Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Green Party wish list.
Options
Comments
-
The IMF are gone and we don't need them to borrow, because we have negative interest rates and near-0 to negative interest rate bonds - so stop talking nonsense, thanks.You seem to be living in you own little world.
Do you remember austerity, the bank bail out and the troika arriving in Ireland telling the government what it could and could not do, what was that if not the EU enforcing its rules?
I will have nothing more to do with this particular topic.
Learn why we went to them for a bailout (hint: high interest rates), and how conditiosn today are nothing like that (hint: zero-to-negative interest rates...), instead of talking absolute nonsense.
Multiple posters here still think we're paying back the IMF...
The EU has never enforced the SGP rules on debt ratios - and they never will! - because they've given favourable treatment to France, Germany, Spain and Portugal (sixth time I'm saying this now). So give it a rest already, those rules have never been enforced - and they never will be, as they'd trigger a fresh political/economic crisis in the EU.
Some people are just fetishists for budget-balancing/austerity, will make up anything to justify it...0 -
-
The IMF are gone and we don't need them to borrow, because we have negative interest rates and near-0 to negative interest rate bonds - so stop talking nonsense, thanks.
Learn why we went to them for a bailout (hint: high interest rates), and how conditiosn today are nothing like that (hint: zero-to-negative interest rates...), instead of talking absolute nonsense.
Multiple posters here still think we're paying back the IMF...
The EU has never enforced the SGP rules on debt ratios - and they never will! - because they've given favourable treatment to France, Germany, Spain and Portugal (sixth time I'm saying this now). So give it a rest already, those rules have never been enforced - and they never will be, as they'd trigger a fresh political/economic crisis in the EU.
Some people are just fetishists for budget-balancing/austerity, will make up anything to justify it...
the reason the IMF were here last time was that virtually no one would lend to us .. or only lend to us at prohibitively high interest rates because we were an absolute basket case i.e. we didnt manage our public finances properly
and yes the IMF are still keeping an eye on the irish economy and budgets even 12 years later, they even encouraged contjnued national debt reduction in their latest 2019 mission
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/imf-seeks-healthcare-review-to-avoid-spending-overruns-1.3887842%3fmode=amp0 -
And now people are so desperate to lend us money, that they will do it at 0% and even negative interest rates, indicating GIGANTIC demand for government bonds, and ample ability to issue them...
The IMF are gone - they write reports, and have no influence on us anymore - we're not paying debt to them.0 -
Many of those buying bonds are those who have to. Guys like pension funds. Bye bye retirement...And now people are so desperate to lend us money, that they will do it at 0% and even negative interest rates, indicating GIGANTIC demand for government bonds, and ample ability to issue them...0 -
Advertisement
-
And now people are so desperate to lend us money, that they will do it at 0% and even negative interest rates, indicating GIGANTIC demand for government bonds, and ample ability to issue them...
The IMF are gone - they write reports, and have no influence on us anymore - we're not paying debt to them.
Yes they may lend it to us now. Most bonds are written on ten year loan notes. And you are right the vast majority are recycled. Because we managed to get our debt in order we managed to reborrow all our debt over the 5+years at lower rates than we borrowed from the EU and EMF. Yes we could borrow this year and maybe next year. But in 2-3 or 5 years time when we want go recycle debt the bond lender may decide that Ireland isn't a good risk and our bond interest goes up. This is what happened in 2010.
Due to COVID we are probably looking at 250 billion in debt. At 0.5% interest it costs us 1.25 billion to service, at 2% it costs 5 billion this is manageable, at 4% it 10billion we be in austerity and 5%+ it f@@king ''oops''. Just because we can borrow at virtually 0% is not to mean we can always do it.
As I said you are basing you analysis on ''Magic Money'' from the magic monkeySlava Ukrainii
0 -
Ah come on the programme is an insult to current and upcoming generations - leaving them fucked on housing, and hiking regressive taxes on them while pledging austerity in a bit more than a couple of years...
Don't defend the Greens when what they've enabled is just more of the same. Push for a new/separate party that actually represents green policies - instead of representing nothing more than the co-opting of the green vote...
Who did you vote for in the election?0 -
[QUOTE=Bas
s Reeves;113870503]Yes they may lend it to us now. Most bonds are written on ten year loan notes. And you are right the vast majority are recycled. Because we managed to get our debt in order we managed to reborrow all our debt over the 5+years at lower rates than we borrowed from the EU and EMF. Yes we could borrow this year and maybe next year. But in 2-3 or 5 years time when we want go recycle debt the bond lender may decide that Ireland isn't a good risk and our bond interest goes up. This is what happened in 2010.
Due to COVID we are probably looking at 250 billion in debt. At 0.5% interest it costs us 1.25 billion to service, at 2% it costs 5 billion this is manageable, at 4% it 10billion we be in austerity and 5%+ it f@@king ''oops''. Just because we can borrow at virtually 0% is not to mean we can always do it.
As I said you are basing you analysis on ''Magic Money'' from the magic monkey[/QUOTE]
You don't make economic policy based on 'maybes' in the future - we have an economic crisis and high unemployment now, and we are best placed to fund ourselves in the future, by maximizing GDP and employment now - and keeping both maximized the whole way.
Economies crater through a combined GDP drop and by choosing austerity - they don't crater through sustaining Full Output (maximum GDP) in downturns, and neither do bond rates hike in economies that sustain Full Output that way either.
We've been hitting 0% and negative interest - not even 0.5%.
The existing stock of government debt doesn't rise in interest, when interest rates go up - and all through the period of low interest, we can restructure the stock of debt as we desire, to spread out when it falls due. 10 year bonds, 30 year bonds, 100 year bonds are even mooted....hell, even perpetual bonds have been mooted.
Again - you demonstrate with the term "magic money", that you think we dig money out of the ground, as if we still used gold, or that it is otherwise burdensome to create (all variations of these views, are a century out of date) - that you don't understand we are in a fiat money system...
Again: Where exactly do you think money comes from, how it's created? You don't seem to have the slightest clue, just spout on about a "magic monkey" as if people are supposed to know what the fuck you're on about - when you don't even know yourself...0 -
Tell me how wrote: »Aside from the level of debt, if there was an agreement within government to access more funding, where is it likely the demand would be that money is spent.
The healthcare system (record trolley numbers, extensive waiting lists, most expensive hospital in the world)
Housing (record homeless numbers, growing disenfranchised group who fear house ownership is beyond them)
Social Welfare (Most expensive dept, Covid-19 Cost explosion)
There is less than a zero chance of any sort of agreement amongst government or the electorate to fund green progression via massive borrowing while the above issues exist.
I'm not saying that investment is not going to be critical in meaningful progress, but this angle on the conversation is once again absolving parties outside of the Greens completely.
A joined up thinking approach is whats needed to quite quickly solve a number of issues and a bit of foresight.
Stop selling army land to developers and evicting soldiers to rent privately. The result: the Defence Forces are bleeding troops because they can't afford to rent and live on what they are being paid. So pay increase?
The apartments next to Tallaght hospital were in Nama. How about free rent of one to any doctor or nurse who secures a job in the hospital. They'd easily resolve the staffing shortages. Nope, they sold them to a vulture fund.
There's an unfinished monstrosity in Sandyford across the road from the Beacon. How about finish it and set up a similar scheme.
Hospital staff who can do so, living next door to the hospital cuts down on cars and public transport use when they can walk to work. Who wants to be treated by a nurse who just arrived on shift after an hour on the Luas?
Reduce car usage - fine with me.
But the bicycle is not the answer for everyone. Personally, I'd want danger money to cycle in Dublin city.
Match people to where they work.
I'd love to see some figures on the demographics of people living in Central Park. From my observations, many don't need to be there specifically, they could be moved to allow some of the 4000+ people who work next door in Vodafone or Merryl Lynch to live there and again walk to work.
Green Party, think smarter about the issues the country faces.0 -
You don't make economic policy based on 'maybes' in the future - we have an economic crisis and high unemployment now, and we are best placed to fund ourselves in the future, by maximizing GDP and employment now - and keeping both maximized the whole way.
Economies crater through a combined GDP drop and by choosing austerity - they don't crater through sustaining Full Output (maximum GDP) in downturns, and neither do bond rates hike in economies that sustain Full Output that way either.
We've been hitting 0% and negative interest - not even 0.5%.
The existing stock of government debt doesn't rise in interest, when interest rates go up - and all through the period of low interest, we can restructure the stock of debt as we desire, to spread out when it falls due. 10 year bonds, 30 year bonds, 100 year bonds are even mooted....hell, even perpetual bonds have been mooted.
Again - you demonstrate with the term "magic money", that you think we dig money out of the ground, as if we still used gold, or that it is otherwise burdensome to create (all variations of these views, are a century out of date) - that you don't understand we are in a fiat money system...
Again: Where exactly do you think money comes from, how it's created? You don't seem to have the slightest clue, just spout on about a "magic monkey" as if people are supposed to know what the fuck you're on about - when you don't even know yourself...
Its is not maybe's its economic analysis. One of the reasons money is cheap at present for bonds is because people who have pensions buy annuities. Pension companies that sell annuities have to buy mainly government bonds as pensions have to be secure. However there is a move to change this across the world. At resent because annuities rates are so poor pensioners are starting to leave the money in there AVC's using a balanced investment portfolio. There reasons for this is two fold, pensioners can now end up as long on there pensions as working therefore do not need to secure all the money day one. Annuity rates are so poor not heading to sub 3% because of bond rates it is making DB scheme bankrupt if they secure the total pension of any worker that retires with a projected lifespan left of heading for 30 years. Because of this governments across the world are considering changing pension rules and allowing annuity providers to have a more mixed portfolio. when these changes come into place bond rates will rise.
By the way I did not say we were paying 0.5% what I posted was different senario interest rates to show the effect on the Budget. i know all bonds are not turned over every year, but neither are they turned over uniformly, there are time when we rewrite 20-30% of bonds in a 12 month period. Yes the NTMA try to balance that as much as possible but if you get caught at the wrong part of the cycle and are forced to borrow at extremely high bond rates as we did in 2010 with an budget and economy under pressure it causes austerity like 2010-2014. Finally a economy cannot run at full employment and full output for any great lenght of time, you would need continuous growth which in itself causes issues within the economy. We tried it in the noughties it failed
Yes I know as I told you money is no longer tied to the gold standard and that central banks print it but our central bank is not printing it, it the EU central bank that prints it and controls it. They have rules you think we can disobey those rules. Yes the EU has released the shackles but as you have been told that the rules to this are defined. As well they have released a quantitative easing fund of 750 billion but we have very limited access to that of about 2 billion.
Again your plan is magic money from the magic monkeySlava Ukrainii
0 -
Advertisement
-
Deleted User wrote: »A joined up thinking approach is whats needed to quite quickly solve a number of issues and a bit of foresight.
Stop selling army land to developers and evicting soldiers to rent privately. The result: the Defence Forces are bleeding troops because they can't afford to rent and live on what they are being paid. So pay increase?
The apartments next to Tallaght hospital were in Nama. How about free rent of one to any doctor or nurse who secures a job in the hospital. They'd easily resolve the staffing shortages. Nope, they sold them to a vulture fund.
There's an unfinished monstrosity in Sandyford across the road from the Beacon. How about finish it and set up a similar scheme.
Hospital staff who can do so, living next door to the hospital cuts down on cars and public transport use when they can walk to work. Who wants to be treated by a nurse who just arrived on shift after an hour on the Luas?
Reduce car usage - fine with me.
But the bicycle is not the answer for everyone. Personally, I'd want danger money to cycle in Dublin city.
Match people to where they work.
I'd love to see some figures on the demographics of people living in Central Park. From my observations, many don't need to be there specifically, they could be moved to allow some of the 4000+ people who work next door in Vodafone or Merryl Lynch to live there and again walk to work.
Green Party, think smarter about the issues the country faces.
Your plan smack of a land commission plan for housing. Will the state always end up owning these houses. If Vodafone leaves the worker go do they have to move out. What happens if the partner of the nurse or Vodafone worker works an hours commute in a different place.Slava Ukrainii
0 -
I'd love renewables in my house. cant resell electricity to the grid so payback way too long. looked at air to water when replacing boiler completely unsuitable as a retrofit to an old house.
would love to see what the solutions are0 -
The sole reason money is cheap is because the interest rate is low/negative - leading to a flow of funds from the ECB/central-banks, through financial intermediaries (covering a wide variety of financial institutions, not merely pensions), who then purchase bonds. A good portion of those bonds then get exchanged from those financial institutions, with the ECB during QE asset purchases.Bass Reeves wrote: »Its is not maybe's its economic analysis. One of the reasons money is cheap at present for bonds is because people who have pensions buy annuities. Pension companies that sell annuities have to buy mainly government bonds as pensions have to be secure. However there is a move to change this across the world. At resent because annuities rates are so poor pensioners are starting to leave the money in there AVC's using a balanced investment portfolio. There reasons for this is two fold, pensioners can now end up as long on there pensions as working therefore do not need to secure all the money day one. Annuity rates are so poor not heading to sub 3% because of bond rates it is making DB scheme bankrupt if they secure the total pension of any worker that retires with a projected lifespan left of heading for 30 years. Because of this governments across the world are considering changing pension rules and allowing annuity providers to have a more mixed portfolio. when these changes come into place bond rates will rise.
By the way I did not say we were paying 0.5% what I posted was different senario interest rates to show the effect on the Budget. i know all bonds are not turned over every year, but neither are they turned over uniformly, there are time when we rewrite 20-30% of bonds in a 12 month period. Yes the NTMA try to balance that as much as possible but if you get caught at the wrong part of the cycle and are forced to borrow at extremely high bond rates as we did in 2010 with an budget and economy under pressure it causes austerity like 2010-2014. Finally a economy cannot run at full employment and full output for any great lenght of time, you would need continuous growth which in itself causes issues within the economy. We tried it in the noughties it failed
Yes I know as I told you money is no longer tied to the gold standard and that central banks print it but our central bank is not printing it, it the EU central bank that prints it and controls it. They have rules you think we can disobey those rules. Yes the EU has released the shackles but as you have been told that the rules to this are defined. As well they have released a quantitative easing fund of 750 billion but we have very limited access to that of about 2 billion.
Again your plan is magic money from the magic monkey
It is not 2010 anymore. Austerity is always a political decision, never an economic one.
The EU rules are suspended - and the SGP rules have both never been enforced, and are unenforceable, as the favourable treatment given to France, Germany, Spain and Portgual in terms of debt ratio breaches, would lead to a fresh EU political/economic crisis and litigation, if there was any attempt at that.
Persistent Full Employment and Full Output is perfectly manageable - it's standard New Deal style Keynesianism.
Nobody has to disobey any ECB rules, governments are perfectly able to indirectly access this financing on the secondary market through issuing government bonds - and there is bugger all the ECB can do about it...
You seem to hold a contradictory position - where you use the term 'magic money', which means that you think money is not something that is readily created, that it's ridiculous to think of it being printed out of thin air - yet you claim to believe the ECB prints money...out of thin air...i.e. the ECB has 'magic money' apparently...
You don't seem to understand what you mean by 'magic money' - and whatever the fuck the 'magic monkey' is supposed to be, in addition to that...
You seem to believe the exogenous theory of money creation - that the ECB is the only entitiy that creates money, and is ultimately in direct control of the money supply - but again you are wrong, money creation is endogenous, it is controlled by activity within the economy, by people/businesses taking out loans etc. (when banks give out loans, they create money - 'magic money' you say...), and the ECB does not have the power to stop this, only to dissuade/encourage it indirectly, through interest rate changes and open market operations.0 -
ednwireland wrote: »I'd love renewables in my house. cant resell electricity to the grid so payback way too long. looked at air to water when replacing boiler completely unsuitable as a retrofit to an old house.
would love to see what the solutions are
You won’t get the answer on this thread.....I have renovated two houses and it depends on a number of things...you need to be careful on A2W as the contractors can get ahead of themselves
Maybe open a thread on the renewable forum with details...solar is not for everyone but FiT is not going to make a huge difference depending on your system....0 -
Shefwedfan wrote: »You won’t get the answer on this thread.....I have renovated two houses and it depends on a number of things...you need to be careful on A2W as the contractors can get ahead of themselves
Maybe open a thread on the renewable forum with details...solar is not for everyone but FiT is not going to make a huge difference depending on your system....
I assume FiT means the Feed in Tariff that this government has yet to pass legislation on, but is committed to doing so.
Why will A Feed in Tariff not make a difference?
If people are generating surplus electricity and feed that back into the grid surely they will be getting the same unit cost as any other electricity generator, or credit offset for that amount of power when they do need to draw power from the grid.
It strike me with the massive cost of solar installation not to do so is going to be counter productive especially when it will take years for anyone who has chosen to invest in solar to break even.
Surely the Green have a policy and proposal ready to put before government regarding this and will be insisting that any tariff system ensures that the national grid buy this surplus electricity at the same price as the electricity they get from commercial fossil fuel powered generating plants.0 -
I assume FiT means the Feed in Tariff that this government has yet to pass legislation on, but is committed to doing so.
Why will A Feed in Tariff not make a difference?
If people are generating surplus electricity and feed that back into the grid surely they will be getting the same unit cost as any other electricity generator, or credit offset for that amount of power when they do need to draw power from the grid.
It strike me with the massive cost of solar installation not to do so is going to be counter productive especially when it will take years for anyone who has chosen to invest in solar to break even.
Surely the Green have a policy and proposal ready to put before government regarding this and will be insisting that any tariff system ensures that the national grid buy this surplus electricity at the same price as the electricity they get from commercial fossil fuel powered generating plants.
If you don’t know about solar why are you posting about it?
Cheerio......I’m out0 -
I am happy Eamon is the transport minister, I hope he can finally get bus connects and the metro going, and keep pushing forward the efforts to pedestrianise more spaces and build more segregated cycle infrastructure.
I pity the folks in rural Ireland, you'll all have to share the one car and there'll be wolves outside your one offs before the year is out. Say goodbye to cattle farming too, you'll be moving to a diet of imported avocados and soy now I'm afraid.
Greens are great for Dublin though and that's all that matters!0 -
Thelonious Monk wrote: »I am happy Eamon is the transport minister, I hope he can finally get bus connects and the metro going, and keep pushing forward the efforts to pedestrianise more spaces and build more segregated cycle infrastructure.
I pity the folks in rural Ireland, you'll all have to share the one car and there'll be wolves outside your one offs before the year is out. Say goodbye to cattle farming too, you'll be moving to a diet of imported avocados and soy now I'm afraid.
Greens are great for Dublin though and that's all that matters!
I hope your still happy when your electricity and gas bill trebles over the next few years thanks to Eamon the savour of the planet, while he heads of into the sunset with his nice ministerial pension laughing at the like of you struggling to keep you house warm because that you cant afford to retrofit you house.
No need to pity the country folk, like many in rural people i own a bog and plenty of trees so i wont be cold, so f*ck the Greens.
''Greens are great for Dublin'' tell that to the renters or young people trying to buy a home or can the sleep on cycle lanes at night.0 -
The problem is that will end up being a hidden subsidy. Households selling 'leccy back to the grid is basically selling into a glut.Surely the Green have a policy and proposal ready to put before government regarding this and will be insisting that any tariff system ensures that the national grid buy this surplus electricity at the same price as the electricity they get from commercial fossil fuel powered generating plants.0 -
PommieBast wrote: »The problem is that will end up being a hidden subsidy. Households selling 'leccy back to the grid is basically selling into a glut.
The way I see it is if people are allowed to sell their surplus back to the grid, then that's less time the fossil fuel powered electricity generating plants have to run.
Give them the rate at which the grid buy (obviously there would be different rates depending on time of day), or credit them in their electricity bills when they do draw power from the grid.
A the moment, as I understand it, homes that have solar panels can't feed back into the grid. Legislation is required for this.
Installing solar to homes is still expensive, and most installations will not break even in cost for many years. That is what puts off most people, and the grants while there simply do not make solar a sensible investment at the moment for most where their money is tight and they would have to borrow to install solar.
When solar becomes the norm there might well be a glut during daylight hours, but even if a very minimal payment is made for surplus electricity it has to be better than having oil or gas power plants running. Even if they only offset one of these plants it would be worth it.
The issue is do we wait until technology improves and solar panels become so cheap that everyone has them or do we incentivise people to install solar now, by feeding their surplus into the grid and paying them a nominal fee for that electricity.0 -
Advertisement
-
Trouble there is that powerstations that are intended to be turned on and off daily are nowhere near as efficent as base-load generation. Only burning coal/oil/gas half the time is no gain if the CO2/MWh while running is 3-4 times higher.When solar becomes the norm there might well be a glut during daylight hours, but even if a very minimal payment is made for surplus electricity it has to be better than having oil or gas power plants running. Even if they only offset one of these plants it would be worth it.0 -
PommieBast wrote: »Trouble there is that powerstations that are intended to be turned on and off daily are nowhere near as efficent as base-load generation. Only burning coal/oil/gas half the time is no gain if the CO2/MWh while running is 3-4 times higher.
Which is why I could not understand the first thing the new government doing would be to allow homes to put their surplus into the grid.
the sooner we get rid of those power plants that are switched on and off at peak periods the better. Solar happens to work during the times the extra electricity is required, so its a perfect match.
Its a win/win as far as I can see it. Additional energy available when its most needed, and little on no serious capital investment required by the state.
If enough homes had solar, then the need for these power plants that only operate during peak times could be be negated,or their number significantly reduced.
Obviously the commercial energy generators might not like it because this would eat into their profits, but I think this is one of those few cases where national interest should override any commercial interest.0 -
mgn wrote:I hope your still happy when your electricity and gas bill trebles over the next few years thanks to Eamon the savour of the planet, while he heads of into the sunset with his nice ministerial pension laughing at the like of you struggling to keep you house warm because that you cant afford to retrofit you house.mgn wrote:No need to pity the country folk, like many in rural people i own a bog and plenty of trees so i wont be cold, so f*ck the Greens.mgn wrote:''Greens are great for Dublin'' tell that to the renters or young people trying to buy a home or can the sleep on cycle lanes at night.
Nice rant, but you fell for the bait.
Truth be told...we're playing catchup with many developed nations. We don't even pay water charges so be thankful for that at least.
What's the matter with realising the benefits of joined up infrastructure? Multiple nations have it. You pay for out when you use it. You can complain about tax all you like but so what, you'll be paying that anyway.
So or your can benefit from whatever additions are made... and in some cases you'll be rightly thankful for.
You see, i wont benefit hugely either but my mentality is that I'd rather see a functioning, cost efficient, well designed national infrastructure to be proud of rather than a horse and cart in Galway say, just because it doesnt directly benefit me. Thats a sad mentality.
I do agree with the housing problems but that had f**k all to do with cycle lanes0 -
I read an article today in the Sunday Times. It says there's no way we can afford universal basic income. They government will have to borrow billions to revive the economy. Many shops and business, s are at risk of closing down. I think many of the green proposals will be delayed or not put into practice, the government need to get support from the greens
To form a new government so they agreed to a
green wishlist which is mostly impossible to
put into practice in the present situation
where we are just getting covid under control.
To pay universal basic income would cost most of the annual tax revenue.
There's a reason no country has ever put ubi
Into effect apart from small trials in part of the country.
Ireland is an open economy we rely on exports, tourism and tax revenue from company's like Intel to pay for government services and social welfare. At the moment, tourism income is zero.
Many airlines are struggling to stay in business
We are in an recession. I don't think it's simply
financially viable to carry out some of the policy's in the green wishlist0 -
Peak demand is 18:00-20:00. For half the year sunset is before 19:00.Solar happens to work during the times the extra electricity is required, so its a perfect match.
Its a win/win as far as I can see it. Additional energy available when its most needed, and little on no serious capital investment required by the state.0 -
Which is why I could not understand the first thing the new government doing would be to allow homes to put their surplus into the grid.
the sooner we get rid of those power plants that are switched on and off at peak periods the better. Solar happens to work during the times the extra electricity is required, so its a perfect match.
Its a win/win as far as I can see it. Additional energy available when its most needed, and little on no serious capital investment required by the state.
If enough homes had solar, then the need for these power plants that only operate during peak times could be be negated,or their number significantly reduced.
Obviously the commercial energy generators might not like it because this would eat into their profits, but I think this is one of those few cases where national interest should override any commercial interest.
Surplus goes to the grid, always has as far as I am aware0 -
I read an article today in the Sunday Times. It says there's no way we can afford universal basic income. They government will have to borrow billions to revive the economy. Many shops and business, s are at risk of closing down. I think many of the green proposals will be delayed or not put into practice, the government need to get support from the greens
To form a new government so they agreed to a
green wishlist which is mostly impossible to
put into practice in the present situation
where we are just getting covid under control.
To pay universal basic income would cost most of the annual tax revenue.
There's a reason no country has ever put ubi
Into effect apart from small trials in part of the country.
Ireland is an open economy we rely on exports, tourism and tax revenue from company's like Intel to pay for government services and social welfare. At the moment, tourism income is zero.
Many airlines are struggling to stay in business
We are in an recession. I don't think it's simply
financially viable to carry out some of the policy's in the green wishlist
Ubi is a pipe dream for those who feel that the world owes them something. It doesn't0 -
I would expect the Greens to support micro renewables first. Rooftop solar is an obvious choice. They should also back commercial solar. The two would operate on diff tarriffs.
There are two peaks in electric use, one lunch time, and a bigger peak in the evening. All moves to, flatten the curve should be promoted.
Both can be installed relatively quickly. Simply further ease the planning restrictions on rooftop and the commercial projects are actually shovel ready.
A 5 Mw farm can be installed in 14 weeks. These would give the Greens visible action.0 -
Unless the Greens are making government pay for it, it's not happening - people can't even afford a home, and those that can are up to their ears in mortgage debt - so won't be shelling out for that.
That's the entire problem with the Greens. They won't pony up the money - so they expect every person individually to pony up - when it's only going to be the well off and upper middle class types that can do any of that - a tiny proportion of people.
Either the Greens make government pony up - or it won't happen. That goes for all home improvements needed. Hell, they aren't even going to sort the basic issue of having a home in the first place. Not a fucking Green Party at all...0 -
Advertisement
-
Nice rant, but you fell for the bait.
Truth be told...we're playing catchup with many developed nations. We don't even pay water charges so be thankful for that at least.
What's the matter with realising the benefits of joined up infrastructure? Multiple nations have it. You pay for out when you use it. You can complain about tax all you like but so what, you'll be paying that anyway.
So or your can benefit from whatever additions are made... and in some cases you'll be rightly thankful for.
You see, i wont benefit hugely either but my mentality is that I'd rather see a functioning, cost efficient, well designed national infrastructure to be proud of rather than a horse and cart in Galway say, just because it doesnt directly benefit me. Thats a sad mentality.
I do agree with the housing problems but that had f**k all to do with cycle lanes
For a start I like most other people living in the country pay for our water.
What functioning cost efficient well designed national infrastructure are you on about, the 1 million a day that's going to be spend on cycling lanes, is that whats going to make you proud.0
![[Deleted User]](/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
Advertisement