Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

FF/FG/Green Government - Part 3

1729730732734735747

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 200 ✭✭dubdamo


    I didnt say that they were welcome, that is just how it works, free movement of Citizens from both jurisdictions. most of the refugees who arrive here arnt actually fleeing persecution, as you well know.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,286 ✭✭✭Blut2


    Yes. A sex offender with a proven criminal record, who's already safely resident in the UK which is a safe country, should not be allowed into Ireland to apply for asylum when they present asking to do so.

    Thats hardly a controversial opinion to have I would think. Its just our government doesn't seem to agree.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 30,851 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    You are only applying those rules to those seeking asylum, you don't apply them to others with either Irish, European or British citizenship or right of residency. That is discriminatory.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 30,851 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    A garda has far more responsibility than a TD???!?????

    Of all the nonsense I have seen posted on here, that is right up there.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 301 ✭✭Oxo Moran


    So why did the Taoiseach and Minister of Justice pass comment and get deeply involved in the Defense Forces over the Crotty case?

    It was because they saw a PR win. Then Harris shrugged off the McGahon assault, so they'll sit this one out.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 301 ✭✭Oxo Moran


    So anyone can waltz in to the country with no background checks and no ID, on their word they are an asylum seeker? I must try that the next time I try catch a flight to the USA.

    I think accepting a person as an asylum seeker and leaving them to fend for themselves on the street is disgusting.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 301 ✭✭Oxo Moran


    I see Fine Gael are looking to protect the inheritance of the wealthy. Led by up and comer Neale Richmond.

    Imagine making that the priority of your young political career, with all the crises and inequality? Seems new FG will be staying with the old play book.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,407 ✭✭✭✭astrofool




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,088 ✭✭✭Clo-Clo


    Yes it is terrible for people to work all their lives, paying taxes all their lives, and then have the ability to leave something for their children to start them on their way



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 30,851 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    So wealthy is anyone whose house is worth more than €330,000?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,621 ✭✭✭Augme


    And that's why I'm wondering. Harris was perfectly happy and straight out of the blocks to get involved when it was a member of the Defence Forces.

    Of course. Garda deal with vulnerable people ebey day of the week, garda have access to very sensitive information, garda have access to guns, drugs, weapons and significant amounts of cash. The responsibility of an undercover special detective is even more serious.

    A TD sends in PQs, attends funerals, goes to the opening of a local community centre, attends town hall meetings etc etc.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 30,851 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    Ah here, this is unbelievable, you are doubling down on it. You really don't have a clue about what a TD does. Is this what our education system has been reduced to?

    There is a huge responsibility on any Oireachtas member to legislate for the people. You are representing your community. You are electing the government.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,621 ✭✭✭Augme


    I know exactly what a TD does ffs. It's clear our education has failed us miserably though given most fo the stuff I've read from you. That we can agree on.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 301 ✭✭Oxo Moran


    One third of households report receiving a large inheritance.  This, to the greatest extent, is the top one third on the socio-economic ladder. 

    Of that cohort, the median amount received per individual is €100,000, a long way short of the €335,000 threshold at which tax is accruable. A tiny number of households — around 3% — receive an inheritance that exceeds €335,000. 

    For an inheritance in excess of that threshold a tax of 33% is due. Good luck to anybody among the very small number of privileged people who inherit such a huge windfall, usually in middle age. 

    https://www.irishexaminer.com/opinion/commentanalysis/arid-41439073.html#:~:text=Fine%20Gael%20was%20out%20batting,believe%20this%20is%20%E2%80%9Cunfair%E2%80%9D.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 301 ✭✭Oxo Moran


    Look at Cervicheck, Scoliosis waiting lists, National Children's Hospital. Harris now Taoiseach. You think politicians are held responsible? The only time they face any accountability is at an election.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,335 ✭✭✭✭Cluedo Monopoly


    Did you notice how they are suddenly rolling out a new Scoliosis plan in order to be able to deflect the waiting list question during the election campaign? The plan is to send the children abroad for surgery. The timing is so see through. The 2017 deadline for a 4 month waiting list promise is still pure nonsense. Harris came up with that promise himself.

    What are they doing in the Hyacinth House?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,664 ✭✭✭✭rob316


    That's a bad look increasing the inheritance tax limit. Be better if they decreased CGT and dirt for the average person trying to better themselves. Nothing annoys we more than paying those taxes on my money I earned through working hard that I have already paid tax on.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,286 ✭✭✭Blut2


    When someone arrives in Ireland and claims asylum they're subject to entirely different rules and procedures than a random European or British tourist arriving.

    The idea that its discriminatory to not let sex offenders claim asylum in the country is an absolutely unbelievable level of mental gymnastics to defend our current government's incompetence at controlling the border. I hope nobody you know or care about is ever the victim of one of said sex offenders who now reside here.

    And its also completely contrary to government policy - Helen McEntee is on the record claiming asylum seekers are, and should be, vetted before being given entry. The problem is her department is in reality completely failing at doing this.



  • Posts: 0 ✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Inheritance tax and its associated cognitive dissonance has been done to death on this site so no point repeating - but to look at cutting any kind of (non income) tax while giving workers a tiny tax cut (note: this will almost definitely be less than a welfare recipient gets) then also leaving the top rate >50% is simply laughable



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 30,851 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    Unfortunately, that isn't the way this works.

    Say you are from Bangladesh and you are convicted of rape. In Bangladesh, that carries a death sentence. You arrive in Ireland and seek asylum on the basis you will be killed if you go back to Bangladesh. My understanding is that we are obliged to consider asylum in such cases.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,286 ✭✭✭Blut2


    Your understanding is completely incorrect. We're not obliged to consider asylum in any case, we have full control of our own asylum policy.

    We pay lip service to the 1951 UN Refugee convention, and the current government spent months trotting out "international obligations" as justification for their own failure to control the number of asylum seekers arriving earlier in the year. But even they have since given up on that once they were asked to clarify exactly what would happen if we didn't meet these "international obligations".

    The rather relevant real world example of Denmark successfully reducing their number of asylum cases by 90% in recent years, without any negative consequences, and while remaining part of the UN and EU, completely negates any "obligations" defense.

    Theres nothing stopping Ireland from following Denmark's successful example other than our government's incompetence.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,621 ✭✭✭Augme


    We are obliged to consider asylum, just as Denmark are and have been doing so as well.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,286 ✭✭✭Blut2


    "obliged". And if we don't, what exactly is the penalty? And enforced by whom?

    We have no actual binding obligation to do anything with asylum policy. As, again, can be seen with Denmark.

    Denmark introduced reasonable asylum policy changes and successfully reduced their number of asylum seekers arriving by 90% as a result.

    They're now taking in approx 2,500 a year, vs 30,000 expected in Ireland in 2024. Despite Denmark still being a wealthy, Northern European, EU member, liberal democratic country. And they have a population almost 20% larger than ours, so per capita the difference is even more stark. And they're also on mainland Europe, not a geographically isolated island in the Atlantic, so considerably easier for asylum seekers to actually get to.

    Theres absolutely nothing stopping us from doing the same other than our current government's incompetence.

    denmark.jpg


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,621 ✭✭✭Augme


    By EU law. You really should research this area.

    For example, here's Hungary being fined for not upholding EU law in this area.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,073 ✭✭✭✭Francie Barrett


    It never ceases to surprise just how out of touch this government has become with the electorate.

    Earning just €42k a year puts the ordinary PAYE worker into the higher rate tax band of 40%. There is the USC on top of that which is 4.5%, then PRSI which is another 4%.

    There's no justice for the ordinary PAYE workers, and the government couldn't care less. They just view you as tax slaves to shake down in order to fund their personal pet projects.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,286 ✭✭✭Blut2


    Which specific EU law do you think applies here?

    Denmark is a fully functioning member of the EU you'll note and has had zero problems after changing their policies to reduce asylum seekers by 90%. Why exactly can they do it and our government can't?

    Hungary has very different policies, thats a rather obvious attempt to move the goal posts. And that fine was for a very specific issue at that -"forcing asylum seekers to travel to Belgrade or Kyiv to apply for a travel permit to enter Hungary", not the policies Denmark has successfully implemented.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,621 ✭✭✭Augme


    I've not made any attempt to move the goals posts. You said

    "obliged". And if we don't, what exactly is the penalty? And enforced by whom?

    We have no actual binding obligation to do anything with asylum policy. As, again, can be seen with Denmark.

    Both of those statements are utterly false. EU member states are bound by EU law in the area of asylum, and member States who dont comply with it can be punished as in the case of Hungary.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,286 ✭✭✭Blut2


    So thats a "no" on you knowing which exact EU law you think applies here so?

    You're claiming Ireland can't implement the same policies as Denmark that reduced their intake of asylum seekers by 90%. Because of "legal obligations".

    But apparently can't name which specific legal obligations.

    And also can't explain why Denmark is able to ignore these 'obligations' as an EU member state but Ireland isn't.

    Its not exactly a logical argument is it?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,365 ✭✭✭✭hotmail.com


    A further fire tonight at the site in Coolock.

    Justice Minister no where to be seen.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 55,647 ✭✭✭✭Headshot




Advertisement