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

Ireland's debt deal: What will the Left do now?

24567…10

Comments

  • #32
    daithicarr
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 425 ✭✭daithicarr


    What a pile of horse **** about government levelheadedness and about the left being proven wrong.

    The government did nothing to achieve this, if Spain and Italy hadn't got into trouble we would have got nothing. we are getting scraps off the table. all the time we did what we were told and begged for some help, and got blank refusals.

    Spain and Italy play hard ball from stage one and get what they want. we are just holding on to their coat tales.


  • #33
    hyperborean
    Closed Accounts Posts: 655 ✭✭✭hyperborean


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    See, right in the first sentence you are wrong, (as usual), the Irish left consists of much more....

    How does anyone take you serious?


  • #34
    djpbarry
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    Heads the ball wrote: »
    So its hit a floor at 14%...
    Paint it any way you want – it’s still steady.
    Heads the ball wrote: »
    At a massive social cost
    Where? Show me.
    Heads the ball wrote: »
    I was calling out someone to show how it has RECOVERED (not just stayed flat)
    Nobody said the economy has recovered. What has been said is that the economy has steadied. Seems to me you’re arguing against a point that nobody has made.


  • #35
    mikom
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,391 ✭✭✭✭mikom


    Pride comes before a fall.


  • #36
    hyperborean
    Closed Accounts Posts: 655 ✭✭✭hyperborean


    daltonmd wrote: »
    Good post. But it also begs the question of what will FG - "No higher taxes", and Labour - "No SW and PS wage cuts,"do?

    You actually think this was a good post! I am extremely interested as to the reasoning behind this. please elaborate, please


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    Blowfish
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,112 ✭✭✭Blowfish


    poeticseraphim wrote: »
    But a lot of people still have trouble getting their heads around the fact that traditionally leftist politics around the world believe in social justice. And taxation comes with that.
    That depends heavily on how you define social justice.
    daithicarr wrote: »
    What a pile of horse **** about government levelheadedness and about the left being proven wrong.

    The government did nothing to achieve this, if Spain and Italy hadn't got into trouble we would have got nothing. we are getting scraps off the table. all the time we did what we were told and begged for some help, and got blank refusals.

    Spain and Italy play hard ball from stage one and get what they want. we are just holding on to their coat tales.
    Did you actually read the OP? He didn't mention anything to do with it being the government as opposed to Spain/Italy. It's actually pretty irrelevant to the discussion.

    The point being made is simply that once the bank debt does get shifted off government books, we will still have a huge deficit. In that sense, the idea promoted that we could 'end austerity' is pretty much nonsense
    hyperborean wrote: »
    You actually think this was a good post! I am extremely interested as to the reasoning behind this. please elaborate, please
    Very little of our deficit is due to the banks. This explains it pretty well.


  • #38
    Sand
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,000 ✭✭✭✭Sand


    Has an Irish debt deal been secured? Whose paying off our debt? When did this happen?


  • #39
    hyperborean
    Closed Accounts Posts: 655 ✭✭✭hyperborean


    Blowfish wrote: »
    That depends heavily on how you define social justice.
    Did you actually read the OP? He didn't mention anything to do with it being the government as opposed to Spain/Italy. It's actually pretty irrelevant to the discussion.

    The point being made is simply that once the bank debt does get shifted off government books, we will still have a huge deficit. In that sense, the idea promoted that we could 'end austerity' is pretty much nonsense
    Very little of our deficit is due to the banks. This explains it pretty well.
    #Good lad, ye see that is not what the OP said or implied, the post( has interesting parts and valid points of debate but the purpose was singular in its reasoning..... to engage is to tolerate the alan greenspan view of neo con libertarianism.

    Greenspan being a complete failure


  • #40
    NIMAN
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,593 ✭✭✭✭NIMAN


    Thats the opposition's job, to complain about everything the Gov does.

    Its is now the Left's job to make this sound like a bad deal to you and me. And they will do their damnest.


  • #41
    Blowfish
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,112 ✭✭✭Blowfish


    hyperborean wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.
    Are you sure you're reading the same OP as I am? Here's what was said:
    Permabear wrote: »
    This post has been deleted.
    hyperborean wrote: »
    Greenspan being a complete failure
    Indeed he was, but given that his concept of recovery involved stimulus through lowered interest rates, I'm not quite sure how that applies here or how you could realistically describe him as libertarian.


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    Monty Burnz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,455 ✭✭✭✭Monty Burnz


    jimmycrackcorm wrote: »
    There's still the austerity to complain about. However I'm waiting to hear Sinn Fein explain how pushing to vote against the fiscal treaty and the subsequent access to the stability fund looks now.
    They don't appear to have been asked by anyone.


  • #43
    Monty Burnz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,455 ✭✭✭✭Monty Burnz


    hyperborean wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.
    Much more than what??
    Permabear wrote: »
    This post has been deleted.
    Sinn Fein named, ULA named, and 'fellow travelers' = catch-all term for all spare lefties. Labour are in government. Who is left, exactly?


  • #44
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    I suspect that the left will carp and complain, as is their prerogative. I also suspect that they'll wait and see where this all ends up. To be honest, we'd all be as well to wait and see what happens. I've lost count of the number of times that Europe does something, there's an initial positive reaction from the markets, we all say "woo hoo!", and then by the following week it's all doom and gloom again. We don't know if things will be any different this time, so let's not get cocky, eh?


  • #45
    Noreen1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,654 ✭✭✭Noreen1


    Good point.

    Actually, come to think of it - the debt has been transferred from the sovereign to the banks (or will be).

    So, what percentage of the banks does the sovereign own?

    It seems to me that the detail remains largely unknown, apart from the fact that the bank debt still remains to be paid.

    The Irish banks are in no position to repay that debt - so who pays it?


  • #46
    [Jackass]
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,193 ✭✭✭[Jackass]


    The reaction of the left to this deal has given me so much entertainment that I would actually pay a subscription fee just to read and listen to more of their rants.

    Isn't it ironic that the "champions of the little man" are now the ones who are begrudging the potential saving grace of the Economy.

    They are more interested in being anti-establishment and the voice of the people, than being rational and constructive.

    Instead of saying, ok great, this is EXACTLY what we've been banging on about, this is EXACTLY what we wanted to happen, even though we made farcical claims about "burning Europe" and used suicide Economics to make our points, this is what we wanted, so we embrace every factor of the deal, they are instead irate at the thought of the problems being solved, irate that people may not be suffering for much longer, and it just exposes their own personal agenda and how they're "playing politics" more than anyone, whilst the people they are trying to discredit are getting results through negotiating and playing the game the only way it can be played. The fact that they haven't embraced this 100% just shows they haven't a clue, and are giving out just for the sake of it, and are more interested in furthering their own political agenda than in getting anything resolved.


  • #47
    [Jackass]
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,193 ✭✭✭[Jackass]


    Regarding the debt now belonging to the banks, and not the state, but the banks being state owned, when banks are bailed out and brought back to profitability, even with massive burdens, the banks shares can be sold, we can't sell share's in the state, and that money will go straight to the exchequer, so instead of having direct responsabiliy for the debts, we have assets that are going concerns, without the debt hanging over our heads personally. (i.e. imagine the difference of being in massive debt as a sole trader, vs being director / shareholder in a LTD company with massive debts, it still affects you, but it's not your personal debt, and no one can come after you personally for the money - which is essentially the effect this deal will have on the country. The debt is no longer going to be on our spreadsheet as something we need to pay - it is the debt of an asset that we own, but we're not liable for it).


  • #48
    CiaranC
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,300 ✭✭✭CiaranC


    Are Labour not part of "the left" any more, or does its makeup change to suit peoples argument on here?


  • #49
    [Jackass]
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,193 ✭✭✭[Jackass]


    Well, I think it's blatantly obvious that people are talking about the far left (the OP names them in the opening post). Labour are centre-left, and have not put forward the type of rhetoric that people are referring to. I thought that much was obvious.


  • #50
    Gunmonkey
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,067 ✭✭✭Gunmonkey


    Noreen1 wrote: »
    Good point.

    Actually, come to think of it - the debt has been transferred from the sovereign to the banks (or will be).

    So, what percentage of the banks does the sovereign own?

    It seems to me that the detail remains largely unknown, apart from the fact that the bank debt still remains to be paid.

    The Irish banks are in no position to repay that debt - so who pays it?

    From my understanding of the deal, where we borrowed the €45 billion or so to bailout the banks (plus the €20 billion from the pension fund), that was a debt directly attributed to the state which we just happened to use to bailout the banks. Whoever we borrowed from could come along and take that debt straight from our budget, even if it wasnt attributed to the banks, it was just part of the debt we owed.

    Now, that €45 billion is routed through the banks. We still owe the money, but the creditors cant take say "sack all your public servants, no more welfare" to get their money back, it has to come from the states assets in the banks. So either they get a percentage of each years profits or can take the banks as debt, not 100% on how that will be paid. plus since its seperate, we can negotiate it independant of our sovergin debt and get a better deal on the €45 Billion.

    Basically, we still owe the money but its €45 Billion less on top of our existing debts, so the interest payments will be smaller as less money owed as our soverign debt.

    I think.


  • #51
    invinciblePRSTV
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,017 ✭✭✭invinciblePRSTV


    [Jackass] wrote: »
    Well, I think it's blatantly obvious that people are talking about the far left (the OP names them in the opening post). Labour are centre-left, and have not put forward the type of rhetoric that people are referring to. I thought that much was obvious.


    Let's take a reality check and remember who the OP is before giving this thread any consideration.

    The OP has previously classified FF as 'socialist', and all political parties which don't subscribe to a particular bonkers ideology (which we won't name) as 'statists', which appears to be a proxy name for anyone or any entity which advocates state involvement in anything in the public sphere. This would presumably include FG as well which the OP has publicly supported on here on numerous occasions.

    So this means, by the bye, that if the OP is ranting about 'the left', then he's really moaning about the political party he supports?

    Or it could mean OP is just looking for a reason to attack the big bad 'left' bogeyman construct which is a central tenet of his ideology. It's a schtick that is getting rather boring from this particular poster at this stage.....


  • Advertisement
  • #52
    Monty Burnz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,455 ✭✭✭✭Monty Burnz


    invinciblePRSTV wrote: »
    Let's take a reality check and remember who the OP is before giving this thread any consideration.

    The OP has previously classified FF as 'socialist', and all political parties which don't subscribe to a particular bonkers ideology (which we won't name) as 'statists', which appears to be a proxy name for anyone or any entity which advocates state involvement in anything in the public sphere. This would presumably include FG as well which the OP has publicly supported on here on numerous occasions.

    So this means, by the bye, that if the OP is ranting about 'the left', then he's really moaning about the political party he supports?

    Or it could mean OP is just looking for a reason to attack the big bad 'left' bogeyman construct which is a central tenet of his ideology. It's a schtick that is getting rather boring from this particular poster at this stage.....
    So rather than address the question posed, you'd rather question the motives of the questioner? That's a logical failure according to Philosophy 101. The question stands on its own merits.


  • #53
    Annabella1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 661 ✭✭✭Annabella1


    Thankfully the majority voted for the recent EU treaty.It looks like the ESM will be able to directly recapitise banks without it being on the National Debt.A 'No' vote would have not made this possible for us.
    SinnFein and the lefties have been totally exposed


  • #54
    southsiderosie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,565 ✭✭✭southsiderosie


    MOD NOTE:

    Can people please stop with the ad hominem attacks?

    Also, something else that is getting 'rather boring' is the constant attempts to drag debates from other threads into new threads. Let's deal with the actual question at hand, instead of making this yet another thread about libertarians being baby-eaters.


  • #55
    Monty Burnz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,455 ✭✭✭✭Monty Burnz


    Annabella1 wrote: »
    Thankfully the majority voted for the recent EU treaty.It looks like the ESM will be able to directly recapitise banks without it being on the National Debt.A 'No' vote would have not made this possible for us.
    SinnFein and the lefties have been totally exposed
    Oddly enough, I doubt we will be hearing any mea culpa from them.


  • #56
    darkman2
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 8,632 ✭✭✭darkman2


    The philosophy of the far left / Sinn Féin is basically like the country using a credit card to pay for it's mortgage.


  • #57
    cristoir
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 555 ✭✭✭cristoir


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    Smashing post. The basis of their argument has been completely neutralized. Now they and many like them will be forced to explain how they would lower the deficit and the debt beyond the empty slogans of "burn the bondholders" and such. However I imagine they'll find a new scapegoat to blame.


  • #58
    Monty Burnz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,455 ✭✭✭✭Monty Burnz


    cristoir wrote: »
    Smashing post. The basis of their argument has been completely neutralized. Now they and many like them will be forced to explain how they would lower the deficit and the debt beyond the empty slogans of "burn the bondholders" and such. However I imagine they'll find a new scapegoat to blame.
    May I suggest 'fat cats' and 'big business'?


  • #59
    Heads the ball
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 331 ✭✭Heads the ball


    djpbarry wrote: »
    Where? Show me.

    Are you really disputing that there has been a massive social cost?


  • #60
    stackerman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,241 ✭✭✭stackerman


    cristoir wrote: »
    Smashing post. The basis of their argument has been completely neutralized. Now they and many like them will be forced to explain how they would lower the deficit and the debt beyond the empty slogans of "burn the bondholders" and such. However I imagine they'll find a new scapegoat to blame.

    But you are making the assumption that this deal is a "game changer"

    I for one, don't think this deal will change anything. The markets will buy it for 2/3 weeks and then reality will hit . . . We are WELL past the Minsky moment, and "deals" like this simply delay the inevitable. Just my 2cents worth (soon to be reclassified as "my 2 dollars worth :pac:).


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    Icepick
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,456 ✭✭✭Icepick


    stackerman wrote: »
    But you are making the assumption that this deal is a "game changer"

    I for one, don't think this deal will change anything. The markets will buy it for 2/3 weeks and then reality will hit . . . We are WELL past the Minsky moment, and "deals" like this simply delay the inevitable.
    And what is this inevitable thing?
    BTW, if you know more than "the markets", you can easily become a millionaire in 2/3 weeks.


Advertisement