Pointless referenda

Scott Tenorman · 29-10-2018 09:39PM

mammajamma wrote: »

Its called prioritisation, so yeah. Anything with "crisis", such as housing or health comes first with undivided attention. Undivided.

Anything that nobody even thought about for 500 years should come dead, dead last, when we're living in a utopia.

Doesn't matter if the referenda use only 2% of the collective effort, its still 2% wasted in a time when there isn't room for waste. And its wasteful to the point of suspicion, so I get where the op is coming from.

There is an actual department to deal with housing. Are the ministers for say transport or education just supposed to sit on their arses and wait until the priority issue of the day is sorted before doing anything? That would be a shameful waste of resources

Berserker · 29-10-2018 09:40PM

The presidential election was a complete was of time. Is it not possible for the political classes to agree that the current president is going to remain in place for the next term? Anyone with half a brain knew that MDH was going to win this time round.

mammajamma · 29-10-2018 09:44PM

Scott Tenorman wrote: »

There is an actual department to deal with housing. Are the ministers for say transport or education just supposed to sit on their arses and wait until the priority issue of the day is sorted before doing anything? That would be a shameful waste of resources

That's assuming that the current set-up of governance is de-facto "good" and efficient.

When we have allowed several crises to develop while other departments/groups have sweet FA to do, besides busy themselves and get in the way, that's a problem.

We need a governmental/agency that is flexible and efficient to the task.

Therefore, the mode of governance is not fit for task.

Therefore, the government are guilty of poor management at best, and downright distraction at worst.

Either way it will be borne out in the next several elections.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts · 29-10-2018 09:49PM

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Saw this mentioned earlier and my first thought was that it's Leo and FG pulling their usual stunt of trying to keep the electorate distracted from their failings on things like housing, health, cost of living and many other things.

These referenda are all important steps in their own right, but when people are having trouble keeping a roof over their head, or getting medical treatment when they need it, they're hardly priorities.

I heard this trotted out during the marriage equality referendum in 2015 and I totally disagreed with the sentiment then and I still disagree with it now. If we wait for the “right time” to hold a referendum, they would never happen. There would never be a right time. How do you even define that?

The marriage equality referendum was very important to a great many people, as was the referendum on the eighth amendment. Why should they have to wait until the country is fixed? (a point that is probably pretty much impossible to reach and which means different things to different people) Was the blasphemy one pressing? Probably not which was it was a good idea to hold it on the same day as an election that had to happen at that particular time and not a separate date.

Bubbaclaus · 29-10-2018 10:00PM

mammajamma wrote: »

Either way it will be borne out in the next several elections.

With FG gaining a large amount of seats? (per recent polls). They are the most popular party in every age group and every part of the country.

What you are posting isn't exactly tying back to reality.

mammajamma · 29-10-2018 10:02PM

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

I heard this trotted out during the marriage equality referendum in 2015 and I totally disagreed with the sentiment then and I still disagree with it now. If we wait for the “right time” to hold a referendum, they would never happen. There would never be a right time. How do you even define that?

The marriage equality referendum was very important to a great many people, as was the referendum on the eighth amendment. Why should they have to wait until the country is fixed? (a point that is probably pretty much impossible to reach and which means different things to different people) Was the blasphemy one pressing? Probably not which was it was a good idea to hold it on the same day as an election that had to happen at that particular time and not a separate date.

I don't agree with your sentiment at all. You either have priorities or you don't.

Yes, people hanging around for marriage equality for some people is less important than the basic needs of housing and shelter across the country. Yes, abortion or not is less important than basic health provision for all people.

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, and the needs of the many come before the needs of the few, always. Unless youre running a banana republic...hmm...

Scott Tenorman · 29-10-2018 10:10PM

mammajamma wrote: »

I don't agree with your sentiment at all. You either have priorities or you don't.

Yes, people hanging around for marriage equality for some people is less important than the basic needs of housing and shelter across the country. Yes, abortion or not is less important than basic health provision for all people.

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, and the needs of the many come before the needs of the few, always. Unless youre running a banana republic...hmm...

It doesn't have to be either or, you can deal with priorities AND other stuff at the same time.

Deal with the needs of the many AND the needs of the few

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts · 29-10-2018 10:13PM

mammajamma wrote: »

I don't agree with your sentiment at all. You either have priorities or you don't.

Yes, people hanging around for marriage equality for some people is less important than the basic needs of housing and shelter across the country. Yes, abortion or not is less important than basic health provision for all people.

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, and the needs of the many come before the needs of the few, always. Unless youre running a banana republic...hmm...

If you are waiting for all a country’s problems to be solved before referenda can happen, that time will never come. So nothing should change while we’re waiting? You really think we wouldn’t have these social problems had those referenda not happened?

I wondered how homosexual folks felt when they heard sentiments like that uttered in 2015. The simple wish to be on equal footing with heterosexual couples was dismissed as unimportant because deeply entrenched social problems also existed. The two have nothing to do with each other so why not try and fix one the issues when it seems possible? Why wait? The other social issues can also be tackled.

dxhound2005 · 29-10-2018 10:14PM

Berserker wrote: »

The presidential election was a complete was of time. Is it not possible for the political classes to agree that the current president is going to remain in place for the next term? Anyone with half a brain knew that MDH was going to win this time round.

Blame Sinn Fein and the county councillors who nominated the dragons and Freeman. FG, FF and Labour did not want the election.

keano_afc · 29-10-2018 10:38PM

Central African Republic.

mammajamma · 29-10-2018 11:08PM

Scott Tenorman wrote: »

It doesn't have to be either or, you can deal with priorities AND other stuff at the same time.

Deal with the needs of the many AND the needs of the few

I don't think you understand what prioritisation means.

mammajamma · 29-10-2018 11:14PM

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

If you are waiting for all a country’s problems to be solved before referenda can happen, that time will never come. So nothing should change while we’re waiting? You really think we wouldn’t have these social problems had those referenda not happened?

I wondered how homosexual folks felt when they heard sentiments like that uttered in 2015. The simple wish to be on equal footing with heterosexual couples was dismissed as unimportant because deeply entrenched social problems also existed. The two have nothing to do with each other so why not try and fix one the issues when it seems possible? Why wait? The other social issues can also be tackled.

Yeah I know what you mean. I remember walking down a street in an American city, some person waffling in my ear about gay rights on their way to a very expensive restaurant near their luxury apartment.

When I pointed out the countless homeless, destitute people we were passing (even in that nice part of the city), and how they surely needed more social attention than somebody who likes to stick their dingdong in preferential places and need marriage rights to solidify their sexual orientation.....I was greeted with a face of shocked amusement.

In other words ,im glad it worked out for your particular gripe in life, and how you prioritised it against the "other".

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts · 29-10-2018 11:15PM

mammajamma wrote: »

I don't think you understand what prioritisation means.

Out of interest, has any country in the world ever solved all of its problems? If so, how did they achieve that? We have so much to learn!

Scott Tenorman · 29-10-2018 11:17PM

mammajamma wrote: »

I don't think you understand what prioritisation means.

It doesn’t mean putting all your resources into one thing at the expense of everything else.

Here is a dictionary definition to help you out:

“determine the order for dealing with (a series of items or tasks) according to their relative importance.”

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts · 29-10-2018 11:17PM

mammajamma wrote: »

Yeah I know what you mean. I remember walking down a street in an American city, some person waffling in my ear about gay rights on their way to a very expensive restaurant near their luxury apartment.

When I pointed out the countless homeless, destitute people we were passing (even in that nice part of the city), and how they surely needed more social attention than somebody who likes to stick their dingdong in preferential places and need marriage rights to solidify their sexual orientation.....I was greeted with a face of shocked amusement.

In other words ,im glad it worked out for your particular gripe in life, and how you prioritised it against the "other".

What is my particular gripe in life? I don’t know what it is so I’m all ears. Tell me something about myself that I don’t know.

mammajamma · 29-10-2018 11:18PM

Scott Tenorman wrote: »

It doesn’t mean putting all your resources into one thing at the expense of everything else.

Here is a dictionary definition to help you out:

“determine the order for dealing with (a series of items or tasks) according to their relative importance.”

Sure, and what percentage would you assign to elements termed "crisis"?

mammajamma · 29-10-2018 11:23PM

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

What is my particular gripe in life? I don’t know what it is so I’m all ears. Tell me something about myself that I don’t know.

You focused on gay rights, you insinuated that those issues should be of parallel importance to what many would consider "more" important.

It is a logical assumption that you are vested in that opinion.

Ta dah.

It is also nothing to do with the conversation, and I was wrong to bring any kind of personalisation to it.

Scott Tenorman · 29-10-2018 11:24PM

mammajamma wrote: »

Sure, and what percentage would you assign to elements termed "crisis"?

About three fiddy?

mammajamma · 29-10-2018 11:25PM

Scott Tenorman wrote: »

About three fiddy?

So you DO understand prioritisation

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts · 29-10-2018 11:29PM

mammajamma wrote: »

You focused on gay rights, you insinuated that those issues should be of parallel importance to what many would consider "more" important.

It is a logical assumption that you are vested in that opinion.

Ta dah.

It is also nothing to do with the conversation, and I was wrong to bring any kind of personalisation to it.

I mentioned the two big referenda of the last few years in a thread about... referenda. They were examples.

You used specious reasoning, not logical reasoning.

I’m not gay nor have I actively campaigned for gay rights personally. I’m actually just able to empathise with people whose interests and causes they hold dear.

Would you have argued back in the day that fighting for everyone to be able to vote wasn’t important because people were living in poverty in tenements at the time?

Seth Brundle · 30-10-2018 03:48PM

Berserker wrote: »

The presidential election was a complete was of time. Is it not possible for the political classes to agree that the current president is going to remain in place for the next term? Anyone with half a brain knew that MDH was going to win this time round.

That's a very naive post.
Across the world, millions are unable to vote freely in elections and you bitch because you think it would be better to have politicians make the decision for you.

Hector Savage · 30-10-2018 04:00PM

Referendums OP, it's "R E F E E R E N D U M S"

Zorya · 30-10-2018 04:02PM

Hector Savage wrote: »

Referendums OP, it's "R E F E E R E N D U M S"

Reefer-endums...I'll vote

bodhrandude · 30-10-2018 04:31PM

I can't be bothered with this thread can we bring back the favourite horror movies thread again.

Bubbaclaus · 30-10-2018 05:01PM

OP is on boards.ie making threads when there is a housing crisis. Should he not be prioritising the crisis?

whisky_galore · 30-10-2018 05:06PM

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Out of interest, has any country in the world ever solved all of its problems? If so, how did they achieve that? We have so much to learn!

Stupid post.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts · 30-10-2018 05:09PM

whisky_galore wrote: »

Stupid post.

How so? Some people here seem to be suggesting that we shouldn’t be holding these referenda on apparently minor issues until we solve all of our social issues first. I’m wondering if any country has ever reached that point. The point being, I doubt any country ever has because that’s pretty much impossible. Can you outline where the stupidity lies in the post you quoted of mine?

Pointless referenda

Comments