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

Lisbon vote October 2nd - How do you intend to vote?

Options
1…959698100101…127

Comments

  • Options
    #2912
    BlitzKrieg
    Registered Users Posts: 14,685 ✭✭✭✭BlitzKrieg


    how does lisbon save brian cowen's job?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/gavinhewitt/busnewafp595.jpg


  • Options
    #2913
    squod
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,704 ✭✭✭squod


    Scofflaw wrote: »
    People have had 18 months or more to "read about it and debate it amongst themselves". If people are interested to do so, they've done so - if not, no amount of extra time will lead to them doing so.


    cordially,
    Scofflaw


    Famous last words?

    You know, I disagree with you on this. The reason why we're voting so soon is, to my mind, about ego. That and getting Ireland to vote quickly before Britain has a chance to.


  • Options
    #2914
    moondogspot
    Closed Accounts Posts: 113 ✭✭moondogspot


    squod wrote: »
    Famous last words?

    You know, I disagree with you on this. The reason why we're voting so soon is, to my mind, about ego. That and getting Ireland to vote quickly before Britain has a chance to.

    The Czech Republic will probably hold it up anyway to allow the British to vote.


  • Options
    #2915
    FunnyStuff
    Closed Accounts Posts: 344 ✭✭FunnyStuff


    Sam Vimes wrote: »
    I thought democracy was a system where the majority got what they wanted

    So did i, but it seems the majority are being told no, you must vote again....


  • Options
    #2916
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    squod wrote: »
    Famous last words?

    You know, I disagree with you on this. The reason why we're voting so soon is, to my mind, about ego. That and getting Ireland to vote quickly before Britain has a chance to.

    If we held the referendum after the new Commission was chosen in November, that Commission would need to be chosen according to the Nice Protocol on Enlargement rules, which require a Commission of less than one Commissioner per member state. Not much point getting agreement to keep the full Commission and then not getting it.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2917
    Dinner
    Registered Users Posts: 2,132 ✭✭✭Dinner


    FunnyStuff wrote: »
    So did i, but it seems the majority are being told no, you must vote again....

    You forgot the bit about the finding and addressing peoples concerns.

    Someday a no voter will surprise me and mention it.

    By the way, you don't have to vote again if you don't want to. They army won't be round to your house to bring you to the polling station!


  • Options
    #2918
    meglome
    Registered Users Posts: 7,980 ✭✭✭meglome


    FunnyStuff wrote: »
    So did i, but it seems the majority are being told no, you must vote again....

    Who told them? They can either not vote or vote Yes or No. I personally don't recall being forced to vote. Maybe they only came round to your house?


  • Options
    #2919
    IgnatiusPop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22 ✭IgnatiusPop


    PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »
    Well played that man, 'some good things in Lisbon', but voting 'no' for 3 reasons that are nothing to do with it. One of which (#2) is factually incorrect. Another of which (#3) Lisbon would actually help by increasing democratic accountability in decision making.

    :rolleyes:

    Sorry Buckfast, you couldnt be more wrong. The french and Duch didnt like it in 2005 when it was the Eu Constitutuion, and they rightly rejected it because it opens the door to the beginings of a federal system of government in europe - which is an idea that is so flawed as to be unbelievable. As far as your point of "Democratic Accountability" is concerned. We already have enough of that -but the things we need, like jobs, economic security, protection of our workers minimum wage against outside interference, and the ability to retain control of how we present ourselves to foreign investors who we rely upon to create jobs for us all, will in most cases be severly damaged, and in other cases completely ignored by the Lisbon treaty.

    Everybody should be voting No to this farce, not just because we have been forced to hold a wholly un-democratic SECOND referendum, but because if we are ever to have a chance at rebuilding our economy and our country, we need to have our Elected government managing our daily affairs, and deciding with us how we as a country are to proceed and meet the challenges that arise and affect us - what we dont need is a rotating commitee of foreign politicans, many of whom have never even set foot in Ireland -and all of whom are looking out for the best interests of their own people as opposed to ours- running our foreign policy, running our policies of Taxation, and raising our corporate tax to allow them to tempt investors and jobs from our shores to theirs.

    It is very easy to give control of something away, but it is a very different story when you try to take it back.

    Please consider this when you vote on October 2nd.


  • Options
    #2920
    Dinner
    Registered Users Posts: 2,132 ✭✭✭Dinner


    IgnatiusPop wrote: »
    Sorry Buckfast, you couldnt be more wrong. The french and Duch didnt like it in 2005 when it was the Eu Constitutuion, and they rightly rejected it because it opens the door to the beginings of a federal system of government in europe - which is an idea that is so flawed as to be unbelievable. As far as your point of "Democratic Accountability" is concerned. We already have enough of that -but the things we need, like jobs, economic security, protection of our workers minimum wage against outside interference, and the ability to retain control of how we present ourselves to foreign investors who we rely upon to create jobs for us all, will in most cases be severly damaged, and in other cases completely ignored by the Lisbon treaty.

    State like language and symbolism were removed from the Constitution before it became Lisbon. And the German courts recently ruled that Lisbon was not, in fact, a stepping stone towards a federal system of government. Thats just a rehashed argument thats been used for nearly every EU referendum. It wasn't true then, and it's not true now.
    IgnatiusPop wrote: »
    Everybody should be voting No to this farce, not just because we have been forced to hold a wholly un-democratic SECOND referendum, but because if we are ever to have a chance at rebuilding our economy and our country, we need to have our Elected government managing our daily affairs, and deciding with us how we as a country are to proceed and meet the challenges that arise and affect us - what we dont need is a rotating commitee of foreign politicans, many of whom have never even set foot in Ireland -and all of whom are looking out for the best interests of their own people as opposed to ours- running our foreign policy, running our policies of Taxation, and raising our corporate tax to allow them to tempt investors and jobs from our shores to theirs.

    You need to do a bit more research into Lisbon. EU foreign policy must be unanimous. They CANNOT change our corporate tax rate. They just can't. Thats a direct tax which can only be set by the government of Ireland, not the EU.


  • Options
    #2921
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    IgnatiusPop wrote: »
    Sorry Buckfast, you couldnt be more wrong. The french and Duch didnt like it in 2005 when it was the Eu Constitutuion, and they rightly rejected it because it opens the door to the beginings of a federal system of government in europe - which is an idea that is so flawed as to be unbelievable. As far as your point of "Democratic Accountability" is concerned. We already have enough of that -but the things we need, like jobs, economic security, protection of our workers minimum wage against outside interference, and the ability to retain control of how we present ourselves to foreign investors who we rely upon to create jobs for us all, will in most cases be severly damaged, and in other cases completely ignored by the Lisbon treaty.

    Everybody should be voting No to this farce, not just because we have been forced to hold a wholly un-democratic SECOND referendum, but because if we are ever to have a chance at rebuilding our economy and our country, we need to have our Elected government managing our daily affairs, and deciding with us how we as a country are to proceed and meet the challenges that arise and affect us - what we dont need is a rotating commitee of foreign politicans, many of whom have never even set foot in Ireland -and all of whom are looking out for the best interests of their own people as opposed to ours- running our foreign policy, running our policies of Taxation, and raising our corporate tax to allow them to tempt investors and jobs from our shores to theirs.

    It is very easy to give control of something away, but it is a very different story when you try to take it back.

    Please consider this when you vote on October 2nd.

    In this case, you take it back by holding a referendum and leaving the EU. What's complicated about that? Greenland managed it.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2922
    Sam Vimes
    Registered Users Posts: 21,611 ✭✭✭✭Sam Vimes


    FunnyStuff wrote: »
    So did i, but it seems the majority are being told no, you must vote again....

    The majority voted no because they didn't want higher taxes, abortion, conscription, loss of neutrality and loss of a commissioner. They're getting what they want (or not getting what they don't want). Their will has been done


  • Options
    #2923
    Nulty
    Registered Users Posts: 7,838 ✭✭✭Nulty


    I will be voting NO on a purely political basis. Economics should take a backseat when it comes to decisions like this. I wont pretend to know everything but I have principles and my principles tell me not to get into a gang like the EU.

    The most important thing in politics is to keep the powers that be on as short a leash as possible. The longer the leash (Brussles) the more they hump your leg. By giving away more power we enevitably dig our own graves. Noone can, for one second, believe that power doesn't corrupt. As a complete sceptic of not only Europe (increasing unification on all levels) but the whole political system I believe that further entrenchment in the EU can only lead to more trouble.

    If I die a cold and lonely man, I want to do it in my own country, on my own terms, not because I let a bunch of foreigners decide whats best for me.

    Live by the sword - Die by the sword! Long live JFK!


  • Options
    #2924
    amacachi
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,316 ✭✭✭✭amacachi


    I'll be voting yes.


  • Options
    #2925
    SV
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,534 ✭✭✭SV


    Definite no from me.


  • Options
    #2926
    Sam Vimes
    Registered Users Posts: 21,611 ✭✭✭✭Sam Vimes


    squod wrote: »
    Famous last words?

    You know, I disagree with you on this. The reason why we're voting so soon is, to my mind, about ego. That and getting Ireland to vote quickly before Britain has a chance to.

    You know that the treaty only has two years to be ratified before it's sent back to the council right? And that the time limit runs out next month?


  • Options
    #2927
    RandomName2
    Registered Users Posts: 5,570 ✭✭✭RandomName2


    For the last time Constitution Treaty = Lisbon = Lisbon II

    Or perhaps you think that the Reichstag 10 years ago was a different building (it didn't have the glass dome then).

    But I think we have reached an impasse on this issue. Mainly because the no side wish to point out the dictatorial nature of the EU, and yes voters what to divorce what has come before with what is presently happening (same with the first referendum).

    But there are umpteen areas that there can be no solution to. And there can be no solution because expediency dictates otherwise. But I find it more the tendency of the yes side to look at semantics and ignore the bigger arguments.

    E.g.: French voted no to Constitution.
    Hypothesis: They mightn't like the exact same legislation contained within Lisbon + they might want a vote on the issue.
    Answer: They elected Sarcozy so were explicitly stating that they did not approve of having a vote on Lisbon, and were also indirectly voicing their approval of Lisbon. Moreover, Lisbon is entirely different. People shouldn't have a direct vote on things anyway. Are you really saying that elected representatives are not as capable as the public at making decisions about the future of the public? Anyway, you shouldn't be talking about the ratification processes of another country.

    If you can't see the big issue here, then there is a fundamental logical breach that cannot be repaired.

    Or the UK doesn't get a vote
    Ans: Ah well, they're all euro-skeptics anyway.

    Or nowhere else gets a public vote
    Ans: Well that's the system that they chose when they elected their governments/ when their constitutions were written in 1945.

    And the Treaty itself is a yes-sider's semantic wet dream.

    The treaty explicitly mentions militarisation
    Ans: Didn't you see all the clauses? Clause clause clause clause clause.

    Why is it there in the first place? Why is a whole heap of statecraft in the treaty which has no business in economic partnership?
    Ans: Its a non-federalised federation of unified non single-statehood suprastate manufacturing waffle


  • Options
    #2928
    Spiritoftheseventies
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,082 ✭✭✭✭Spiritoftheseventies


    Just a general comment. There is all this talk about treaty being good for foreign investment. Where was all this investment to city of Limerick when DELL relocated its operations to Poland. EU commission has since approved a plan by Poland government for a 56.4 million grant for Dell's new operation there.
    Now it seems to me that either EU commission either dropped the ball on this one given that vote is still in the balance or B they were just paying lip service to Irish.
    Either way a massive own goal in my opinion.


  • Options
    #2929
    RandomName2
    Registered Users Posts: 5,570 ✭✭✭RandomName2


    bayviewclose wrote: »
    Just a general comment. There is all this talk about treaty being good for foreign investment. Where was all this investment to city of Limerick when DELL relocated its operations to Poland. EU commission has since approved a plan by Poland government for a 56.4 million grant for Dell's new operation there.
    Now it seems to me that either EU commission either dropped the ball on this one given that vote is still in the balance or B they were just paying lip service to Irish.
    Either way a massive own goal in my opinion.

    It's not really a big deal in-of-itself. Although I liked some of the yes-side explicitly lying about it; saying that DELL relocated due to the frst Irish 'no' vote! :D Of course, they say that multinationals are worrying about whether or not Ireland has gone all euroskeptic and are using -wait for it- the second Lisbon Treaty referendum as a means to gauge this. And if Ireland is euroskeptic (regardless of its actual legal relationship with the EU) these same multinationals are supposed to pull out. Worst lie I've heard in years - really, the worst (although some of the politicians claimed that there wouldn't be a second Lisbon vote if Lisbon was rejected - but you can concede them this point as they were ahead in the polls at the time).


  • Options
    #2930
    ei.sdraob
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭ei.sdraob


    bayviewclose wrote: »
    Just a general comment. There is all this talk about treaty being good for foreign investment. Where was all this investment to city of Limerick when DELL relocated its operations to Poland. EU commission has since approved a plan by Poland government for a 56.4 million grant for Dell's new operation there.
    Now it seems to me that either EU commission either dropped the ball on this one given that vote is still in the balance or B they were just paying lip service to Irish.
    Either way a massive own goal in my opinion.

    our failed government is spending 90 billion on NAMA

    thats nothing to do with EU or Lisbon that how our ****ing leaders choose to waste money


    oh and it was nice of EU to give millions to Dell employees

    http://ec.europa.eu/ireland/press_office/news_of_the_day/egf-funding-dell_en.htm

    and then forcing the government to match the figure


  • Options
    #2931
    PopeBuckfastXVI
    Registered Users Posts: 5,155 ✭✭✭PopeBuckfastXVI


    bayviewclose wrote: »
    Just a general comment. There is all this talk about treaty being good for foreign investment. Where was all this investment to city of Limerick when DELL relocated its operations to Poland. EU commission has since approved a plan by Poland government for a 56.4 million grant for Dell's new operation there.
    Now it seems to me that either EU commission either dropped the ball on this one given that vote is still in the balance or B they were just paying lip service to Irish.
    Either way a massive own goal in my opinion.

    Would you like to see the EU commission block government grants to Enterprise?

    I certainly wouldn't, nor would the hundreds of thousands still employed in businesses around the country in receipt of various IDA and EI grants.

    Massive own goal? Much as some in this country might like to believe it, the world does not, in fact, revolve around Ireland. Other people are getting on with actual business, rather than pandering to our self-serving, parochial gombeenism.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2932
    Dinner
    Registered Users Posts: 2,132 ✭✭✭Dinner


    RandomName2 wrote: »
    For the last time Constitution Treaty = Lisbon = Lisbon II

    You left out some facts again.

    Constitution Treaty - State like language + Orange card system + softening of free market language = Lisbon Treaty + Guarantees on major concerns = Lisbon II


  • Options
    #2933
    dresden8
    Registered Users Posts: 3,289 ✭✭✭dresden8


    PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »
    Would you like to see the EU commission block government grants to Enterprise?

    I certainly wouldn't, nor would the hundreds of thousands still employed in businesses around the country in receipt of various IDA and EI grants.

    Massive own goal? Much as some in this country might like to believe it, the world does not, in fact, revolve around Ireland. Other people are getting on with actual business, rather than pandering to our self-serving, parochial gombeenism.

    Do you support the EU paying employers in Ireland grants of 60 million or so to move abroad?

    I wonder how those 1,800 unemployed people will vote.


  • Options
    #2934
    sceptre
    Registered Users Posts: 19,608 ✭✭✭✭sceptre


    dresden8 wrote: »
    Do you support the EU paying employers in Ireland grants of 60 million or so to move abroad?

    I wonder how those 1,800 unemployed people will vote.
    This is weird - second time this morning I've seen this and the second time this week I've seen people coming at once with the same bad information for no particular reason (last time it was turkey). Again, how does this stuff spread all at once and arrive here all at once?

    The Polish government gave 54.5 million euros. The EU didn't. Even a quick google search for <dell poland EU grant> is enough to act as an information source so a bit of research would help at all times. I'm hoping those 1800 unemployed people are aware of that as there's enough misinformation out there already. As for what the EU paid, that'd be the 22.8 million in aid under the European Globalisation Fund to support the unemployed workers.

    But seriously, is there an organised misinformation effort or something? Because I'm not prepared to let this forum descend into an idiocracy so it's easier if I know. I can't be awake all the time. If it's disorganised, then I'm beginning to doubt my education system faith and I place such reliance on that for the future of this grand little auld country of ours.


  • Options
    #2935
    ei.sdraob
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭ei.sdraob


    sceptre wrote: »
    The Polish government gave 54.5 million euros. The EU didn't.

    not only that

    but EU gave Dell workers in Ireland 14.8 million directly

    with the Government having to put up an extra €8 million on top of this


    how nice of the EU to do such a thing in first place


    theres even a thread here > http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055687216


  • Options
    #2936
    dresden8
    Registered Users Posts: 3,289 ✭✭✭dresden8


    sceptre wrote: »
    This is weird - second time this morning I've seen this and the second time this week I've seen people coming at once with the same bad information for no particular reason (last time it was turkey). Again, how does this stuff spread all at once and arrive here all at once?

    The Polish government gave 54.5 million euros.

    Ok, put my hand up mis-read EU approving grant of 54.5 million Euro's to them approving it from themselves.

    Point taken.

    But we still got shafted, not just by the EU, but also the Polish government.


  • Options
    #2937
    ei.sdraob
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭ei.sdraob


    dresden8 wrote: »
    Ok, put my hand up mis-read EU approving grant of 54.5 million Euro's to them approving it from themselves.

    Point taken.

    But we still got shafted, not just by the EU, but also the Polish government.


    yeh shafted to the tune of + 14.8 million :D

    money that EU didnt have to give to Dell workers but they did

    i love this alternate reality of yours and use of words



    how about getting back to the real world

    were we have EU coming in and giving money to our workers, while our government instead of doing everything to keep Dell here are pissing money into the developer/banker bailout


    instead of staying competitive we are wasting more money, and instead of thanking the EU for helping the workers, we moan at them and accuse them of doing something they didnt do

    :mad:


  • Options
    #2938
    IgnatiusPop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22 ✭IgnatiusPop


    PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »
    Would you like to see the EU commission block government grants to Enterprise?

    I certainly wouldn't, nor would the hundreds of thousands still employed in businesses around the country in receipt of various IDA and EI grants.

    Massive own goal? Much as some in this country might like to believe it, the world does not, in fact, revolve around Ireland. Other people are getting on with actual business, rather than pandering to our self-serving, parochial gombeenism.

    "...self-serving, parochial gombeenism" ???????

    Pope, I dont know if you are one of the many thousands of people in this country who has lost their job, but judging by your tone, I would suspect that you are not. The knock on effects of large multinationals like Dell leaving the country has a saggering effect on peoples lives. 2000 people lost their jobs when Dell left - but a further (approx.) 7000 lost their jobs in other companies around ireland that SUPPORTED Dell's Limerick plant. Perhaps you would like to meet some of the former employees of Waterford Crystal, who earlier this year were informed BY TEXT MESSAGE that they were now redundant - Some of those people had worked there for over 30 years.

    This treaty is going to cause more and more jobs to leave Ireland, but more importantly if a common consolidated tax base is implimented around the EU - which Lisbon II makes possible - then it might make it next to impossible to coax these jobs back in the near future.


  • Options
    #2939
    ei.sdraob
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭ei.sdraob


    IgnatiusPop wrote: »
    "...self-serving, parochial gombeenism" ???????

    Pope, I dont know if you are one of the many thousands of people in this country who has lost their job, but judging by your tone, I would suspect that you are not. The knock on effects of large multinationals like Dell leaving the country has a saggering effect on peoples lives. 2000 people lost their jobs when Dell left - but a further (approx.) 7000 lost their jobs in other companies around ireland that SUPPORTED Dell's Limerick plant. Perhaps you would like to meet some of the former employees of Waterford Crystal, who earlier this year were informed BY TEXT MESSAGE that they were now redundant - Some of those people had worked there for over 30 years.

    This treaty is going to cause more and more jobs to leave Ireland, but more importantly if a common consolidated tax base is implimented around the EU - which Lisbon II makes possible - then it might make it next to impossible to coax these jobs back in the near future.

    of for gods sake

    Direct taxation is not a job of EU

    go read the Treaty and the Guarantees

    instead of sprouting the same nonsense yet again

    /


  • Options
    #2940
    dresden8
    Registered Users Posts: 3,289 ✭✭✭dresden8


    ei.sdraob wrote: »
    yeh shafted to the tune of + 14.8 million :D

    money that EU didnt have to give to Dell workers but they did

    i love this alternate reality of yours and use of words



    how about getting back to the real world

    were we have EU coming in and giving money to our workers, while our government instead of doing everything to keep Dell here are pissing money into the developer/banker bailout


    instead of staying competitive we are wasting more money, and instead of thanking the EU for helping the workers, we moan at them and accuse them of doing something they didnt do

    :mad:

    1,800 workers by 204 unemployment per week by 52 weeks = 19,094,400 per annum in unemployment payments.

    This does not include dependents who will push up that figure.

    It does not include rent and mortgage interest payments from social welfare.

    It does not include taxes forgone.

    Edit: And I forgot your figure of 8 million from the Irish exchequer.

    You might think Ireland got a good deal, but in the real world the numbers don't agree with you.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2941
    IgnatiusPop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22 ✭IgnatiusPop


    Dinner wrote: »
    You left out some facts again.

    Constitution Treaty - State like language + Orange card system + softening of free market language = Lisbon Treaty + Guarantees on major concerns = Lisbon II

    Dinner,

    Those "Guarantee's" that that YES camp are saying "address the concerns of Irish Voters" are NOT LEGALLY BINDING.

    They werent added to the treaty - we all know this because if they had been the treaty would have to be re-ratified, and this has NOT happened.

    The EU have no legal obligation whatsoever to honour the nonsense assurances that they gave Cowen and his boys. If they did, then the assurances would be called Protocols.

    This goes to the heart of the whole debate as far as I am concerned - we are being sold this utter lemmon that because our Government got these assurances, that now everything is ok - its not!! Its exactly that same thing we all voted NO for the last time -not a coma has changed! If your assurances were to hold any water at all, the treaty ITSELF would have had to be ammended to include them!

    It hasnt - So we dont have ANY assurances!


Advertisement