How do you vote?

GreenHell

Given that you vote at all, how do you vote. Do you fallow some traditional voting sytem such as voting for FF dispite the fact the canidate might be a total plonker or do you vote based on how good a certain canidate is regardless of their political backround?

and if you don't vote, why the hell not?

azezil

I don't vote... cause i'm lazy!
Thats the only reason, i'm a lazy git n never bothered registering.

Digi_Tilmitt

I don't vote cause i'm 14, but if I could vote i would vote for some rainbow dream person who wants to save the world.

Victor

I'm a tactical voter. If there is a candidate or party that I want to promote, but feel that they may not actually do that well, I vive them my first preference. I follow this with the candidates / parties that are most likely to succeed that I want to support. Then those that I am neutral about and finally the candidates that I least want to win.

Samson

I would never vote for any of the following:

Fianna Fail
Fine Gael
Labour
Progressive Democrats

Reasons: in my opinion a coalition of any of these parties will bring about little or no discernible difference in policies.
For example: The "Rainbow" Government was not much different from the present FF/PD Government.

Without either The Green Party or Sinn Fein in Government very little change will be noticeable.

When all the pre-election bluster and false promises are forgotten what are the key differences between these four ?

Typedef

Green Party <as tactical non FF/FG vote>
Sinn Fein <as tactical non FF/FG vote>

FF and FG have too much influence over the dial, it's consistentlly a choice between a right wing government or you guessed it a right wing government.

If Ruari Quinn had an iota he would do a Tony Blair on Labour (ie make it business friendly) and supplant FG as the main opposition party, then maybe Ireland could finally break away from the Dev/Collins split.

The more things change the more they stay the same

You think Oedipus had problems, Adam was eve's mother!

ReefBreak

Without either The Green Party or Sinn Fein in Government very little change will be noticeable.

...IMO the Greens are good to have in the Dail as they keep the big parties on their toes regarding, er, Green issues. But I wouldn't like them in power.

As for Sinn Fein... I can't imagine a worse situation for everyone in this country (particularly regarding jobs, the economy) than having a Marxist party running the country or holding the balance of power. Given a choice between a party that represents an organisation that murdered almost 1900 people between 1969 and 1994 and a party that had Liam Lawlor and a few other dodgy geezers in it's ranks... (oh and presided over the greatest ecomonic boom is Irish history) ...well, no contest really.

Aspro

Sinn Fein are not a Marxist party. They are a right wing nationalist party. They like to spout left wing rhetoric to maintain credibility in their working class strongholds in the South.

In government they would end up as little more than a mini-Fianna Fail. Their record in government in the North is already a prelude to this:
Step 1: Give yourself a hefty pay rise
Step 2: Deny term-time schoolworkers pay rise
Step 3: Close hospitals

The only difference with them being in government in the South would be to heighten tensions in the North - making the protestant community feel even more hemmed into a corner.

Unfortunately they are very good at duping people into believing they are a radical alternative to the stale political establishment atm and are set to make big gains in the general election.

Victor

Originally posted by ReefBreak
and a party that had Liam Lawlor and a few other dodgy geezers in it's ranks... (oh and presided over the greatest ecomonic boom is Irish history) ...well, no contest really.

One I prepared earlier "In particular, I refer to the money Haughey sought for himself (£500,000 IIRC) while at the same time denying a trust fund (for the same amount) for haemophiliacs infected with HIV by an inept and under-funded blood board."

More than 70 of those haemophiliacs died ignominious deaths, rejected by society, their families abused, not knowing why they died or at whose hand.

Point of information: Liam Lawlor was thrown out of the FF (parliamentary?) party. As were about 6 others.

ReefBreak

And again...

Oops, you're mistaking the words "right-wing policies" for "corruption". And I despise corruption as much as you do. In fact, there's no reason to believe that left-wing parties wouldn't have done the same - in fact, they've been sometimes been as bad - if not worse - in leftist dominated countries (China, the old Russia, etc.)

ReefBreak

Point of information: Liam Lawlor was thrown out of the FF (parliamentary?) party. As were about 6 others.

I assume that's a good thing... The wrong-doers were kicked out and rightly so. It would be worse in FF allowed them to stay.

Victor

It was not the corruption. It was the government of the day rejecting the democratic vote of the Dáil (the 1989-1992 government suffered 6 Dáil defeats IIRC). This situation (the trustfund) was the beginning of the end of that government. The corruption adds insult to injury (and death).

smiles

Originally posted by Samson
Without either The Green Party or Sinn Fein in Government very little change will be noticeable.

As a matter of interest what would you wanted changed?

do you not think the last few governments were good enough in bringing about the current economic boom?

oh and ditto nearly everything Aspro said, he's got the majority of the good points.

<< Fio >>

Victor

Originally posted by smiles
do you not think the last few governments were good enough in bringing about the current economic boom?

They were merely surfers on a wave, not the wave machine.

smiles

Originally posted by Victor


One I prepared earlier "In particular, I refer to the money Haughey sought for himself (£500,000 IIRC) while at the same time denying a trust fund (for the same amount) for haemophiliacs infected with HIV by an inept and under-funded blood board."

so, he's corrupt. Can you point to _any_ politican who has brought about changes for the good of this country that isn't ? If you had all that power and all that money would you remain squeeky clean? and i know thats not the point, of course we should have politicians who aren't actually human and arent open to corruption (lets all have computers do it all -- anyone else read "I, Robot"?) but it's near as damn impossible.

Despite his corruption, i dont think you can put the blame on there not being a fund for haemophiliacs directly on one person, there was an entire goverment voting also.

Originally posted by Victor
More than 70 of those haemophiliacs died ignominious deaths, rejected by society, their families abused, not knowing why they died or at whose hand.

Do you meant to say that if there had of been a trust fund then they _would_ know how they died? Seems like you're trying to make Charlie Haughey out to being a murderer of haemophiliacs, which is a little far fetched to say the least.

Originally posted by Victor
Point of information: Liam Lawlor was thrown out of the FF (parliamentary?) party. As were about 6 others.

Doesnt that mean that they're cleaning up their ranks and trying to be become somewhat less corrupt?

<< Fio >>

[note that everything i say here is not necessarily _my_ point of view, but just trying to get all the ideas and opinions out into the open so there can be a proper discussion]

smiles

Originally posted by Victor
They were merely surfers on a wave, not the wave machine.

So where did this economic boom come from? who/what is/was the wave machine? (i've got a fair bit of detail on the history of the Celtic Tiger that I'll dig out if you've got a valid argument)

<< Fio >>

Aspro

Doesnt that mean that they're cleaning up their ranks and trying to be become somewhat less corrupt?

No. It just means the toilet overflowed and one little turd fell out. And now they're trying to blame the bad smell on him instead of where he fell out of.

Victor

It's all down to demographics. There was a huge increase in the population in the late 60s and early 70s. Those are the people who created the boom (through general consumption and demand for housing, capital and consumer goods).

Haughey had a huge part in refusing the trustfund, DESPITE the Dáil voting otherwise. He has even apologised for it (well health cuts in general in the late 80s). While it might be harsh to hint at murder, can you tell me why French government ministers ended up in jail in a similar scandal?

BTW excellent Aspro.

smiles

Originally posted by Aspro


No. It just means the toilet overflowed and one little turd fell out. And now they're trying to blame the bad smell on him instead of where he fell out of.

Lets get this clear... FF is a toilet... and all other parties are fresh smelling spring meadow? (well they're damn good at burying their **** underground at least)

<< Fio >>

smiles

Originally posted by Victor
It's all down to demographics. There was a huge increase in the population in the late 60s and early 70s. Those are the people who created the boom (through general consumption and demand for housing, capital and consumer goods)

What about the huge increase in emigration that happened in the late 70s and 80s? wouldnt that have drastically reduced the number of people who are fueling this multiplier effect (the consumpion makes more consumption stuff), but theres more to it than consumption, the multiplier effect is made up of Consumption (like you said), Investment (the capital goods you mentioned and more), and Government expenditure.... (woops, forget that one?)

Look at China, it has a _huge_ population? do they have a chinese tiger?

<< Fio >>

Victor

Originally posted by smiles
Look at China, it has a _huge_ population? do they have a chinese tiger?

Have you not heard of the Asian tigers (extinct c. 1997). Look at hong Kong, Shanghai and a few other areas and you will see the Chinese tiger.

Aspro

Lets get this clear... FF is a toilet... and all other parties are fresh smelling spring meadow? (well they're damn good at burying their **** underground at least)

Not at all. The whole political establishment have been wallowing in the proverbial to one degree or another for decades. If they weren't directly getting slipped the backhanders for a rezoning et al, they certainly condoned it. It was only Ben Dunne's f*ck up that opened the whole can of worms.

Oh, and to add to Victor's bit. I wouldn't just concentrate on how the money was spent but also on how it was created - a well educated, low wage workforce, working long hours and contributing to 87% of tax revenue while the corporate sector only paid 10% (the lowest rate in the whole EU).

FF and FG both like to take credit for the boom, while as Victor said, they were only the surfers. Neither had the balls to increase corporation tax to even the UK level of 30%, which would have meant a lot of extra revenue for our decrepit public services.

Now that were in a recession, will they claim credit for that too??

smiles

Originally posted by Victor
Have you not heard of the Asian tigers (extinct c. 1997). Look at hong Kong, Shanghai and a few other areas and you will see the Chinese tiger.

of course I have, but that Asian tiger what sitting around affecting only the rich built up area like Hong Kong experienced.

But in my opinion while there can be expansionary economic growth (GDP/GNP figures) that wasnt just what happened in ireland, there was a huge increase in the stardards of living of _all_ people in ireland, however in Asian economies the rich got richer and the poor got poorer (i know this is a big generalisation but for the most part it is true).

<< Fio >>

smiles

I very nearly missed your edit after i put my reply up (this is in answer to that is it not?)

Originally posted by Victor
Haughey had a huge part in refusing the trustfund, DESPITE the Dáil voting otherwise.

One person cannot turn down a Dail decision if the majority have voted in favour of it. It isnt technically possible (or if i am wrong, please show me some _proof_ of this).

Originally posted by Victor
He has even apologised for it (well health cuts in general in the late 80s).

Right. I think you have the arguement I was going to make in your post.

Originally posted by Victor
While it might be harsh to hint at murder, can you tell me why French government ministers ended up in jail in a similar scandal?

I can't as I wont pretend to argue about something I know nothing about, could you tell me I could find more information on this, as i'm sure the situation wasn't exactly the same, and would like to see what it was like...

<< Fio >>

Victor

Originally posted by smiles
Lets get this clear... FF is a toilet... and all other parties are fresh smelling spring meadow? (well they're damn good at burying their **** underground at least)

No...

FG is the bath. Big, but underused with a few stains and a puddle in the bottom.

Labour is the wash hand basin. Compact, but solid, sometimes makes odd gurgling noises.

The Greens are the little air freshen in the corner, which you hope will get rid of the smell, but it really isn't big enough.

Healy Rae is the 'bog roll'.

The PDs are the toilet cover. Trying to stop the ****. But are they strong enough.

Sinn Fein are the water cistern. Threatening to flood the place.

The various socialists are the little ornaments you see around the place, but they don't really get to do a whole lot.

The rest of the independents are puddles on the floor that you hope have come from the bath ...

smiles

Originally posted by Aspro
Oh, and to add to Victor's bit. I wouldn't just concentrate on how the money was spent but also on how it was created - a well educated, low wage workforce, working long hours and contributing to 87% of tax revenue while the corporate sector only paid 10% (the lowest rate in the whole EU).

and who made the decision that brought in free education?
and who reduced the level of corporation tax to the low level it was at that encouraged so many new industries?
who set up the IDA?
who led to Ireland joining the European Monetary System (EMS) (ancestor of the current EMU) back when Britian had to leave?
( :P )

Of course it was a product of an overall good economic climate, but this climate was *created* a long time ago (in my opinion back when Donaca O'Malley brough in Free Education & travel) and all the decision that the various government have made have (with some exceptions) led to the nurturing of the begining of the Celtic Tiger (even though they may not have realised that they were doing it)

Originally posted by Aspro
FF and FG both like to take credit for the boom, while as Victor said, they were only the surfers. Neither had the balls to increase corporation tax to even the UK level of 30%, which would have meant a lot of extra revenue for our decrepit public services.

It would also have turned off the majority of the foreign companies that have invested in Ireland to create the jobs that created the wealth and the income that people have to spend to encourage the growth of the economy.

Originally posted by Aspro
Now that were in a recession, will they claim credit for that too??

Nothing "causes" a recession, it is simply part of the boom cycle, we couldnt have stayed their indefinatly and for the length of time the Irish economy did we were doing damn well.

<< Fio >>

smiles

Originally posted by Victor
[rant on the bathroom]

Do you flush?

<< Fio >>

Victor

Originally posted by smiles
One person cannot turn down a Dail decision if the majority have voted in favour of it. It isn't technically possible (or if i am wrong, please show me some _proof_ of this).

I understand Liam Lawlor did it recently!

Originally posted by smiles
I can't as I wont pretend to argue about something I know nothing about, could you tell me I could find more information on this, as i'm sure the situation wasn't exactly the same, and would like to see what it was like...[/B]

I don't have links, but I think it was Fintan O'Toole who did a large piece on it last year in the Irish Times ('twas a Saturday)

Victor

Originally posted by smiles
Do you flush?

Whenever I can.

Originally posted by smiles
Of course it was a product of an overall good economic climate, but this climate was *created* a long time ago (in my opinion back when Donaca O'Malley brough in Free Education & travel) and all the decision that the various government have made have (with some exceptions) led to the nurturing of the begining of the Celtic Tiger (even though they may not have realised that they were doing it)

I don't think you can congratulate one minister for the work of a nation.

Victor

Originally posted by Victor
I don't have links, but I think it was Fintan O'Toole who did a large piece on it last year in the Irish Times ('twas a Saturday)

This isn't the one I'm looking for (the one I'm thinking of is much longer and goes into a lot of other stuff)
http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/opinion/2001/0612/opt1.htm

Typedef

in leftist dominated countries (China, the old Russia, etc.)

China and Russia are/were totalitarian (many would accuse 'our' side of the same), but it is not entirely accurate to call such regiemes 'leftist', the extreme views of Stalinism, and Maoism while may have been derived from what would have been called the 'left' in "Western" culture are more totalitarian and draconian then 'leftist'.

National Socialism could similarly have been called 'leftist' but, in reality it was a fervent kind of ultramontanist (except hitler replaced the pope) nationalism. You have examples of 'rightist' governments being totalitarian too, for example when the government of this country attempts to stifle the disemination of information pertaining to referenda it is holding that is totalitarian. A government does not have to be on 'their' side to be totalitarian, not does it have to be on 'their' side to be on the so-called 'left-wing'.

Typedef

Aspro:
Oh, and to add to Victor's bit. I wouldn't just concentrate on how the money was spent but also on how it was created - a well educated, low wage workforce, working long hours and contributing to 87% of tax revenue while the corporate sector only paid 10% (the lowest rate in the whole EU).

Couldn't agree more, the fact is that any affluence the Irish people have comes from damn hard work, they put in the hours for multi-national companies who take advantage of the cheap and extremely adept workforce to make mega bucks. These multinationals don't come to this country to be nice to us, or to 'find their Irish roots :rolleyes: ', but to make money off of us, they don't come to give handouts, they come because it is in their own self interest end of story.

Sure some people seem to have congenital inferiority complexs that say if someone Irish has money that it comes from the benovalence of another nation, but this is simply not the case, if the Irish have become affluent it is because we have fought tooth and nail for it, to suggest otherwise is to pander to your own sense of inferiority. Irish people have built a nation and economic miracle for ourselves, there's no reason to pretend otherwise, let's not be modest our affluence is of our own design and we (Irish) should be proud of it.

Victor

Originally posted by Typedef
Sure some people seem to have congenital inferiority complexs that say if someone Irish has money that it comes from the benovalence of another nation, but this is simply not the case, if the Irish have become affluent it is because we have fought tooth and nail for it, to suggest otherwise is to pander to your own sense of inferiority. Irish people have built a nation and economic miracle for ourselves, there's no reason to pretend otherwise, let's not be modest our affluence is of our own design and we (Irish) should be proud of it.

Well to be fair, some others did help (even if out of common self-interest).

smiles

Originally posted by Victor
I understand Liam Lawlor did it recently!

He was standing in the balance that could have thrown the majority either way.

Originally posted by Victor
I don't think you can congratulate one minister for the work of a nation.

I'm not, i'm simply pointing out that that was the very first step towards creating the economic climate (and i did say in my opinion), if the Irish weren't as educated as we are now then we would never have experienced this boom, again in my opinion and that of a lot of experts.

<< Fio >>

Victor

Originally posted by smiles
He was standing in the balance that could have thrown the majority either way.

It was so unaminous (about 150+:1), that the didn't actually need to vote.

Originally posted by smiles
I'm not, i'm simply pointing out that that was the very first step towards creating the economic climate (and i did say in my opinion), if the Irish weren't as educated as we are now then we would never have experienced this boom, again in my opinion and that of a lot of experts.

Well, maybe its my opinion, that if they weren't born in the first place they couldn't have been educated. So are their Daddies responsible for getting 'romantic' with Mummy?

smiles

Originally posted by Typedef
Couldn't agree more, the fact is that any affluence the Irish people have comes from damn hard work, they put in the hours for multi-national companies who take advantage of the cheap and extremely adept workforce to make mega bucks. These multinationals don't come to this country to be nice to us, or to 'find their Irish roots :rolleyes: ', but to make money off of us, they don't come to give handouts, they come because it is in their own self interest end of story.

Of course they do, self-interest in the motivating factor for all even vaguely capitalist orintated economy. But their investment is an injection into the economy, the jobs they create mean this "extremely adept workforce" has an income. No one opperates completely out of social interest, that is the ideal, and the failure to do this is why most socialist economies experience such problems.

Originally posted by Typedef
Sure some people seem to have congenital inferiority complexs that say if someone Irish has money that it comes from the benovalence of another nation, but this is simply not the case, if the Irish have become affluent it is because we have fought tooth and nail for it, to suggest otherwise is to pander to your own sense of inferiority. Irish people have built a nation and economic miracle for ourselves, there's no reason to pretend otherwise, let's not be modest our affluence is of our own design and we (Irish) should be proud of it.

No economy is self-sufficiant these days, and you cannot honestly say that if no international companies had invested in Ireland that we would be where we are now.

Ireland: The Celtic Tiger and the Social Contrick
http://www.marxist.com/Europe/celtic_tiger601.html

[...]

I have no idea what effort the bosses made but the figures quoted above demonstrate that for all their hard work the workers share has been consistently falling throughout the unprecedented boom in the Irish economy over the last decade.

[...]

Certainly the social contract has been the cover behind which the bosses have sought to increase their profits by increasing productivity, that is changing working conditions to make us all work harder and longer.

[...]


Break the social Con Trick
For a 32 hour week without loss of pay
For Militant trade union action
For a Socialist United Ireland.

I suggest everyone reads it... it is absolutely hilarious some of the bluff inflamatory arguments they make, or else you could just listen to Typedef... :P

<< Fio >>

Ri-ra

Originally posted by smiles


I suggest everyone reads it... it is absolutely hilarious some of the bluff inflamatory arguments they make, or else you could just listen to Typedef... :P

<< Fio >>

*sounds of breaking glass*

smiles

Originally posted by Victor
It was so unaminous (about 150+:1), that the didn't actually need to vote.

Which motion are you talking about because i dont know any where that happened?

Originally posted by Victor

Well, maybe its my opinion, that if they weren't born in the first place they couldn't have been educated. So are their Daddies responsible for getting 'romantic' with Mummy?

right.... (er, what?) So your saying because people are born they caused the Celtic Tiger? right.... when why hasnt it happened in every other country?

Yes there are boom cycles, and every country experiences them periodically, but i'm talking about the fact this was such a huge boom, you dont honestly think that there were no other factors causing the celic tiger other than people were born?

Doesnt the fact that a huge amount of the goods produced in Ireland were exported (first Balance of Payments deficit in years) mean that it wasnt just Irish peoples consumption (from being born) that fueled it?

<< Fio >>

Victor

Deputy rejects charges and ignores call to resign seat

Typedef

Well in fact as the USSR, China, North Korea are not in fact true Marxist countries but instead pretty repressive (not really in keeping with the basic notions of communism, equality and collective responsibility and action) as opposed to being participatory .

Certainly the social contract has been the cover behind which the bosses have sought to increase their profits by increasing productivity, that is changing working conditions to make us all work harder and longer.

This is a bit out of context, some interesting facts about the new breed of puritanical capitalism that is sweeping the globe is for example the south of Mexico, where the government through 'terrorist' proxy is in effect cleansing 'native' people to make way for industrial farms and oil explorations, true the government of this country has not done anything similar to my knowledge but in a wider sense the adage of social exclusion that marxism sought to redress is aptly exponenciated by the above quote.

My point is that human nature negates the system of economic mechisma here. In 'Communist' states there is a huge divide between rich and poor (thus these are not true marxist states) and in capitalist state the same rings true. My point, human society reminds me of the book 1984 in so many ways every time I take the time to give a small thought to it, each 'side' espouses it's own benavolence and derides that of it's opponent, but in the end most end up mirroring their enemies in more ways then they differ from them.

What is voting but the artifice of the totalitarian?

smiles

Originally posted by Typedef

[rant on communism]

My point is that human nature negates the system of economic mechisma here. In 'Communist' states there is a huge divide between rich and poor (thus these are not true marxist states) and in capitalist state the same rings true. My point, human society reminds me of the book 1984 in so many ways every time I take the time to give a small thought to it, each 'side' espouses it's own benavolence and derides that of it's opponent, but in the end most end up mirroring their enemies in more ways then they differ from them.

oh there's the point. or... how does this link to the topic? :P

You're right there are big gaps between the rich and the poor, but there are attempts to change that, that is why there is never *complete* capitalism, all mixed economies try to bring the level of the poor up. However communism/socialism (not the same i know, but for this policy they're damn similar), they seem to want to bring everyone *down* to the same level, so there will always be discomfort. [now i refuse to go any more off topic ]

Originally posted by Typedef
What is voting but the artifice of the totalitarian?

eh, voting is the _opposite_ of totalitarianism.... its to allow everyone to have a say, as opposed to totalitarianism where the dictator or other decides everything....

<< Fio >>

smiles

Originally posted by Victor
Deputy rejects charges and ignores call to resign seat

and the link still doesnt work....


<< Fio >>

Victor

Fintan O'Tooles article:

http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/newsfeatures/2000/0408/newsfea1.htm

Victor

Originally posted by smiles
Originally posted by Victor
Deputy rejects charges and ignores call to resign seat
and the link still doesnt work....

Fixed. What do you mean "still"

smiles

Originally posted by Victor
quote:

---

Originally posted by smiles
One person cannot turn down a Dail decision if the majority have voted in favour of it. It isn't technically possible (or if i am wrong, please show me some _proof_ of this).

---

I understand Liam Lawlor did it recently!

Can I quote your article?

a Dáil motion that "deplored" his conduct, found his continued membership to be "untenable" and sought his voluntary resignation.

He didn't turn down a decision, they did not kick him out. He was asked to resign and he refused. Simple as that!

<< Fio >>