Is it just me or have SF vanished?

jh79 wrote: »

Biggest threat to a UI at this pace is global warming!

You would say that...of course.

I see Michelle in the news today holding up pension payments for needy people.
The Judge is not too impressed with her and claims, she is holding up the rule of law.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-53813371

Superfoods wrote: »

How come the witness said he needed to go to Sinn Fein and then weeks later came in to talk. So why did it take weeks for Sinn Fein to give the green light?

How would I know...I am only going on what is reported.

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Leaving aside the veracity of the story, does the fact that so many young people are willing to overlook issues such as this and vote for SF anyway not give right leaning folks any pause for thought about just how f*cked people feel by the status quo? What I find amazing is how the media in Ireland and the "I'm alright Jack" class will point to all of these allegations against SF, see how it fails to dent their support among young Irish people, and not stop and think about why people might be willing to overlook a party being steeped in so much controversy about its past paramilitary connections, and vote for them anyway based on policy concerns.

Like, how does anyone look at this and not say "If people are willing to overlook news stories like this just so they can vote for a party which claims to have a desire to destroy the status quo, we have really, really failed this entire demographic of people that they feel so desperate as to be willing to do this"?

That's the part I always fail to understand. You all believe every allegation made against Sinn Fein, or at least believe that such allegations should rule a party out of being in power. Yet large, vast swathes of at least 2-3 generations of young Irish people are willing to overlook these controversies and vote for them anyway.

How is it that anyone can avoid the logical next conclusion, which is "maybe our policies and our attitude has genuinely harmed these people and their prospects to such a great extent that they're desperate and willing to try anything to get us out of power"? How do you avoid coming to that conclusion, when you can see with your own eyes that so many people are willing to vote for a party which in your eyes is so unpalatable? If you believe SF to be unpalatable, and you don't deny that young people have been voting for them in their droves, then how can you not also question whether maybe, just maybe, we have a legitimate point to make about the current status quo being utterly unbearable for us?

This is actually a very good point. At the time of the last election we had more or less full employment and the economy was so vibrant that hundreds of thousands of Eastern Europeans and South Americans flocked here to get a piece of the action. So it is a bit of a mystery why 25% of the population should turn to a group of criminals chancers and morons. Perhaps an ongoing sense of reckless entitlement coupled with a moral bankruptcy which allows huge amounts of people to vote for any perceived personal advantage no matter how unlikely or corrupted the source.

Open to other suggestions however as you are certainly correct that it is a very real problem

nigeldaniel wrote: »

looking for a buz is my take on some Sf voters.

The above is obviously a huge simplification but there is a grain of truth in it. SF is a classic anti establishment party, down South at least. Young people hear older voters saying that they'd never vote for Sinn Fein. So perhaps a little part of the attraction in voting SF is good old youth rebellion?

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The incumbent government was so incompetent it was time to turf them out?

The government that had turned around a dead economy run by the IMF to one of full employment ? Can only imagine where we would be if Dessie Ellis, Slab and Gerry were running things through their yapping puppet ,Mary Lou, and the thickos she surrounds herself with

Truthvader wrote: »

The government that had turned around a dead economy run by the IMF to one of full employment ? Can only imagine where we would be if Dessie Ellis, Slab and Gerry were running things through their yapping puppet ,Mary Lou, and the thickos she surrounds herself with

full employment?

Approximately 23% of Ireland’s full-time workforce is on what is categorised as low pay, or earning less than two thirds of median earnings, according to 2017 figures.

https://www.thejournal.ie/workers-in-ireland-on-low-pay-4764896-Aug2019/

maccored wrote: »

full employment?



https://www.thejournal.ie/workers-in-ireland-on-low-pay-4764896-Aug2019/

I assume that would be the 23% with no skill set at all or who work part time etc

Is there some Sinn Fein fantasy society where everyone earns barrister money without actually learning how to do anything- like their TD's? Plus what % of a society do you expect to be on low pay. Been on low pay and on the dole myself but learnt how to do a few things that not everybody knows and moved into the other 77%

Truthvader wrote: »

This is actually a very good point. At the time of the last election we had more or less full employment and the economy was so vibrant that hundreds of thousands of Eastern Europeans and South Americans flocked here to get a piece of the action. So it is a bit of a mystery why 25% of the population should turn to a group of criminals chancers and morons. Perhaps an ongoing sense of reckless entitlement coupled with a moral bankruptcy which allows huge amounts of people to vote for any perceived personal advantage no matter how unlikely or corrupted the source.

Open to other suggestions however as you are certainly correct that it is a very real problem

You're so, so, so close to getting it, but you're so blinded by your right wing ideology that it's not getting over the line.

A booming macroeconomy is bad for young people whose jobs have not experienced wage inflation during the "recovery" in the second half of the 2010s. It means that they're still getting paid the same amount roughly speaking, whereas the cost of living for that demographic has skyrocketed. I keep quoting the FT ad nauseum, but a 14% increase in average wages compared with a 40% increase in average rents represents a dramatic plunge in quality of life at a time when politicians and leaders are preaching about how great everything is compared with a few years back. If your career has turned into the "gig economy" type of career which so many young peoples' have over this decade, then a 40% increase in your rent since 2011 compared with a 14% increase in your wages is a backwards step.

That's why the arguments about how SF's policies will impact the macro economy are rolling off young people like water on a duck's back. The macro economy has become totally disconnected from the reality of quality of life, as more often than not, macroeconomic factors "improving" simply means that everything gets more and more expensive. If your take-home pay is not increasing during that time, then ultimately all this talk of "recovery" is a gigantic "f*ck you" from those in power.

That's why "keep the recovery going" was such a failure as an election slogan in 2016. That's why "a future to look forward to" was even more of a failure in 2020.

The dramatic increase in the cost of housing has meant that to those who weren't already on the ownership ladder when the "recovery" began, life has been getting sh!ttier and sh!ttier for the last five years, with particular acceleration occurring between 2018 and 2020. And the laissez-faire "let them eat cake" approach of Fine Gael and Fianna Fail is making this worse.

Using terms like "entitlement" and "perceived personal advantage" are just showing your complete lack of empathy once again. Someone who could afford to move out and start their own independent life in the early 2010s being forced to move home with their parents again because the government has entirely turned the housing sector over to the greedy c*nts that are the investor class has experienced real, demonstrable, devastating reversal in their quality of life and in their prospects for the future.

It is not the public who are to blame for rejecting a government policy which hurts them, FFS, it's the government which pursued harmful policies without regard to the harm and pain they were causing. That's what FG supporters don't seem to get. That's why all the arguments the government tried to make in the run up to the election didn't work on young people - not when you had Eoghan Murphy allowing quality of life to slide further and further into the abyss while telling young people "this is the future, get used to it".

No. We won't. And that will be reflected at the ballot box - simple as that.

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

You're so, so, so close to getting it, but you're so blinded by your right wing ideology that it's not getting over the line.

A booming macroeconomy is bad for young people whose jobs have not experienced wage inflation during the "recovery" in the second half of the 2010s. It means that they're still getting paid the same amount roughly speaking, whereas the cost of living for that demographic has skyrocketed. I keep quoting the FT ad nauseum, but a 14% increase in average wages compared with a 40% increase in average rents represents a dramatic plunge in quality of life at a time when politicians and leaders are preaching about how great everything is compared with a few years back. If your career has turned into the "gig economy" type of career which so many young peoples' have over this decade, then a 40% increase in your rent since 2011 compared with a 14% increase in your wages is a backwards step.

That's why the arguments about how SF's policies will impact the macro economy are rolling off young people like water on a duck's back. The macro economy has become totally disconnected from the reality of quality of life, as more often than not, macroeconomic factors "improving" simply means that everything gets more and more expensive. If your take-home pay is not increasing during that time, then ultimately all this talk of "recovery" is a gigantic "f*ck you" from those in power.

That's why "keep the recovery going" was such a failure as an election slogan in 2016. That's why "a future to look forward to" was even more of a failure in 2020.

The dramatic increase in the cost of housing has meant that to those who weren't already on the ownership ladder when the "recovery" began, life has been getting sh!ttier and sh!ttier for the last five years, with particular acceleration occurring between 2018 and 2020. And the laissez-faire "let them eat cake" approach of Fine Gael and Fianna Fail is making this worse.

Using terms like "entitlement" and "perceived personal advantage" are just showing your complete lack of empathy once again. Someone who could afford to move out and start their own independent life in the early 2010s being forced to move home with their parents again because the government has entirely turned the housing sector over to the greedy c*nts that are the investor class has experienced real, demonstrable, devastating reversal in their quality of life and in their prospects for the future.

It is not the public who are to blame for rejecting a government policy which hurts them, FFS, it's the government which pursued harmful policies without regard to the harm and pain they were causing. That's what FG supporters don't seem to get. That's why all the arguments the government tried to make in the run up to the election didn't work on young people - not when you had Eoghan Murphy allowing quality of life to slide further and further into the abyss while telling young people "this is the future, get used to it".

No. We won't. And that will be reflected at the ballot box - simple as that.

I think I get what you are saying about the younger generation voting for SF. It was a single issue vote. Housing was the issue. I can understand why someone might vote on a single issue but I think its narrow minded and stupid. Like the Americans that vote purely on abortion or gun rights. It leads to parties saying what they think is popular but not actually having any sensible policies. Like SF.

Yeah_Right wrote: »

I think I get what you are saying about the younger generation voting for SF. It was a single issue vote. Housing was the issue. I can understand why someone might vote on a single issue but I think its narrow minded and stupid. Like the Americans that vote purely on abortion or gun rights. It leads to parties saying what they think is popular but not actually having any sensible policies. Like SF.

It's not just housing though. The housing issue encompasses a far bigger issue, which is a form of stagflation - the cost of living generally going up while wages stagnate, particularly for young people who missed out largely on the era of secure, unionised, formal work arrangements in favour of, as I mentioned, the gig economy, zero hours contracts and client-worker relationships. Housing is the most obvious issue to choose, but the entire economic ladder has been pulled up and away from this generation by people who are insufferably smug and condescendingly "ivory tower" about it, going on and on about avocado toast, boutique hotels and other such bullsh!t while being part of the generation which is directly contributing to that stagflation by buying excess property to use as an investment and then charging as much as "the market" allows them to get away with, without any sense of social responsibility.

The vote for SF was about voting for a party which doesn't think that this is ok. It was about voting for a party whose attitude wasn't "touch sh!t, we got ours". Like it or not, that's how both FF and FG are perceived among young people - not caring about the inflation vs wage issue because they are not affected by it.

Truthvader wrote: »

Accept most of these failings but it is absolutely beyond me how anyone thinks that Mary Lou's years of grating whinging provides a solution to anything. The other pair (Pearse and Eoin) are simply not intellectually equipped to provide anything to anyone save foolish policies and policies.

That is all irrelevant to me however and if people voted for Boyd Barrett and Ruth Coppinger I would expect a similar economic disaster but at least they are not fronting for sinister criminals already responsible for unforgiveable misery. Who could go to the Guards in confidence if Sinn Fein were in charge. Already their own members know not to say anything until Gerry decides whether it is OK or not. Dont think Sinn Fein will bring housing but they will bring the complete corruption of civil society

How could anyone go to the Gardai in confidence when just a day or two ago one of them ran to the media with a story designed to politically damage a party? And it's not the first time they have leaked info for political effect.

What age were you when the policies of FF, cheerled by the policies of FG brought this country to the brink of wipeout?

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

It's not just housing though. The housing issue encompasses a far bigger issue, which is a form of stagflation - the cost of living generally going up while wages stagnate, particularly for young people who missed out largely on the era of secure, unionised, formal work arrangements in favour of, as I mentioned, the gig economy, zero hours contracts and client-worker relationships. Housing is the most obvious issue to choose, but the entire economic ladder has been pulled up and away from this generation by people who are insufferably smug and condescendingly "ivory tower" about it, going on and on about avocado toast, boutique hotels and other such bullsh!t while being part of the generation which is directly contributing to that stagflation by buying excess property to use as an investment and then charging as much as "the market" allows them to get away with, without any sense of social responsibility.

The vote for SF was about voting for a party which doesn't think that this is ok. It was about voting for a party whose attitude wasn't "touch sh!t, we got ours". Like it or not, that's how both FF and FG are perceived among young people - not caring about the inflation vs wage issue because they are not affected by it.

All that ignores the reality that the policies proposed by SF are not workable. People like Pearse Doherty and Paul Murphy can point to their electoral success and stand in the Dail roaring about fairness, but unless there is a plan to achieve that fairness then it is a waste of time.

Truthvader wrote: »

Ah the Guards. You just cant rely on them to cover up for Sinn Fein. Non criminals are well confident to go to the Guards ( save where they are intimidated to the extent that they have to ask scum like Gerry Adams for permission

The Gardai have undermined more than SF politically with leaks. We won't go into other areas where they have been found wanting.

Truthvader wrote: »

v
The cote for Sinn Fein will not adress any of these issues any more than a vote for Trump improved a single thing for America. Sinn Fein are a neo Fascist party run by criminals and lightweights wheeling out meaningless populist drivel for those to young to realise what they are or too criminalised to care.

Plus not sure that the housing argument is being overdone? People die every day and houses are continuing to be built. So who is buying them. Not Landlords who have fled the market since payment of rent became voluntary. It can only be new generations

Houses are not being built. Commerical properties are being incentivised. Why would any builder build houses when there is more money in building hotels and communal accommodation. There is a new housing development of about 40 houses beside where I live (used to be a factory). They are costing between 800K and 900K each. What normal family can afford those?