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

The wondrous adventures of Sinn Fein (part 2)

Ten of Swords

Part 1 here

All mod warnings from part 1 remain in effect

All thread bans from part 1 remain in effect

Threadbans Thread 2

Hqrry113

Carry on...

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

grayzer75

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

They never really explained how a political party ended up owning 50 gaffs and having 200 people on their payroll. What these people actually do is another mystery.

Just walk in and withdraw money from a bank, simples

dundalkfc10

blanch152 wrote: »

Ha ha, didn't get the traction you wanted the first time, so you posted it again, with the addition of a personal dig to try and provoke a reaction.

The people think a lot of things.

Unfortunately for you, that poll doesn't mean a hill of beans and is being treated at such.

Il rephrase that for you, The Poll is not in favour of the Govt so it should not be counted.

Over 60% of people think the Govt should be doing more, All the spin in the world wont change that.

Leo on 65% approval (in a poll) is a good thing and shows how well he is doing but 61% disagreeing with Govt (in a poll) is a not a poll to be looked at.

maccored

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

They never really explained how a political party ended up owning 50 gaffs and having 200 people on their payroll. What these people actually do is another mystery.

are you saying they have unanswered questions? thats not really true though is it ... their books have always been open for inspection.

they are one of the richest parties because they are very economically literate. Doesnt suit your 'they're all stupid' mumbo jumbo though.

maccored

jh79 wrote: »

Well his theory doesn't stand up considering the data he presented was wrong and there was in fact a decrease in unemployment in correlation with decreasing tax.

Could you explain why you think this video is relevant to Ireland's economy so?

his theory doesnt suit you or others on this forum - full stop

costacorta

maccored wrote: »

are you saying they have unanswered questions? thats not really true though is it ... their books have always been open for inspection.

they are one of the richest parties because they are very economically literate. Doesnt suit your 'they're all stupid' mumbo jumbo though.

Or maybe it’s because other political parties don’t rob banks or are profiting from racketeering.

rdwight

Numerous civil, social and economic institutions were damaged by SF's three year hissy fit in abstaining from Stormont. Given the erstwhile reasons offered for abstentionism (and the rationale offered was a moveable feast) it is ironic that Irish language organisations should be prominent among those impacted by Martin McGuiness's petulance and SF's subsequent intransigence.

"Cuirtear maoiniú ar fáil do Fhoras na Gaeilge ón Roinn Cultúir, Oidhreachta agus Gaeltachta ó dheas agus ón Roinn Pobal i dTuaisceart Éireann de réir bhuiséid atá ceadaithe ag an gComhairle Aireachta Thuaidh-Theas. Ach, in éagmais na n-institiúidí polaitiúla níorbh fhéidir buiséid a cheadú ó 2016 i leith"

https://www.irishtimes.com/culture/tuarasc%C3%A1il/c%C3%A1inaisn%C3%A9is-2021-agus-an-ghaeilge-t%C3%A1-r%C3%A9-na-leithsc%C3%A9alta-thart-1.4377753

christy c

maccored wrote: »

they are one of the richest parties because they are very economically literate. Doesnt suit your 'they're all stupid' mumbo jumbo though.

If they are very economically literate (hello Donald), please explain how they were stupid enough to think the demographics will look after themselves? Are all they actuaries and other experts/countries wrong?

Nobotty

maccored wrote: »

what? He's discussing the theory that taxing companies results in job losses. doesnt matter what country

He's discussing it in the American context
He is NOT discussing what effect it has on FDI

maccored

christy c wrote: »

If they are very economically literate (hello Donald), please explain how they were stupid enough to think the demographics will look after themselves? Are all they actuaries and other experts/countries wrong?

how are they one of the wealthiest parties? Considering all their finance is legal? If you call a rich party economically stupid then you dont know what economically stupid means.

[Deleted User]

maccored wrote: »

his theory doesnt suit you or others on this forum - full stop

Actually i agree with him that reducing tax at the higher level will not correspond to increased demand and as a consequence increased employment.

The bit i'm struggling with is why you think this is relevant to a country whose economy depends on FDI?

maccored

Nobotty wrote: »

He's discussing it in the American context
He is NOT discussing what effect it has on FDI

I give up. He is discussing the IDEA that wealth creates jobs. It might be in the american context but its not reliant or exclusive to america

maccored

jh79 wrote: »

Actually i agree with him that reducing tax at the higher level will not correspond to increased demand and as a consequence increased employment.

The bit i'm struggling with is why you think this is relevant to a country whose economy depends on FDI?

why are we reliant on foreign direct investment? are you saying thats a good idea? It isnt. Im not a financial expert - you though obviously are.

christy c

maccored wrote: »

how are they one of the wealthiest parties? Considering all their finance is legal? If you call a rich party economically stupid then you dont know what economically stupid means.

You might need to re read my question, why would an economically literate party be stupid enough to think the demographics would look after themselves?

Nobotty

maccored wrote: »

I give up. He is discussing the IDEA that wealth creates jobs. It might be in the american context but its not reliant or exclusive to america

What has that got to do with the mobility of FDI?
I'll tell you
Nothing

christy c

maccored wrote: »

why are we reliant on foreign direct investment? are you saying thats a good idea? It isnt. Im not a financial expert - you though obviously are.

And the SF plan is to run FDI out of the country by giving two fingers to our Corporate tax payers. Why would an economically literate party do something so stupid?

JohnnyFlash

maccored wrote: »

are you saying they have unanswered questions? thats not really true though is it ... their books have always been open for inspection.

they are one of the richest parties because they are very economically literate. Doesnt suit your 'they're all stupid' mumbo jumbo though.

Where are their books open for inspection?

[Deleted User]

maccored wrote: »

why are we reliant on foreign direct investment? are you saying thats a good idea? It isnt. Im not a financial expert - you though obviously are.

We are reliant on FDI because it's the only way to sustain the quality of life we have. Outside of FDI our biggest industries would be Agriculture and Tourism neither of which could sustain it. We are not lucky enough to have natural resources to sell like Norway or Australia.

Is it SF policy to reduce this reliance on FDI? Do you think that is wise?

rdwight

jh79 wrote: »

We are reliant on FDI because it's the only way to sustain the quality of life we have. Outside of FDI our biggest industries would be Agriculture and Tourism neither of which could sustain it. We are not lucky enough to have natural resources to sell like Norway or Australia.

Is it SF policy to reduce this reliance on FDI? Do you think that is wise?

According to Marty in 2016

"The position is clear - there is no ambiguity in Sinn Fein's position. We along with all the other parties have signed up to a reduced rate of corporation tax of 12.5 % by 2018," he said"

"Every major grouping of potential foreign direct investors that myself and other leaders from the north met in the United States, the question always came up as to what would happen in relation to Europe," he said.

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland-assembly-election/martin-mcguinness-no-ambiguity-in-sinn-feins-corporation-tax-position-34666241.html

[Deleted User]

rdwight wrote: »

According to Marty in 2016

"The position is clear - there is no ambiguity in Sinn Fein's position. We along with all the other parties have signed up to a reduced rate of corporation tax of 12.5 % by 2018," he said"

"Every major grouping of potential foreign direct investors that myself and other leaders from the north met in the United States, the question always came up as to what would happen in relation to Europe," he said.

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland-assembly-election/martin-mcguinness-no-ambiguity-in-sinn-feins-corporation-tax-position-34666241.html

Hopefully they maintain that stance.

I would still be concerned with their intention to tax those earning >100,000. Recruitment for the multinationals could be affected by such a move. Also how much money do SF claim this would raise? They claimed prior to the general election that this would only affect the top 3% of earners.

jm08

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

They never really explained how a political party ended up owning 50 gaffs and having 200 people on their payroll. What these people actually do is another mystery.

Probably because it is fairly obvious. Sinn Fein buy their Constituency Offices and lease them to their TDs (who claim expenses from the State for their use).

What seems to happen in other parties (for example Mairead McGuinness). She owns her Constituency Office and charges expenses to the EU for their use.

Its a little perk for FFG TDs, rather than their parties.

With all that rent coming in for Constituency Offices, they can of course employ plenty of people who are mainly working in disadvantaged areas.

jm08

christy c wrote: »

And the SF plan is to run FDI out of the country by giving two fingers to our Corporate tax payers. Why would an economically literate party do something so stupid?

How are they giving the two fingers to CT payers? Are they all going to move to Hungary, whose CT rate is 9%? Why have they not moved there already?

stefanovich

jm08 wrote: »

Probably because it is fairly obvious. Sinn Fein buy their Constituency Offices and lease them to their TDs (who claim expenses from the State for their use).

What seems to happen in other parties (for example Mairead McGuinness). She owns her Constituency Office and charges expenses to the EU for their use.

Its a little perk for FFG TDs, rather than their parties.

With all that rent coming in for Constituency Offices, they can of course employ plenty of people who are mainly working in disadvantaged areas.

I hope for all our sakes that their books are scrutinised heavily. A lot of serious crime associated with the IRA and even today Sinn Fein members have demonstrated sympathy for their armed counterparts.

blanch152

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

They never really explained how a political party ended up owning 50 gaffs and having 200 people on their payroll. What these people actually do is another mystery.

You can see all around you what they do.

dundalkfc10

stefanovich wrote: »

I hope for all our sakes that their books are scrutinised heavily. A lot of serious crime associated with the IRA and even today Sinn Fein members have demonstrated sympathy for their armed counterparts.

Sure go have a look for yourself. All available on www.sipo.ie for everyone too see.

dundalkfc10

blanch152 wrote: »

You can see all around you what they do.

Well so far in 2020, They have had same result as FF and out performed FG and all other where it counts in the election, and seem to be increasing their voter base based on polls recently.

Alls going well in what they do.

blanch152

jm08 wrote: »

Probably because it is fairly obvious. Sinn Fein buy their Constituency Offices and lease them to their TDs (who claim expenses from the State for their use).

What seems to happen in other parties (for example Mairead McGuinness). She owns her Constituency Office and charges expenses to the EU for their use.

Its a little perk for FFG TDs, rather than their parties.

With all that rent coming in for Constituency Offices, they can of course employ plenty of people who are mainly working in disadvantaged areas.

Why should it be a perk for either individual TDs or parties?

Either way, if the system is as you say it is, it allows TDs and/or political parties to build up property portfolios.

In the case of a political party such as Sinn Fein, it is even worse as they are supporting the corporatisation of landlords, something they claim to oppose. Hypocritical all round, not a normal party.

dundalkfc10

blanch152 wrote: »

Why should it be a perk for either individual TDs or parties?

Either way, if the system is as you say it is, it allows TDs and/or political parties to build up property portfolios.

In the case of a political party such as Sinn Fein, it is even worse as they are supporting the corporatisation of landlords, something they claim to oppose. Hypocritical all round, not a normal party.

Obsessed

McMurphy

dundalkfc10 wrote: »

Obsessed

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVWuy_-oSy0

blanch152

dundalkfc10 wrote: »

Obsessed

Once again, upon exposure, no answer, except default to attacking the poster.

dundalkfc10

blanch152 wrote: »

Once again, upon exposure, no answer, except default to attacking the poster.

Calling someone obsessed (especially a lady who dosnnt stop talking Sinn Fein bla bla bla) is not attacking a poster.

Sinn Fein on the membrane, Sinn Fein on the brain

The election really really hurt you, and your still not over it.

A good smoke of a Joint is what you need, relax yourself and just accept SF are here to stay and have upset the old top 2 parties as its now 3 big parties.