Feb 9th Protest - will you be joining?

samsemtex · 08-02-2013 02:53PM

books4sale wrote: »

No need to attack that poster like you hold some kind of moral high ground or something.

A lot of legit protesters are getting turned off by the new hi-bred that has sprouted up in recent years 'protester + massive ego'. Its like its the new fashionable thing to do.

Your not Che Guevara and never will sarcrifice your life for the good of a country, so stop kidding yourself behind your keyboard spouting masses of rubbish.

After your city stroll, when the union rep stands at the top addressing you all on Saturday, clapping and cheering in unison, have another think about who is actually awake and thinking for themselves. You're no better than those who prop up the government, just under a different banner!

books4sale wrote: »

Don't make asssuptions about posters on here because you'll just end up being way off the mark..... then your creds shot!

Oh the irony. Lecturing me on not making assumptions. Calling me a Che Guevara inspired lefty when i am in favour of cuts to the public service pay roll and am staunchly anti trade union. Practice what ya preach and stop being a complete patsy.

starlings · 08-02-2013 03:19PM

nice_very wrote: »

some people are just not getting that a lot of us are marching/protesting as a protest AGAINST the union inaction and now against the latest act of treason this govt has committed... DO YOU NOT SEE THAT???????????? ffs I think some of you are just using excuses to stay sat on your arse whinging on the internet, while thousands will be out in the rain trying to speak up for the likes of the lazy. Pathetic. Dont forget to watch xfactor or whatever ****e the media wants to feed you. Sheep.

Don't call me a sheep, Shirley. :mad:

What will you do when your march AGAINST union inaction ends in speeches from the unions? Won't those in power be delighted at not even having to bother with dividing and conquering when they see infighting on the march against them?

starlings · 08-02-2013 03:22PM

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

When oh when will people learn that standing around shouting and complain will not make jobs and money appear out of thin air?

If we put as much energy into actually being proactive and working towards getting ourselves out of the hole we are in as we do whinging and moaning about it I really think we would come of the recession much quicker. The hours you spend whinging could be put to better use finding a job.

No protest for me.

I want to thank you a thousand times.

KyussBishop · 08-02-2013 04:00PM

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

When oh when will people learn that standing around shouting and complain will not make jobs and money appear out of thin air?

If we put as much energy into actually being proactive and working towards getting ourselves out of the hole we are in as we do whinging and moaning about it I really think we would come of the recession much quicker. The hours you spend whinging could be put to better use finding a job.

No protest for me.

Where does this boneheaded idea come from, that if you just go out there and put in the effort, you can get a job or create one for yourself; that you can pull yourself up by your own bootstraps?

Why on earth would we have such high unemployment if it were that obvious and simple; there are only enough jobs for 1 out of 26 people, and how on earth are you going to setup a viable business, when consumer demand is so low, and actually getting money to start a business in the first place is difficult.

It's total fairyland "blame the victim for not putting in effort" territory; protest is about the only thing that can be done for a lot of people, because how else do you propose the necessary political change be brought about?

It's very strange really, the derision people put out towards protesting and protestors; I don't understand that (apart perhaps, from those who object for half-witted ideological reasons), it's almost like they are offended, that other people can be arsed to go out and make the effort to promote change, when they themselves can't be bothered.

As I said way back in this thread, discouraging protest with the argument "it won't change anything", is ironically self-defeating, because it's exactly that attitude which leads to nothing changing; these people are also fond of the "well what are the alternatives" line of argument on economic issues, so then what is your alternative, to protesting? What are you going to do, that's going to have any modicum of political difference, if you don't get out and protest? (because it is political change that is needed; people won't just pull themselves up by their bootstraps)

It's like these people don't have any concept of the history of political activism, and can't think of any instance where protest has had any meaningful change; it reduces into just a cynical advocacy to shut up, sit down, and stick with the status quo.

Don't trot out the same tired nonsense either, of demanding solutions and alternatives from me; I've gone through that already in the thread here and in other threads, giving out detailed solutions that would resolve the crisis; lets hear a solution from the naysayers, that doesn't involve our country self-destructing in slow motion, by sitting through widescale unemployment and social/economic destruction for a decade.

20Cent · 08-02-2013 04:01PM

Its gas how the "protest doesn't achieve anything" brigade are the first to moan about the Croke park agreement and OAPs etc being shielded from austerity. Why u think that is?
Its because they got off their holes and got their voices heard.

Was at the last one the union leaders were booed by a large part of the crowd. There were all kinds of groups and banners not just union ones. This well I'm not going because x is going is really childish.

Am Chile · 08-02-2013 04:15PM

Its very important a large crowd of people turnout nationwide tomorrow, if by chance its a poor turnout tomorrow-its gonna send out the entirely wrong message in sending out a message that Irish people are happy with the so called deal that saddles future generations with a mountain of debt that was never theirs to begin with.

starlings · 08-02-2013 04:18PM

KyussBishop wrote: »

Where does this boneheaded idea come from, that if you just go out there and put in the effort, you can get a job or create one for yourself; that you can pull yourself up by your own bootstraps?

Why on earth would we have such high unemployment if it were that obvious and simple; there are only enough jobs for 1 out of 26 people, and how on earth are you going to setup a viable business, when consumer demand is so low, and actually getting money to start a business in the first place is difficult.

It's total fairyland "blame the victim for not putting in effort" territory; protest is about the only thing that can be done for a lot of people, because how else do you propose the necessary political change be brought about?

It's very strange really, the derision people put out towards protesting and protestors; I don't understand that (apart perhaps, from those who object for half-witted ideological reasons), it's almost like they are offended, that other people can be arsed to go out and make the effort to promote change, when they themselves can't be bothered.

As I said way back in this thread, discouraging protest with the argument "it won't change anything", is ironically self-defeating, because it's exactly that attitude which leads to nothing changing; these people are also fond of the "well what are the alternatives" line of argument on economic issues, so then what is your alternative, to protesting? What are you going to do, that's going to have any modicum of political difference, if you don't get out and protest? (because it is political change that is needed; people won't just pull themselves up by their bootstraps)

It's like these people don't have any concept of the history of political activism, and can't think of any instance where protest has had any meaningful change; it reduces into just a cynical advocacy to shut up, sit down, and stick with the status quo.

Don't trot out the same tired nonsense either, of demanding solutions and alternatives from me; I've gone through that already in the thread here and in other threads, giving out detailed solutions that would resolve the crisis; lets hear a solution from the naysayers, that doesn't involve our country self-destructing in slow motion, by sitting through widescale unemployment and social/economic destruction for a decade.

It's not black and white you know! There is a whole spectrum of activism between going on a march and being passive. Some people prefer to organise and cooperate in small groups on particular projects that will bring social benefits, start up new business, support local communities etc. Others lobby quietly and steadily in the background.

I suppose it comes down to how you want to address the problem: through a loudspeaker, or through small cooperative steps. I find the latter much more efficient.

Yitzhak Rabin · 08-02-2013 04:28PM

Looking forward to seeing images of bloated red faced union chiefs bleating on about people having been pushed to the brink, waffling on about the capitalist fatcats, maybe Clare Daly will throw in a word or two about Ardidnary decent wuurkers. Then they'll all head off in their merc's and audis and have a good ol laugh.

KyussBishop · 08-02-2013 04:30PM

starlings wrote: »

It's not black and white you know! There is a whole spectrum of activism between going on a march and being passive. Some people prefer to organise and cooperate in small groups on particular projects that will bring social benefits, start up new business, support local communities etc. Others lobby quietly and steadily in the background.

I suppose it comes down to how you want to address the problem: through a loudspeaker, or through small cooperative steps. I find the latter much more efficient.

The latter are certainly significant and worthwhile community/economic steps, but what about the necessary political change? They (minus the lobbying) don't contribute to that, when it is only through that, that an actual resolution to the crisis can be achieved.

Am Chile · 08-02-2013 04:40PM

Good article written by david mcwilliams today, for anyone who might think we got a good deal, read davids article, recommended reading.

There are two parties in the promissory note negotiations. On one side is the ECB and
on the other, the Irish government. The ECB wanted all along to turn Irish bank
debts into Irish sovereign debts. The Irish government wanted to avoid this at
all costs, preferring either some debt relief or some mutualization or sharing
of the debts.

Once the promissory note was in place the Irish had wriggle room, which the ECB
wanted to reduce, while giving as little away as possible.

Lets look at the interests of both parties in turn, beginning with the ECB.

There are two main reasons the ECB wanted the Irish to swap the promissory note for
sovereign debts. First it would tidy up, in its eyes, the messy promissory note;
it was unorthodox and as long as it was around, ran the risk that the pesky
Irish could go rogue, doing a local deal with themselves between their central
bank and their government – far away from Frankfurt. If the Irish government
said they weren’t paying the note, the Irish central bank would find itself
breaking the ECB’s rules on monetary financing. By not paying the note and yet
still extending cash to Anglo, the Irish central was simply printing money with
nothing to back it up.

The second reason the ECB wanted the Irish to convert the promissory note into Irish
government bonds, was because it would create collateral against the money the
Irish central bank was printing: and the Irish people would be on the hook. As
long as the Irish people are on the hook, the ECB is happy.

Now look at the opening position of the Irish government.

The position of our government was: the banking debt is not ours, it is unfair and
Ireland was only doing its bit to save the European banking system by bailing
out our bank. By preventing contagion, we are owed a favour. So the Irish
government’s red line in the sand has to be to avoid swapping the promissory
note into a government bond. Why? Once you do this, the debt becomes the debt of
the Irish people – and the ECB are off the hook.

Once you accept that it is Irish government debt, the game is over. So the last thing
the government wants to do is convert the unorthodox promissory note into
government debt – at any maturity.

The deal on the table is a complete defeat for the Irish government and the Irish
people, because at its core, when you strip away all the technical details, it
is about transferring bank debt to sovereign debt.

So, it is game set and match to the ECB. Now it is rid of the promissory note –
which was only an IOU written by the last Finance Minister with a vague
undertaking to clear things up eventually -converting it into Irish sovereign
debt, which means you and me are definitely on the hook. The ECB must be
sniggering up its sleeve, if it is not actually laughing in our face, at the
inability of the Irish negotiators to act on our behalf.

Yet again, our negotiators have sold the people short and given the ECB everything
it wanted.

This move will increase overall Irish government debt and in time, will bring forward the risk of a sovereign default in Ireland, which is precisely what the deal was supposed to avoid.

http://www.davidmcwilliams.ie/2013/02/08/lets-get-something-very-clear

starlings · 08-02-2013 05:00PM

KyussBishop wrote: »

The latter are certainly significant and worthwhile community/economic steps, but what about the necessary political change? They (minus the lobbying) don't contribute to that, when it is only through that, that an actual resolution to the crisis can be achieved.

Turning to cooperative trade and networks at local level IS political change. It's already happening. It will take some time for it to be supported -even understood- from the top down, but we have to start somewhere instead of demanding that the hands-tied government sort it all out for us.

I'm not against protests, as I've already said on this thread- just that I think this one is far far too many angry voices, many of them angry with each other, shouting into the wind. No doubt it will be cathartic for some to express their anger, and good for them, but it's not for me.

Chucky the tree · 08-02-2013 05:04PM

Am Chile wrote: »

Good article written by david mcwilliams today, for anyone who might think we got a good deal, read davids

Should we still also believe McWilliams that the original bank guarantee was for the best?

20Cent · 08-02-2013 05:25PM

Chucky the tree wrote: »

Should we still also believe McWilliams that the original bank guarantee was for the best?

He didn't suggest the bank guarantee.

http://www.davidmcwilliams.ie/2011/11/15/recent-inaccuracies-re-the-bank-guarantee

Chucky the tree · 08-02-2013 05:35PM

20Cent wrote: »

He didn't suggest the bank guarantee.

http://www.davidmcwilliams.ie/2011/11/15/recent-inaccuracies-re-the-bank-guarantee

I know he didn't suggest it. But he originally said it was for the best. Once it was clear it was a disaster he was obviously going to back track.

20Cent · 08-02-2013 05:39PM

Chucky the tree wrote: »

I know he didn't suggest it. But he originally said it was for the best. Once it was clear it was a disaster he was obviously going to back track.

Link to that? have seen it said often but never any proof of it.

Blured · 08-02-2013 05:43PM

20Cent wrote: »

Link to that? have seen it said often but never any proof of it.

http://www.davidmcwilliams.ie/2008/10/01/lenihans-masterstroke-has-bought-us-time-to-sort-out-our-own-problems

20Cent · 08-02-2013 05:48PM

Blured wrote: »

http://www.davidmcwilliams.ie/2008/10/01/lenihans-masterstroke-has-bought-us-time-to-sort-out-our-own-problems

He has repeated ad nauseum that he was for a limited amount and a short term guarantee not what Lenihan put in place.

Anyway whats this got to do with the protest on Saturday!!

Blured · 08-02-2013 05:54PM

20Cent wrote: »

He has repeated ad nauseum that he was for a limited amount and a short term guarantee not what Lenihan put in place.

Anyway whats this got to do with the protest on Saturday!!

I didnt read anything about short-term, limited amount of time in that article. Maybe I missed it though

the article wrote:

Longer term, we can expect foreign banks to move here, setting up offices in Ireland and creating a banking industry which will thrive. We have set the template. The upside greatly outweighs any possible downside. The system is the most important thing at this stage. A threat can now, with the right accompanying policies, be turned into an opportunity

20Cent · 08-02-2013 05:57PM

Blured wrote: »

I didnt read anything about short-term, limited amount of time in that article. Maybe I missed it though

Here's something he wrote two weeks after that:
http://www.davidmcwilliams.ie/2008/10/19/bank-guarantee-will-mean-survival-of-the-weakest

It would have been far better to have followed the Swedish or Swiss approach, by sticking to the three-phased programme, weeding out the guilty while recapitalising the system using government preference shares.

Now we potentially have the worst of all worlds. The moral of the story is that, when you try to satisfy the left- and the right-wing, you end up with a dog’s dinner. This is hardly the best platform for recovery.

Anyway I guess the point being made is why believe someone who was wrong before in the past. This is pretty absurd since everyone has been wrong in the past. We all read and evaluate what we think of things and decide ourselves.

Blured · 08-02-2013 05:59PM

20Cent wrote: »

Anyway I guess the point being made is why believe someone who was wrong before in the past. This is pretty absurd since everyone has been wrong in the past. We all read and evaluate what we think of things and decide ourselves.

I think the point being made is that most of the experts have gotten as many predictions wrong as they have gotten right, which is why we should treat them all with a pinch of salt

20Cent · 08-02-2013 06:05PM

Blured wrote: »

I think the point being made is that most of the experts have gotten as many predictions wrong as they have gotten right, which is why we should treat them all with a pinch of salt

Totally agree, but the story that McWilliams was all for the action Lenihan took is incorrect but widely repeated.

Anyway as per the op I'm going and hope there is a very big turnout. Protest actually does work.

Plates · 08-02-2013 07:03PM

Does anyone have a definition of "Ordinary People"? Does the existence of Ordinary People imply that there are also "Extraordinary" people?

I asked Pearse Doherty this question via email as an online search for "Pearse Doherty" +"Ordinary People" resulted inthousands of results. His answer was "I use the term 'ordinary people' to mean those on low and middle incomes".

When I asked him what salary bands he considers to be lowand middle income I didn't get a reply.

Can anyone enlighten me on the definition of this throwaway phrase?

lockon... · 08-02-2013 07:17PM

Plates wrote: »

Does anyone have a definition of "Ordinary People"? Does the existence of Ordinary People imply that there are also "Extraordinary" people?

I asked Pearse Doherty this question via email as an online search for "Pearse Doherty" +"Ordinary People" resulted inthousands of results. His answer was "I use the term 'ordinary people' to mean those on low and middle incomes".

When I asked him what salary bands he considers to be lowand middle income I didn't get a reply.

Can anyone enlighten me on the definition of this throwaway phrase?

Sure
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/pedantic

rambutman · 08-02-2013 07:25PM

I can see the problem but what is the objective of the march?

What do these people expect/want to happen?

The acquisition stage of NAMA is over. The cash has been poured into the banks. Our government borrowed the money to do it. All we can do now is suck it up and ride it out.

squod · 08-02-2013 07:28PM

Blured wrote: »

http://www.davidmcwilliams.ie/2008/10/01/lenihans-masterstroke-has-bought-us-time-to-sort-out-our-own-problems

Re-read the article.

By keeping the banks liquid, the private sector will solve the problem of writing down bad loans, working with debtors to get the best deal and, most importantly, by doing all this in a controlled, not panicked fashion. When people are panicking, they tend to make the wrong decisions.

How do we accelerate the process of cleaning up the banks’ balance sheets and in time, and how do we punish those who recklessly got us into the mess?

What happened in reality (as people the world over have been telling you now for four long years) is that the banks were guaranteed and then the government, the central bank and the PS workers in charge of this fiasco did nothing.

Listen to the next 20 seconds of this interview as he sums up the strategy.

http://youtu.be/Pd8DDz7ZxGk?t=5m3s

squod · 08-02-2013 07:34PM

rambutman wrote: »

I can see the problem but what is the objective of the march?

What do these people expect/want to happen?

The acquisition stage of NAMA is over. The cash has been poured into the banks. Our government borrowed the money to do it. All we can do now is suck it up and ride it out.

This is an awful lot of money you're talking about. I mean really big. Plenty of countries have had civil wars over this kind of thing. The scale of the problem is huge.

If this present government won't help us out then they must go.

woodoo · 08-02-2013 08:50PM

I think people should go and march. The march should be to show Europe that we are not happy with the current arrangement over the legacy bank debt. We need a deal on that.

G Power · 08-02-2013 09:21PM

rambutman wrote: »

I can see the problem but what is the objective of the march?

What do these people expect/want to happen?

The acquisition stage of NAMA is over. The cash has been poured into the banks. Our government borrowed the money to do it. All we can do now is suck it up and ride it out.

I personally would be totally cool if the thousands that show up tomorrow would do it again real soon, and keep doing it until everyone of the crazies that can end this enslavement of the future generations here in Ireland were left with no other choice but to save us all and let the banks and their debts go to hell!!

sure it wouldn't be easy but it couldn't be any harder than what they're saying is the only game in town.

we are putting way too much faith into Enda and the rest of the nutjobs up there in leinster house that they are looking after anybody other than themselves and their friends in EU, ECB, IMF, American government etc etc.

by doing nothing we give their egos the excuse that ah sure everything is dandy and nobody cares enough to truly challenge us on our "decisions"

G Power · 08-02-2013 09:25PM

rambutman wrote: »

I can see the problem but what is the objective of the march?

What do these people expect/want to happen?

The acquisition stage of NAMA is over. The cash has been poured into the banks. Our government borrowed the money to do it. All we can do now is suck it up and ride it out.

if we all hit the streets regularly we could force those in government that actually want to work for us to tell the troika to stick their repayments up their h0les cos they created every step that led us into this mess in the first place. you are correct in sayin the money is already poured into the failed banks but it's never too late to say we're not paying it back, therefore no debt. Simples

lucretiaborgia · 08-02-2013 09:53PM

squod wrote: »

This is an awful lot of money you're talking about. I mean really big. Plenty of countries have had civil wars over this kind of thing. The scale of the problem is huge.

If this present government won't help us out then they must go.

That's scary. What countries have had civil wars ?

Feb 9th Protest - will you be joining?

Comments