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

Have we given up?

12346»

Comments

  • #152
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,851 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Lenny Lovett wrote: »
    I've every faith in our Garda Siochana.
    As, I'm sure, did Frank McBrearty at one time.
    It's you who says they're stupid and outdated.
    No, I'm not saying that. Jesus, it's like arguing with a twelve-year-old. Go look up the concept of "irony" and come back to me.
    I merely question whether in these days of technology and given that there is prefectly accurate weather forecasts coming from The UK and all over Europe, whether we really need over four hundred staff in Met Eireann.
    Right, but you're questioning from a position of ignorance. You can't think of a reason off the top of your head for the staffing levels at Met Eireann, therefore we don't need them. On that basis, forgive me if I give your ideas for economic recovery short shrift.
    Did I say that? I can't seem to find where I did but you think you're right so I wouldn't dream of raining on your parade.
    I'm really not sure who you're trying to impress with this sort of non-argument.
    But, to be fair, could the "competing technologies" companies not complain likewise that you guys are grant aided too? What gives you guys the right to all the contents of the trough and noone else?
    They can complain about whatever they want. I'll compare the five-figure sum I got five years ago to the eight-figure sum they're in the process of receiving at the moment, and make up my own mind which of us has the stronger case.
    No reply yet. These feckin Quangos are soo feckin slow in responding...
    If only I had any idea what you meant by "quango". Hell, if only you showed any signs of knowing what you meant by it...


  • #153
    tbh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,914 ✭✭✭✭tbh


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    I run a rural broadband company, and I haven't seen fifteen million - or the colour of it - in government money.
    Lenny Lovett wrote: »
    Ah, so you do run a Quango then. That explains your views then. I understand now why you want everyone else cut. You'll be ok 'cos the EU development funding will keep you afloat!;) (The old "I'm alright Jack" routine!!)
    oscarBravo wrote: »
    It's really awfully difficult to argue with someone who invents his own definitions of words. Go figure out what a quango actually is (hint: it's not a small, privately-owned company) and come back to me when you know what you're talking about.
    Lenny Lovett wrote: »
    A Quango is a Quasi Autonomous N.G.O. is it not? Where di I say it was a small, privately owned company? Again, please quote.
    oscarBravo wrote: »
    I run a small, privately owned company. You said I run a quango. You explain it to me.
    Lenny Lovett wrote: »
    Ok. Sorry. I stand corrected. I obviously, mistakenly, assumed that your privately owned company may have one of these Broadband Companies that was funded by Government Grant aid. So you weren't... Right?
    oscarBravo wrote: »
    OK, we're getting places. So now your definition of a quango is a privately owned company that has ever received a government grant.
    Lenny Lovett wrote: »

    Did I say that? I can't seem to find where I did but you think you're right so I wouldn't dream of raining on your parade.

    .


  • #154
    Lenny Lovett
    Closed Accounts Posts: 920 ✭✭✭Lenny Lovett


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    As, I'm sure, did Frank McBrearty at one time.
    Yeah. look, I accept that some sh1t like that happens but surely they could do similarly to what they do in the UK - bring in a Detective/Senior Officer from the other end of the country and investigate it and bring Criminal charges against whoever is guilty of wrongdoing. Yes. I know they have an Ombudsman system in the UK but only after every other avenue has been exhausted. My point is simple: mainly that we can't afford these Ombudsman Offices for each Government/Public Service Dept. along with the associated entourage of staff they carry. Maybe one central Ombudsman? I wonder how many cases each Ombudsman deals with that, frankly, shouldn't make it past the post room?
    oscarBravo wrote: »
    You can't think of a reason off the top of your head for the staffing levels at Met Eireann, therefore we don't need them.
    I just think that it's a service that we do not necessarily need - or at least we do not need all of it at it's current size - when we could use, say, the UK Weather service or any of the many private companies that do this on a professional basis and provide weather forecasts to the likes of the Independent Airports in the UK and Europe as well as the Independent Broadcasters. I'm not advocating Pilots etc using random weatherv websites for their info. Just that it would be far more financially viable to use a private company and slice out another layer of excess.
    oscarBravo wrote: »
    On that basis, forgive me if I give your ideas for economic recovery short shrift. I'm really not sure who you're trying to impress with this sort of non-argument.
    I assure you that I'm not out to impress anybody. All I want is fair play for everyone. Less or even zero waste (probably not realistic to look for zero waste though) and a fair spread of all the cuts and other economic measures and most importantly that they don't cause further serious damage to the economy. At the moment all the cuts are primarily focused on the Welfare Recipients/Poor, Hospitals/The Sick and Education/Our Children. I just feel that they could find the revenue elsewhere without these three targets always being first up for the chop which is the case.


  • #155
    Lenny Lovett
    Closed Accounts Posts: 920 ✭✭✭Lenny Lovett


    tbh wrote: »
    .
    And another Mod piles into the fray with his wisdom... Must be another ban on the way for Lenny:eek:


  • #156
    tbh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,914 ✭✭✭✭tbh


    Lenny Lovett wrote: »
    At the moment all the cuts are primarily focused on the Welfare Recipients/Poor, Hospitals/The Sick and Education/Our Children. I just feel that they could find the revenue elsewhere without these three targets always being first up for the chop which is the case.

    to be honest, it's a fact of life that those areas are the areas where most money is spent, therefore will always be the areas where savings are sought. It does seem unfair, but it's just an economic fact of life.
    What the government need to do is to make life easier to bear for those affected by the cuts by bringing down the cost of living as much as possible, because to my untrained eye it's impossible to achieve the savings needed, rightly or wrongly, without cutting the standard of living for everyone.
    I do agree tho, that as much waste as possible needs to be eradicated, that's a given. However just saying "this can't be touched, that can't be touched, you'll just have to find the money somewhere else" is hurling from the ditch.


  • Advertisement
  • #157
    tbh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,914 ✭✭✭✭tbh


    Lenny Lovett wrote: »
    And another Mod piles into the fray with his wisdom... Must be another ban on the way for Lenny:eek:

    not my wisdom, lenny, it's you and ob's quotes, verbatim. I'm just going to ask you again, as always, to lay off the snide comments.


  • #158
    Lenny Lovett
    Closed Accounts Posts: 920 ✭✭✭Lenny Lovett


    tbh wrote: »
    to be honest, it's a fact of life that those areas are the areas where most money is spent,
    The most money is spent on Public Service Wages by far yet it's the recipients of the services that are toi suffer not the Public Service wage earners.

    Mary Harney said at the weekend that she acknowledged that 70% of all tax income went on PS wages but because of the Croke Park agreement they can't be touched so the money must come from the services and benefits themselves. Is that fair ?


  • #159
    tbh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,914 ✭✭✭✭tbh


    Lenny Lovett wrote: »
    The most money is spent on Public Service Wages by far yet it's the recipients of the services that are toi suffer not the Public Service wage earners.

    Mary Harney said at the weekend that she acknowledged that 70% of all tax income went on PS wages but because of the Croke Park agreement they can't be touched so the money must come from the services and benefits themselves. Is that fair ?

    in a word - no. I agree with your substantive point, btw. I've not argued with that at all - even if for nothing else than reasons of morale, it's vital that waste is eliminated. I've no problems paying more tax, but if I'm damned if my kids inheritance is going to replace the ministerial mercs for example.
    However, the simple fact is that the savings needed are going to be impossible to achieve without affecting everyone in society, and once we start exempting anyone, we give everyone the right to claim exemption.


  • #160
    Lenny Lovett
    Closed Accounts Posts: 920 ✭✭✭Lenny Lovett


    tbh wrote: »
    not my wisdom, lenny, it's you and ob's quotes, verbatim. I'm just going to ask you again, as always, to lay off the snide comments.
    It's just that I find it gas that we have four mods arguing one side and ye all thank each other every time one of ye makes a point. :pac:
    All towing the party line. The Chief Whip must be watching!!


  • #161
    Lenny Lovett
    Closed Accounts Posts: 920 ✭✭✭Lenny Lovett


    tbh wrote: »
    in a word - no. I agree with your substantive point, btw. I've not argued with that at all - even if for nothing else than reasons of morale, it's vital that waste is eliminated. I've no problems paying more tax, but if I'm damned if my kids inheritance is going to replace the ministerial mercs for example.
    However, the simple fact is that the savings needed are going to be impossible to achieve without affecting everyone in society, and once we start exempting anyone, we give everyone the right to claim exemption.
    But this is just it. The savings won't affect everyone. They will not be cutting PS salaries as they're ring fenced by the CP agreement. They will not be taxing the High Earners/Artists/Musicians/Authors because of the tax breaks they qualify for. They always hit the same people first. Whenever the cuts are mentioned by any Politician the first three sectors are Welfare, Health and Education. And then if further cuts are needed then they look at others. And getting back to my original point, by cutting Welfare it will have far wider damaging implications.

    As well as your kids inheritance, their Education should not be touched either regardless of how skint the country is.


  • Advertisement
  • #162
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,851 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    There's only one Politics mod involved in the conversation, and I'm arguing as a poster, not a mod. tbh, donegalfella and DeVore are ordinary users in this forum (unless DeVore makes it clear otherwise). The fact that they moderate other forums is irrelevant and off-topic.

    (In the interest of clarity, this post is with my moderator hat on.)


  • #163
    Lenny Lovett
    Closed Accounts Posts: 920 ✭✭✭Lenny Lovett


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    There's only one Politics mod involved in the conversation, and I'm arguing as a poster, not a mod. tbh, donegalfella and DeVore are ordinary users in this forum (unless DeVore makes it clear otherwise). The fact that they moderate other forums is irrelevant and off-topic.

    (In the interest of clarity, this post is with my moderator hat on.)
    Ok. It was a joke on my part. A poor one, admittedly. I'll severly admonish myself now.;)


  • #164
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,019 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • #165
    Lenny Lovett
    Closed Accounts Posts: 920 ✭✭✭Lenny Lovett


    donegalfella wrote: »
    This post has been deleted.
    No they don't. Public Sector pay as a whole, accounts for two thirds of state expenditure. There is a difference.


  • #166
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,019 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • #167
    Lenny Lovett
    Closed Accounts Posts: 920 ✭✭✭Lenny Lovett


    So the Government give us a taster of the proposed cuts last night. They tell us that they will be cutting instead of taxing and what happens this morning? Our borrowing costs go up! Great result chaps:rolleyes:. I just backs up what I was saying: Cuts will finish off the economy!


  • #168
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,851 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Lenny Lovett wrote: »
    So the Government give us a taster of the proposed cuts last night. They tell us that they will be cutting instead of taxing and what happens this morning? Our borrowing costs go up! Great result chaps:rolleyes:. I just backs up what I was saying: Cuts will finish off the economy!
    Two flaws in your reasoning: first, unless I've been mis-hearing, the government will be taxing as well as cutting. Second, you're assuming that the spike in bond yields is as a result of the means proposed to achieve the savings, rather than the fairly breathtaking scale of the savings required.


  • #169
    Lenny Lovett
    Closed Accounts Posts: 920 ✭✭✭Lenny Lovett


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    Two flaws in your reasoning: first, unless I've been mis-hearing, the government will be taxing as well as cutting.
    From www.rte.ie/news:
    At the start of a special two-day debate on the economy, Mr Cowen said no section of society could escape budgetary cutbacks, adding that December's Budget would be weighted more towards spending cuts rather than tax increases.
    oscarBravo wrote: »
    Second, you're assuming that the spike in bond yields is as a result of the means proposed to achieve the savings, rather than the fairly breathtaking scale of the savings required.
    It was Colm McCarthy who said so on Newstalk at Lunchtime...


  • #170
    Southsider1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 674 ✭✭✭Southsider1


    donegalfella wrote: »
    This post has been deleted.
    Sounds like you were a touch inaccurate to me. They well and truly skanked the poorer classes as usual and left the Public Service and the richer untouched.
    Lenny Lovett wrote: »
    And again we have the situation whereby the people who had no hand, act or part in our downfall ar the ones that everyone wants to penalise first. The poor. I would have no problem with the Welfare system being cut back as long as everyone else dipping into the public purse took an proportional whack too. The problem is that in the last budget these were the people who bore the brunt of the cuts and it looks like they're the target again. Why? Because they are an easy target. They have little or no representation. They cannot afford buses and trains to Dublin to protest. Many are poorly educated and so are unable to stand up for themselves unlike the Civil Service and other Unionised bodies.

    Well Lenny Lovett, having read most of this thread it looks that broadly you were right. DJPBarry, Donegalfella and co were fairly well off the mark. The Government have well and truly attacked the poorer in society and let the Public Service and the wealthy off scot free. They have created a deflationary budget that will rip the remainder of the heart out of the economy eliminating any chance of growth in the short to mid term. They have created no stimulus and no motivations for investment. They could have increased Corporation tax by one or two percent and we would still have been half of what the rest of Europe is. They have negated the cut in welfare by cutting the minimum wage so they eliminated the incentive for dole claimants to look for work.

    PS> Did you march yesterday Lenny Lovett?


Advertisement