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

anyone here going to vote sinn féin?

shtemcguire

they have policies that want to help the poor and they are republican which is good

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

lugha

Quackles wrote: »

Absolutely I will vote Sinn Féin. While I'm not naive enough to think that they will be in government, I think a term in strong opposition will make them a formidable force in the future of politics on this island, and I look forward to being properly represented for a change.

Well at least that is a sensible reason to vote for them. They certainly will be a different type of opposition to FF.
But for those who will vote SF because they approve of their policies, that will never be implemented because they won't be in power ...... :rolleyes:

Quackles

Absolutely I will vote Sinn Féin. While I'm not naive enough to think that they will be in government, I think a term in strong opposition will make them a formidable force in the future of politics on this island, and I look forward to being properly represented for a change.

dabestman1

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

OK, lets talk economics then. Sf's plan is to use the National Pension Reserve Fund to cover our budget deficit this year. The deficit for 2011 is projected to be €17.7bn with the €6bn austerity package, Sinn Fein want to reverse many of the measures so under them the deficit would be higher. The NPRF is not enough to cover this years deficit with the cuts so under SFs plan we definitely would not be able to cover our deficit for this year (ie. not be able to pay nurses, social welfare, pensioners, etc.). Of course SF also want to use the NPRF to provide a stimulus package, they seem to have forgotten they need the money to cover the deficit.

Basically, under SFs plan the country will be in a worse economic state, and we would have no one to turn to to borrow from as they will have told the IMF to piss off, the bond markets wouldnt touch us 12 months after we refused to repay the last loan and we would have no funds of our own (NPRF) left. Even if we do cover the deficit for this year, we will still have the same deficit next year. We would have one year to balance the books and would have to take €17.7bn out of our economy in one year which would do enormous damage. We took out €6bn in the last budget and look at how it is effecting people, now imagine three times that.

Explain to me how SF's plan can work?

Just listening to an economist there, (minored it myself) he was saying that to cover the deficit if we burn the bondholders that we would still be able to borrow in the markets and this is what SF intend to do in the next few months. not as simple as the example of borrowing 100 from johnny down the pub and him not lending to u anymore.
Why we didnt have an election before the bailout and this would be a non issue.

SafeSurfer

dabestman1 wrote: »

The British and the Unionists did their fair share of innoncent killings too,QUOTE]

Yes but they are not asking us for our vote.

Pete_Cavan

Jim236 wrote: »

Wow...now Sinn Féin are like the Nazis.:rolleyes:

And we're only on page 3 lol.

You were complaining that in every thread about Sinn Fein they get branded as terrorists. OK lets leave that aside. I explained SF's plan and asked the question how can it work (post #276 in this thread). So far no SF supporter has attempted to answer that question. It seems to me SF supporter love when people bring up the terrorist thing because that allows them to dodge questions of the economy.

Seriously though, can some SF supporter please read post #276and explain it to me because I am dying to know do any of you really think it can work.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

paky

parties like sinn fein use the current economic panic as a platform for gaining power. they say they'll make all these reforms but no reformist parties last long. the ones who do last are the ones who renege on their promises and with a leader like gerry Adams, I dont think you'll see anything stupid like burning the bondholders and telling the imf the p.iss off.

dsmythy

Jim236 wrote: »

Wow...now Sinn Féin are like the Nazis.:rolleyes:

And we're only on page 3 lol.

He didn't say they were.

KELTICKNIGHTT

if sinn fein where i power,we be worse off,doesnt take a degree too see with there policy's,and more bankrupt
sinn fein need too grow up in politics and give people real policy's that help and not make it worse

Jim236

Wow...now Sinn Féin are like the Nazis.:rolleyes:

And we're only on page 3 lol.

KeithAFC

Monty Burnz wrote: »

I think it would be a bit like discussing Bertie Ahern standing for president without mentioning all the corrupt stuff that he pulled or the tribunals. How in the name of god can you leave it out? If Sinn Fein didn't want people mentioning Gerry McCabe's murder and that sort of stuff, they should have thought about it before they stood behind their colleagues who murdered him.

Would it be fair to bring up Al Qeada atrocities if Osama bin Laden was the president of a party standing for election to the Dáil? I think it would.

Great post. I fully agree with you. Trying to talk about Sinn Fein without mentioning the PIRA, would be like discussing Hitlers life without mentioning the holocaust. Its nearly impossible to do it.

Pete_Cavan

zig wrote: »

Tell me why do you think the interest rate is so exorbitant? Because our sovereign debt is tied to bank debt. Even if we were to borrow just enough with a high interest rate it would still be less than the kind of money being dumped into the banks. Bond holders dont run this country, people will be alot more willing to invest in a country that isnt weighted down so heavily with the banks.

Even without the banks debt we still have a deficit of close to €18bn. The bond markets would not invest any money here if we defaulted on the loans we already have, would you give someone a loan 12 months after you lost billions on them? The bond holders dont run this country but we need them, with or without bank debt, to cover the deficit (unless we make €18bn in cuts in one year which is not possible).

Joe Public No.1

at present this country is in debt to the tune of 160 billion this is because of decisions made by last government,banks, bondholders and now the imf/eu bailout has terms which means the pension fund is spent 1st and that the banks/bond holders get another sizeable chunk of money(50billion) and the people of ireland get shafted. sinn fein are the only people to date to say no to this BS,,are there figures correct?? but they want to put together a stimulus package to get people working about time this should of happened already but the bunch in the dail are putting banks and themselves first. eu/imf know if ireland defaults portugal and spain could follow and there maybe no single currency left. certain banks should be left to fall.

i will vote for ???? sinn fein, FG, Labour

Monty Burnz

zig wrote: »

Tell me why do you think the interest rate is so exorbitant? Because our sovereign debt is tied to bank debt. Even if we were to borrow just enough with a high interest rate it would still be less than the kind of money being dumped into the banks. Bond holders dont run this country, people will be alot more willing to invest in a country that isnt weighted down so heavily with the banks.

The problem is this: that bank debt became Irish public debt as soon as Lenihan signed on the dotted line. In an ideal world we could repudiate that debt because the banks lied to us - they blew smoke up the asses of the FFers and they were delighted to believe them.

The question is this: can we repudiate the additional bank debt, still pay the national debt, and still be able to get the money from somebody that we need to run the state?

The answer from me is that I honestly don't know. It would be a heck of a gamble to take. I spent some time in Argentina after they went bust, and it's not fun.

dabestman1

Monty Burnz wrote: »

They did. But they are not asking me to vote for them, are they? So I don't see the relevance here.

I definitely agree that burning the bond holders needs serious consideration.

the past is the past, look to the future, anyway at least u agree the burning the bondholders is worth considering.

zig

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Tell me why do you think the interest rate is so exorbitant? Because our sovereign debt is tied to bank debt. Even if we were to borrow just enough with a high interest rate it would still be less than the kind of money being dumped into the banks. Bond holders dont run this country, people will be alot more willing to invest in a country that isnt weighted down so heavily with the banks.

jmayo

snubbleste wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

You mean they offer policies that people want because under those policies they do not suffer.
And some mythical rich people will pay for all the public sector wastage and social welfare bill. :rolleyes:

zig wrote: »

because labour/FG have pretty much nothing new to offer thats any different to FF.

And what do SF have to offer ?
Oh yeah we can spend the pension reserve fund many times over, tell the international markets to go fook themselves and then go back the next year to borrow again.
Ehh that may work for them usually where they threaten to send someone round to break their legs, but it won't work with London, Frankfurt and Wall Street.
People do not realise just how fooked we are and just how much will have to be shaved off the public purse.
Telling people cuts can be reversed and somehow their government cheques are immune is lunacy.

SF are just spouting populist cr** in order to get people to vote for them.
They are telling peope what they want to hear, not the truth.
Worse still they now have the other two at it, as they try and bring out schemes to appeal to those disaffected by cuts and mortgage arrears.

Permabear wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

If SF got in and they started their usual garbage about Corporation tax, watch over 50,000 FDI employed joining the dole queue in quick time.

KeithAFC

Seems like a play on fear job by Sinn Fein to be honest. We all know they don't have much of a clue at all regarding the republics economic situation.

Monty Burnz

dabestman1 wrote: »

The British and the Unionists did their fair share of innoncent killings too

They did. But they are not asking me to vote for them, are they? So I don't see the relevance here.

dabestman1 wrote: »

anyway to the present, it was FF who bailed out their friends and the banks which led to the IMF bailing us out on terms we will never be able to pay back and lot of parties are coming round to the idea of renegotiation or burn them.
Remember this when you vote.

I definitely agree that burning the bond holders needs serious consideration.

Monty Burnz

Jim236 wrote: »

Thats irrelevant. Can we not have 1 topic about Sinn Féin without it turning into another IRA whataboutery thread?

I think it would be a bit like discussing Bertie Ahern standing for president without mentioning all the corrupt stuff that he pulled or the tribunals. How in the name of god can you leave it out? If Sinn Fein didn't want people mentioning Gerry McCabe's murder and that sort of stuff, they should have thought about it before they stood behind their colleagues who murdered him.

Would it be fair to bring up Al Qeada atrocities if Osama bin Laden was the president of a party standing for election to the Dáil? I think it would.

Victor

Seloth wrote: »

In my local town its a SF councilor and his wife that run one of two local news papers and I must say its the biggest load of propaganda Bull**** known to man.

The Cllr Discussed in this weeks edition in his own large section of how SF are the only true opposition party :pac:

You might mention that to SIPO www.sipo.ie I'm not saying they've done anything wrong, but there may be an absence of transparency.

Brenireland

Jim236 wrote: »

Sorry I took your post to mean I was being biassed towards SF for giving them my no.1. Just copped you can't see how I voted and was just asking.

I Gave FG vote No.1

dabestman1

Monty Burnz wrote: »

I'd guess because a lot of younger people don't remember the Sinn Fein/IRA terrorist campaign and the innocent deaths it entailed. And they don't realise the disaster that socialist government brought to half of Europe and elsewhere. Basically if you didn't watch the news before 1994, the Shinners seem like a normal political party and their policies look plausible.

The British and the Unionists did their fair share of innoncent killings too, anyway to the present, it was FF who bailed out their friends and the banks which led to the IMF bailing us out on terms we will never be able to pay back and lot of parties are coming round to the idea of renegotiation or burn them.
Remember this when you vote.

dsmythy

Jim236 wrote: »

ffs here we go again...

With regards as to why more people are willing to vote for them I think their history is well on point. The past fades.

Monty Burnz

Jim236 wrote: »

ffs here we go again...

How do you mean? How can you talk about Sinn Fein without mentioning terrorism/Gerry McCabe/Northern Bank etc?

Whether some people like it or not, that IS a political issue if these guys are looking for our votes. In 30 years time guys like Adams who were IRA leaders will be gone from the party, and it will be less of an issue for people like me who remember the atrocities they committed. But right now, it's a really big issue.

I was addressing the question as to why SF's polling figures look good. In addition to the protest vote element, and the fact that they are telling people what they want to hear, I volunteered the point that people under the age of say 25 will have no real recollection of the Warrington bombing or the massacre in Eniskillen. Nor will they remember the dismal state of Eastern European countries that were being killed by socialism. I think it's a valid point.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Pete_Cavan

Jim236 wrote: »

Thats irrelevant. Can we not have 1 topic about Sinn Féin without it turning into another IRA whataboutery thread?

OK, lets talk economics then. Sf's plan is to use the National Pension Reserve Fund to cover our budget deficit this year. The deficit for 2011 is projected to be €17.7bn with the €6bn austerity package, Sinn Fein want to reverse many of the measures so under them the deficit would be higher. The NPRF is not enough to cover this years deficit with the cuts so under SFs plan we definitely would not be able to cover our deficit for this year (ie. not be able to pay nurses, social welfare, pensioners, etc.). Of course SF also want to use the NPRF to provide a stimulus package, they seem to have forgotten they need the money to cover the deficit.

Basically, under SFs plan the country will be in a worse economic state, and we would have no one to turn to to borrow from as they will have told the IMF to piss off, the bond markets wouldnt touch us 12 months after we refused to repay the last loan and we would have no funds of our own (NPRF) left. Even if we do cover the deficit for this year, we will still have the same deficit next year. We would have one year to balance the books and would have to take €17.7bn out of our economy in one year which would do enormous damage. We took out €6bn in the last budget and look at how it is effecting people, now imagine three times that.

Explain to me how SF's plan can work?

Jim236

Brenireland wrote: »

sorry was just curious chill.

Sorry I took your post to mean I was being biassed towards SF for giving them my no.1. Just copped you can't see how I voted and was just asking.

Brenireland

Jim236 wrote: »

Thats irrelevant. Can we not have 1 topic about Sinn Féin without it turning into another IRA whataboutery thread?

sorry was just curious chill.

lugha

crebel81 wrote: »

I am seeking change. Fundamental change. I will be voting SINN FEIN!!

I'm afraid you will be disappointed. There is almost no chance of SF being in power in which case they will barely be in a position to make any change, much less any fundamental kind.