most. Legally no crime to be seen. Insurance fraud is a crime, exaggeration of a likely claim is not but it is up to a judge to spot that and that report suggests that would have been the probable outcome.

McMurphy

is_that_so wrote: »

Yeah, that comes under being stupid and greedy. Put it down to dubious behaviour at most. Legally no crime to be seen. Insurance fraud is a crime, exaggeration of a likely claim is not but it is up to a judge to spot that and that report suggests that would have been the probable outcome.

If she "over stated" the extent of her injuries, then she exaggerated the extent of her injuries.

That's insurance fraud, a "clear cut case" of insurance fraud, according to Insurance Ireland

Insurance fraud is often perceived as being different from other types of crime as it is viewed as a victimless crime - no one is hurt. In the overall scheme of things, the making of a false claim or the exaggeration of a genuine claim by a few thousand Euro is seen as the proverbial drop in the ocean of the finances of insurance companies. However, the reality is very different. While most claims are genuine, a small minority of people make fraudulent and exaggerated claims. Insurance fraud costs insurance companies in Ireland an estimated €200 million annually which ends up being paid by honest policyholders.

Fraud is the premeditated commission of a serious criminal offence which merits trial on indictment before a judge and jury in the criminal courts, the same courts where crimes such as armed robberies, serious assaults and even murders are dealt with.

Types of insurance fraud are wide-ranging, from criminal gangs who engage in fraud rings to the individual who exaggerates a claim on their policy to get more money from their insurance company.

There's also this:

The law, the Civil Liability and Courts Act 2004, under sections 14 and 25, makes it a criminal offence to invent accidents, feign injuries, or exaggerate elements of either.

Section 25 applies to anyone giving false or misleading evidence in a personal injuries action with the intention of misleading the court, while section 14 requires the plaintiff specifically to swear an affidavit as to the truth of all assertions, allegations, and information provided to the defendant and to provide that affidavit within 21 days of lodging a claim.

Fines of up to €100,000 and/or imprisonment of up to ten years can be imposed on those convicted of breaches of either section.

is_that_so

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

If she "over stated" the extent of her injuries, then she exaggerated the extent of her injuries.

That's insurance fraud, a "clear cut case" of insurance fraud, according to Insurance Ireland

You're using an internal review to establish facts best left to a court of law. The nature of overstated is for the judge to decide. The bold bit says trying to get more from their own insurance company. I'd imagine she was suing a different one. She was never actually on trial. As no charges have been presented and there are unlikely to be any she's only guilty on the internet!

Underground

I'm not sure who considers FG right wing. I think PBP Solidarity types would probably say something like that. But when you're so far to the left like them, everyone must seem right wing.

Assetbacked

is_that_so wrote: »

You're using an internal review to establish facts best left to a court of law. The nature of overstated is for the judge to decide. She was never actually on trial. As no charges have been presented and there are unlikely to be any she's only guilty on the internet!

It would certainly be a good move politically for FG to try to have her prosecuted to send a message about how serious they are on insurance reform.

McMurphy

is_that_so wrote: »

The nature of overstated is for the judge to decide. She was never actually on trial. As no charges have been presented and there are unlikely to be any she's only guilty on the internet!

You only read what you wanted to read, didn't you?

Maybe you missed this part.

The law, the Civil Liability and Courts Act 2004, under sections 14 and 25, makes it a criminal offence to invent accidents, feign injuries, or exaggerate elements of either.

Now I don't know if you are being deliberately obtuse, or are just trying to defend Bailey and or the FG party, and I couldn't care less regardless.

What I will say though, that FGs own internal review of what happened seems to have concluded that Bailey exaggerated the extent of her injuries.

As it stands they have a member in their own party who they have concluded committed insurance fraud, and more power to them, now let's see how they deal with it, and if the solicitor involved will be outed too.

Phoebas

Another thread derailed.

Phoebas

Assetbacked wrote: »

It would certainly be a good move politically for FG to try to have her prosecuted to send a message about how serious they are on insurance reform.

They aren't right wing or anywhere close to it. They don't market themselves as right wing, nor do their supporters to any great extent.
They're right of LAB, SF and possibly FF, so I guess that's slightly right wing in an Irish context, but nowhere near in any normal meaning of it.

is_that_so

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

You only read what you wanted to read, didn't you?

Maybe you missed this part.



Now I don't know if you are being deliberately obtuse, or are just trying to defend Bailey and or the FG party, and I couldn't care less regardless.

What I will say though, that FGs own internal review of what happened seems to have concluded that Bailey exaggerated the extent of her injuries.

As it stands they have a member in their own party who they have concluded committed insurance fraud, and more power to them, now let's see how they deal with it, and if the solicitor involved will be outed too.

No I read what you bolded but I like facts. None of any of this points to current criminal charges. I am happy for people to be prosecuted but you seem to be using her behaviour to adopt a stance on FG, which is fine BTW.

is_that_so

Assetbacked wrote: »

It would certainly be a good move politically for FG to try to have her prosecuted to send a message about how serious they are on insurance reform.

That's a DPP call. I can see them censuring her in some way or maybe deselecting her in the next election but can't see a lot of success in any prosecution.

Jupiter Mulligan

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

Would you defend an armed robber because they were stopped in their tracks too?

Didn't get to commit fraud because she was exposed, not because she had a change of heart.

Johnny Boy's approach to sinning reminds me of what Father Brennan told me in religion class fifty years ago:-

remember lads, if you look at a good looking girl and feel a stirring in your y-fronts and fancy a quick knee trembler with her then, whether or not you actually shag her, you've committed adultery in your heart and are guilty of sin!

In a like manner, the Rev Johnny Bloodhound has found the Bailey woman guilty of sinning! Stone her!

It's refreshing to see that the fundamental sense of morality that wee Johnny learned at his mother's knee has never left him. And it's even better to see a practicing Cattlick moralising on the agnostic threads of Bored.ie!

klaaaz

Eric Cartman wrote: »

There is definitely an interest in it. If FG came out tomorrow and said they were going to knock 10% off income tax at the expense of welfare you’d have most of the country delighted.

Typical FG neo capitalist nonsense with zero empathy for the poor. This type of dangerous greed wants to get rid of social services like our health service, reduce funding for the Gardai, fire brigade, ambulance service, the coastguard etc

Billionaires control the vast majority of the wealth, banksters along with FFG political elite caused the economic crash with enormous debt put on the populace.

And oh, insurance fraudsters cheat us all.

bloodless_coup

I only vote for Fine Geal in the hopes they some day revert to thier 1930s origins.

Jupiter Mulligan

klaaaz wrote: »

And oh, insurance fraudsters cheat us all.

As do tax thieves - yet self-confessed tax fraudster Mick Wallace received 140,000 votes from admirers of tax cheats in the Ireland South European constituency.

On this basis, perhaps Ms. Bailey should consider running for Europe in 5 years time. She already dyes her hair, so all she really needs to do is to dress like a knacker and she's home and dry.

Varik

Phoebas wrote: »

They aren't right wing or anywhere close to it. They don't market themselves as right wing, nor do their supporters to any great extent.
They're right of LAB, SF and possibly FF, so I guess that's slightly right wing in an Irish context, but nowhere near in any normal meaning of it.

Would disagree about how they portray/advertise themselves.

Load of talk about "people who get up in the morning" and Leo and his "welfare cheats cheat us all", they just don't do anything about it.

Thy just try to differentiate their brand and then continue as normal.