nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Is it just me or have SF vanished?

Pkiernan

I haven't seen or heard anything from Mary Lou, Slab Murphy and other good Republicans in ages.

What's going on?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

timsey tiger

SF voted to bail out the banks and bankrupt the country, why are people still supporting them?

Jinglejangle69

Yurt! wrote: »

I'll help you out here on the big words:

dis·in·gen·u·ous
/ˌdisənˈjenyo͞oəs/

adjective
not candid or sincere, typically by pretending that one knows less about something than one really does.

Are you sure you're using the right word here pal?

You've presented nothing but the word disengenuous (used incorrectly)

You're a nasty piece of work.

Pal, chump.

You really are full of it.

I asked you for evidence of your claim plumbers don't exist yesterday and all you replied with was you tube videos about Venezuela when it wasn't even me who made the long post comparing SF to Venezuela.

All you do is deflect and snipe when asked for evidence of your nonsense claims.

I hope you're been paid well to make a fool of yourself here daily.

Yurt2

CtevenSrowder wrote: »

As yiu said yourself. There was a whole thread on it, and SFs housing policy and promise of house builds was shown to completely disingenuous.

I'll help you out here on the big words:

dis·in·gen·u·ous
/ˌdisənˈjenyo͞oəs/

adjective
not candid or sincere, typically by pretending that one knows less about something than one really does.

Are you sure you're using the right word here pal?

You've presented nothing but the word disengenuous (used incorrectly)

Mortelaro

Yurt! wrote: »

Sure thing champ.

Again, good to see we've moved on from 65k houses lies.[

Have we?
I didnt know that...

Still, it's fun to see you all so bamboozled by credible solutions proven in other countries (and already in Ireland on a smaller scale).

how am I bamboozled?

FG: incapable on hosting and openly hostile to affordable housing for working people

It might surprise you,but the 70% or so of home owning dwellers with few exceptions and the retired are working people
Mind you,credit where credit is due,FF were in power for most of the period that level of home ownership was built up

CtevenSrowder

Yurt! wrote: »

Wow, much evidence. Such convince. 12/10

As yiu said yourself. There was a whole thread on it, and SFs housing policy and promise of house builds was shown to completely disingenuous.

Pkiernan

maccored wrote: »

any facts to back up that statement? besides what you hear FF or FG gibbering - actual facts linking the running of SF to the army council will suffice.

And Gerry wasn't in the IRA either before anyone starts!

Yurt2

Mortelaro wrote: »

Hahahaha, now you'd never want to make assumptions like that about posters just because they don't support Sinn Féin
You've no idea whether I can stand someone buying an affordable house or not (I can of course) Or what the next government might be capable of
Or what might have happened if house building had continued to ramp up under current conditions for that matter
You're only concerned with obviously your own parties yet to be proven policies

Sure thing champ.

Again, good to see we've moved on from 65k houses lies.

Still, it's fun to see you all so bamboozled by credible solutions proven in other countries (and already in Ireland on a smaller scale).

FG: incapable on hosting and openly hostile to affordable housing for working people

maccored

Pkiernan wrote: »

Who is the current Army Council Mouthpiece until MLMcD makes a full recovery?

any facts to back up that statement? besides what you hear FF or FG gibbering - actual facts linking the running of SF to the army council will suffice.

Mortelaro

Yurt! wrote: »

You're running out of road. Good policy is good policy and you simply can't stand it.

FG: incapable on housing.

Hahahaha, now you'd never want to make assumptions like that about posters just because they don't support Sinn Féin
You've no idea whether I can stand someone buying an affordable house or not (I can of course) Or what the next government might be capable of
Or what might have happened if house building had continued to ramp up under current conditions for that matter
You're only concerned with obviously your own parties yet to be proven policies

Pkiernan

Who is the current Army Council Mouthpiece until MLMcD makes a full recovery?

McMurphy

tikkahunter wrote: »

Yeah Vanished like many of the IRA victims body’s over the years .No in work , il read up and respond when I get a break , any chance you can go back and respond on my reply to your post last night .

At work myself tikka, we all have our crosses to bear I suppose.

However - It is with great interest I note that when presented with facts ref "free gaffs" and an FG policy from mere weeks ago, of which you seemingly weren't aware off until I did you the courtesy, you revert to many others (including political figures) default "IRA something".

Here's a tip I'll give you for free, if you are going to come waltzing in to a current affairs forum, and start foaming at the mouth about free gaffs X 60k the shinners want to build, make some sweeping generalisations about the calibre of people who avail of same, and of the political pary who pander to them, while now apparently needing to "read up" on the acting govt party's plans to do the exact same weeks ago, perhaps do some research beforehand.

You leave yourself open to all kinds of slagging and insinuations otherwise.

Yurt2

Mortelaro wrote: »

Indeed, you've a lot in common with Margaret Thatcher

Affordable purchase schemes are a world away from Margret Thatcher's council purchase schemes (or indeed the similar schemes in Ireland which pre-date her's by a good couple of decades).

For one, the construction costs and finance costs are fully amortised by the purchaser via mortgage, as opposed to council tenants purchasing at a deep discount where the state can't wash its face on the sale.

You're running out of road. Good policy is good policy and you simply can't stand it.

FG: incapable on housing.

Mortelaro

Yurt! wrote: »

It's a net societal good, having people own their own home via an affordable purchase scheme that doesn't radically increase the private debt of the country.

Indeed, you've a lot in common with Margaret Thatcher

tikkahunter

McMurphy wrote: »

I'm guessing mr tikka is upset at what he perceives to be scroungers layabouts and welfare cheats availing of these 'free gaffs' you know the likes of a Ms Margaret Cash, free gaff taker, courtesy of a FG govt.

Did the shinners steal the blueshirts blueprints for 60k free gaffs, or did FG steal the shinners blueprints for 60k free gaffs'?

Either way - someone is going to be on the receiving end of Mr tikkas ire, looks to me like he didn't do his homework, and something something loud noises and anger.

I don't know if he, (after being brought up to speed) has went off and done further research on the blueshirts v shinner 60k free gaff giveaway bonanza, or if someone needs to change the thread title to:

"Is it just me or has tikkahunter just vanished?"

Yeah Vanished like many of the IRA victims body’s over the years .No in work , il read up and respond when I get a break , any chance you can go back and respond on my reply to your post last night .

McMurphy

Yurt! wrote: »

Lol, was just about to post this. The SF plan matches the 60k social homes plan, and commits to an affordable purchase / rental project on top of that which FG will not attempt for ideological reasons.

I'm guessing mr tikka is upset at what he perceives to be scroungers layabouts and welfare cheats availing of these 'free gaffs' you know the likes of a Ms Margaret Cash, free gaff taker, courtesy of a FG govt.

Did the shinners steal the blueshirts blueprints for 60k free gaffs, or did FG steal the shinners blueprints for 60k free gaffs'?

Either way - someone is going to be on the receiving end of Mr tikkas ire, looks to me like he didn't do his homework, and something something loud noises and anger.

I don't know if he, (after being brought up to speed) has went off and done further research on the blueshirts v shinner 60k free gaff giveaway bonanza, or if someone needs to change the thread title to:

"Is it just me or has tikkahunter just vanished?"

Yurt2

McMurphy wrote: »

You should vote for the blueshirts so, no way they'd bother their mickeys building 60k free gaffs.

This is awkward.

60,000 social housing units to be built by 2025 under Fine Gael plan

Literally from Jan this year.

Lol, was just about to post this. The SF plan matches the 60k social homes plan, and commits to an affordable purchase / rental project on top of that which FG will not attempt for ideological reasons.

Edit: if I had my way, I'd in fact raise the proportion of affordable purchase in the SF plan at the expense of 10-20k social units within the 100k.

Many people on the housing list you might find would be able to purchase on this scheme but are on the housing list out of desperation.

Once affordable purchase gets a head of steam it will be a very attractive prospect for young (and not so young) couples and individuals currently locked out of the market.

It's a net societal good, having people own their own home via an affordable purchase scheme that doesn't radically increase the private debt of the country.

Sultan_of_Ping

piplip87 wrote: »

Looking online at the comments sections of the articles regarding the coalition talks and once again it strikes me at how uneducated people are SFs biggest fans at the moment.

.....

3) We voted for change..... Marylou should be Taoiseach.... Yet many times in the past parties had more seats, yet went into opposition....

......

This is the biggest myth SF have been peddling, in my opinion.

Their core vote is somewhere between 12 and 15% - those people are going to vote for them no matter how many "ex"-paramilitaries they employ, or how many representatives they bully out of the party.

Being generous, even if we assume they doubled their vote from 12% to the 24% of first preferences achieved in the recent GE, that's only* 12% of the electorate who swapped their vote to SF, meaning 88% either voted as they normally do or went with someone else.

Can a vote for SF be regarded as a vote for change, when at most only* 1-in-8 switched their allegiance to them? Maybe if you've the mathematical ability of a typical SF supporter you can regard it as such but whatever way you spin it many, many more people declined to vote SF than actually voted SF.

*I use the word "only" here in discussing proportions - in terms of vote swing a 12% gain is, relatively speaking, a rare event.

Sheep breeder

Mary Lou has being out of action, fair enough. If SF want to be in government surely they should have being having negotiations with other participants in the dail and working behind the scene to come up with some sort of plan to form a government if they are serious about taking power. The veruca and my hole have being trying to keep power. How badly do SF want to be in government after Covid 19 is gone.

McMurphy

tikkahunter wrote: »

100,000 to be built 40,000 to be be affordable/ rent to buy . 60,000 social - so 60,000 “free gaffs” . If you get a social house you get rent allowance and the hap and your dole plus your bills paid. You get the house for noting and same house would cost a working person 800-1000 on a mortgage a month , then all their bills on top.Very few of social housing go to people that actually need them and need a leg up in society, they just go to those who know how to work the system.

You should vote for the blueshirts so, no way they'd bother their mickeys building 60k free gaffs.

This is awkward.

60,000 social housing units to be built by 2025 under Fine Gael plan

Literally from Jan this year.

tikkahunter

Yurt! wrote: »

Even a cursory look at the SF housing policy reveals it is an affordable housing policy and not a 'free gaffes' charter.

Some people are such sh*t talkers without a clue.

100,000 to be built 40,000 to be be affordable/ rent to buy . 60,000 social - so 60,000 “free gaffs” . If you get a social house you get rent allowance and the hap and your dole plus your bills paid. You get the house for noting and same house would cost a working person 800-1000 on a mortgage a month , then all their bills on top.Very few of social housing go to people that actually need them and need a leg up in society, they just go to those who know how to work the system.

ThunbergsAreGo

Yurt! wrote: »

Even a cursory look at the SF housing policy reveals it is an affordable housing policy and not a 'free gaffes' charter.

Some people are such sh*t talkers without a clue.

No it's mostly social housing

"Deliver 100,000 public homes on public land; including 60,000 social homes, 30,000 affordable purchase homes and 10,000 affordable rental homes"

[Deleted User]

landofthetree wrote: »

One of the big two reasons for voting for then is gone

Housing isn't an issue anymore.

Tens of thousands of empty units will appear as loads of unemployed foreign workers leave. Plus there will be no Air BnBs or tourism for 18months+. Plus loads of English language students won't be able to come here for academic year 2019-20

Rents will fall dramatically as well.

We are lucky as hell we didn't build many houses the last few years.

Surely now is time,more than ever to build social housing??

Your success/solution is entirely predicated on no econmic recovery....your essentially argueing to repeat mistakes of last 10 to 15 years??

Would it not make basic sense to get ahead of problems,instead if waiting for issues to arise?

Yurt2

CtevenSrowder wrote: »

It's a pie in the sky charter. Their whole policy is completely disingenuous.

Wow, much evidence. Such convince. 12/10

CtevenSrowder

Yurt! wrote: »

Even a cursory look at the SF housing policy reveals it is an affordable housing policy and not a 'free gaffes' charter.

Some people are such sh*t talkers without a clue.

It's a pie in the sky charter. Their whole policy is completely disingenuous.

Yurt2

blanch152 wrote: »

Boris is a gob****e, I said that in my last post, but his work ethic is still higher than Mary-Lou's.

Is that what you want? A politician wandering around shedding Covid19 to prove their 'work ethic' to some no-names on the internet who were mocking her for taking precautions in the first instance.

You people are really disgracing yourselves.

Yurt2

tikkahunter wrote: »

Why don’t you discuss how much of a mouth piece she is ? Or how she is promising the people of this country something that is impossible to deliver ie. free gaffs

Even a cursory look at the SF housing policy reveals it is an affordable housing policy and not a 'free gaffes' charter.

Some people are such sh*t talkers without a clue.

Suckit

This thread is hilarious, sporadic comments.

Jinglejangle69

Lads if SF want to be in power then get the left parties to agree a programme of government.

The numbers are there.

If you can't manage that then stop crying like a bunch of little girls in a playground whos taken their ball and gone home because it didn't work out like they wanted.

You can't always get what you want.

Good night.

Suckit

Horsebox9000 wrote: »

Not surprised to see a shinner do nothing for a couple of days seeing as you will wait

None of that sentence makes sense.

Horsebox9000

Suckit wrote: »

I've looked, not seen loads, or any tbh.
I don't ask for links usually (as a matter of fact, don't think I ever have before), unless I am looking for advice or help, so in this instance I guess it would be help.
Could you provide those links?
No rush. Take a couple of days if need be.

Not surprised to see a shinner do nothing for a couple of days seeing as you will wait