Why don't we riot like mad ejits

KyussBishop · 20-02-2014 01:35PM

Jonny7 wrote: »

This appears to be your own personal view of people in power

Specifically speaking what post-crisis regulations do you disagree with and what regulations would you introduce that will not cost thousands of jobs, stunt growth or cause the exit of banking business and clients from the country?

In other words "but that's just your opinion" - eh, well yes this is a message board where people post their opinions; if you want to try and counter my opinion with contradicting facts, go right ahead - pointing out "but that's just your opinion" is a pretty redundant statement.

Can add your question to the above list of rhetorical questions, that you ask yet seem to have (in your previous post) displayed enough bad intent, to make it seem like a rhetorical question you intend to use, to remain eternally 'unconvinced' of any and every answer presented.

Jonny7 · 20-02-2014 01:44PM

renegademaster wrote: »

road tax here is a joke and should be built into the petrol pumps, the phones are all being spied upon by GCHQ, water quality is crap and we're now expected to pay to be poisoned, galway a&e is now the worst in the country, gardas hands are tied, our recourse to complain about the garda has now being comprimised, courts are corrupt...

I suggest we all whinge and moan about stuff on the internet - and if anyone calls us out on it, blame the general populace for being too lazy/stupid

The perfect excuse within an excuse

"I'm unhappy with my government but I am too lazy to do anything about it"

on top of that we can blame people who don't protest for being too lazy

renegademaster · 20-02-2014 01:50PM

Jonny7 wrote: »

I suggest we all whinge and moan about stuff on the internet - and if anyone calls us out on it, blame the general populace for being too lazy/stupid

The perfect excuse within an excuse

"I'm unhappy with my government but I am too lazy to do anything about it"

on top of that we can blame people who don't protest for being too lazy

but the general public are lazy, i seen the lack of support from them with my own eyes over and over again, no matter what happens, last big public show of anger was in nov 2011 when 150000 showed up to pressure cowens government into finally calling for general elections after months of them avoiding having an election in donegal, there hasn't been the same numbers out on a protest here since and if we looked at all that's come to light since cowens government that's my point made!

Jonny7 · 20-02-2014 01:55PM

KyussBishop wrote: »

You pretty much deliberately cut up the first sentence you quote from me, to remove the bolded part below that already addresses most of your demands for answers - which shows you have dishonest intent, and that your questions are almost purely for rhetorical effect:

The argument in your post as well, pretty much reduces down to "If there is no evidence, it didn't happen - nothing to see here" - which is exactly the argument that the post your replying to addresses, meaning you've pretty much willingly ignored my entire post, in order to put forward a rhetorical attack - this kind of rhetorical argument, you see from someone making demanding questions, to setup up a platform where they steadfastly remain 'unconvinced' of everything said - and I'm not here to try and convince people, who both selectively ignore my posts, and display dishonest intent in doing that.

And don't bother complaining about not getting answers, when 1: you already have an answer to most questions in the post you selectively ignored, and 2: when you shouldn't bother expecting anyone to answer you when you display such bad intent.
What that then becomes, is a platform to try and pan a user for not answering questions (even when they have), to try and distract from them pointing out your dishonest methods of argument - which I'll be keeping an eye on and will dissect in detail.

Which regulations do you have an issue with and why?

If not, then what about the people passing these regulations, or those who are being regulated.. what specifically are they doing wrong? what laws are being broken?

Your own suspicion and convictions might be enough for you personally, but you do need substance

Jonny7 · 20-02-2014 01:57PM

renegademaster wrote: »

but the general public are lazy, i seen the lack of support from them with my own eyes over and over again, no matter what happens, last big public show of anger was in nov 2011 when 150000 showed up to pressure cowens government into finally calling for general elections after months of them avoiding having an election in donegal, there hasn't been the same numbers out on a protest here since and if we looked at all that's come to light since cowens government that's my point made!

and what have you done?

KyussBishop · 20-02-2014 02:09PM

Jonny7 wrote: »

Which regulations do you have an issue with and why?

If not, then what about the people passing these regulations, or those who are being regulated.. what specifically are they doing wrong? what laws are being broken?

Your own suspicion and convictions might be enough for you personally, but you do need substance

Why, precisely, are you continuing to selectively ignore this?

KyussBishop wrote:

There are barely any adequate investigations into fraud, and barely any efforts at implementing necessary reforms of regulations, to prevent a future crisis - and not even proper investigation into fraud that people have tried to blow the whistle about, in the current crisis (like from Jonathan Sugarman - a whistleblower who was implicitly threatened with him being referred to the Gardai by the central-bank/financial-regulators, if he exposed wrongdoing to them).

You're continuing to selectively ignore whatever you like from posts, so you can setup a platform when you make demanding questions, and remain 'unconvinced' - even though you have zero intention of even botherhing your arse, looking at what people reply with.

You seem here to spread FUD mainly, to downplay the very idea of protesting - I'm not here to convince you of anything, when you seem to be making it clear you're here to make an act of being 'unconvinced' by everything to spread FUD, and I'm most certainly not going to do more than shine a spotlight on your dishonest methods of argument, when you display bad intent like that.

SPS1 · 20-02-2014 02:23PM

KyussBishop wrote: »

Yes I suppose Martin Luther King never achieved anything, with his dedication to non-violent protest - completely ineffective, right?

You don't put together protest movements in order to make people in power listen - if you're getting to the point of protesting, they already aren't going to listen - you put protest movements together to help educate people and galvanize public opinion, and to develop political alternatives - i.e. new politicians and influencing the influencable current politicians, to build up political pressure.

People who go to protests, in order to turn them violent, are idiots who will only risk discrediting the wider protest in the eyes of the public, driving people away from protesting - if you want to guarantee a tiny protest movement, which drives people away from it, then use violence.

We're absolutely nowhere near the level, where things are so bad, that violence is in any way justifiable - even Mandela in apartheid South Africa held it as a last resort, after all other avenues were exhausted.

And the opposing coin was malcom x another influential figure in that moment of history, who advocated violence as a means for change. For every peaceful figure you list for any given moment in history who advocated non boycotting/non violence. You will often find a backbone of freedom fighters, who for obvious reasons are not as celebrated when they advocate violence as a means to achieve their goal. I'm unaware of any movement to gain rights, that succeeded without a large element of boycott/violence.

Public opinion can change rapidly on violent protests & spur further action (such as political change etc)., 1916 proves this. It's too clear cut to say violence ostracises support.
That does not mean however I support lobbing bricks for any old reason.

Jonny7 · 20-02-2014 02:33PM

KyussBishop wrote: »

You're continuing to selectively ignore whatever you like from posts, so you can setup a platform when you make demanding questions

Apologies if I miss anything its bc I am in work or on phone

I want to separate personal conviction from actual substance

If for example you believe the government is using fluoride to slowly poison people - your mere belief of it is not enough - you need evidence to back up your claim that they are

It's an analogy to your current issue

I'm not saying the gov/regulators/etc are NOT corrupt

I am saying if you claim they are - you have to back it up with substance

If you believe the gov/regulators/bankers are corrupt, then what, apart from personal belief, is this based on?

Do you see my point here?

KyussBishop · 20-02-2014 02:38PM

Jonny7 wrote: »

Apologies if I miss anything its bc I am in work or on phone

I want to separate personal conviction from actual substance

If for example you believe the government is using fluoride to slowly poison people - your mere belief of it is not enough - you need evidence to back up your claim that they are

It's an analogy to your current issue

I'm not saying the gov/regulators/etc are NOT corrupt

I am saying if you claim they are - you have to back it up with substance

If you believe the gov/regulators/bankers are corrupt, then what, apart from personal belief, is this based on?

Do you see my point here?

I've replied with this 3 times at least thus far, in answer to that:
"and not even proper investigation into fraud that people have tried to blow the whistle about, in the current crisis (like from Jonathan Sugarman - a whistleblower who was implicitly threatened with him being referred to the Gardai by the central-bank/financial-regulators, if he exposed wrongdoing to them)."

https://www.google.ie/search?q=Jonathan%20Sugarman

ArmaniJeanss · 20-02-2014 02:50PM

renegademaster wrote: »

but the general public are lazy, i seen the lack of support from them with my own eyes over and over again, no matter what happens, last big public show of anger was in nov 2011 when 150000 showed up to pressure cowens government into finally calling for general elections after months of them avoiding having an election in donegal, there hasn't been the same numbers out on a protest here since and if we looked at all that's come to light since cowens government that's my point made!

Maybe the majority of people have some level of relative contentment with how things are at the moment, and accept that the government is roughly on some sort of generally correct track.

You seem to feel that by default the public should be supporting you ("I've seen the lack of support with my own eyes over and over again", 'general public is lazy") without pausing to ask why should they?

Potatoeman · 20-02-2014 02:51PM

KyussBishop wrote: »

The central bank and regulators, are made up of ex-banking/finance industry people, and the banking/finance industry, has so much control over money that they have extreme political influence that they can use to avoid being regulated.

It's not the fault solely of just one of banking/finance/government, it's the fault of the class of people who inhabit all of those industries in powerful positions, to the point that they can put themselves either beyond the law, or rewrite/hold-back laws/reforms, in their favour.

It's a problem that's not limited to any one location, but is a problem consisting of a whole class of (first and most important of all) powerful and corrupt (legally/ethically) people, or powerful people who are happy to remain within and protect an ethically corrupt system (ethically corrupt due to inadequate regulations, enforcement of regulations or reform of regulations - among many other reasons).

The problem was NIB and Anglo breaching regulation and it not being acted on. BOI and AIB became drawn into the property market more due to the money being made by the other banks. It was this overexposure that caused most of the problems and it all goes back to not enforcing regulation. This is what needs to be investigated as its a very tangiable thing. Why was the regulation not enforced? No need for conspiracy theories. It was the regulators job to regulate.

KyussBishop · 20-02-2014 03:23PM

Potatoeman wrote: »

The problem was NIB and Anglo breaching regulation and it not being acted on. BOI and AIB became drawn into the property market more due to the money being made by the other banks. It was this overexposure that caused most of the problems and it all goes back to not enforcing regulation. This is what needs to be investigated as its a very tangiable thing. Why was the regulation not enforced? No need for conspiracy theories. It was the regulators job to regulate.

It's not a conspiracy theory, it's regulatory capture - what else do you call a regulatory agency, staffed by people that come from the industry they are supposed to regulate? Do you think that poses a conflict of interest?

I agree though, that enforcement of regulation is one, significant, part of it - but then: If a bank breaches regulations, it is also responsible for that too.

If I break the law, it's not the fault of the police for not stopping me, it's the fault of me for breaking the law.

Potatoeman · 20-02-2014 03:30PM

KyussBishop wrote: »

It's not a conspiracy theory, it's regulatory capture - what else do you call a regulatory agency, staffed by people that come from the industry they are supposed to regulate? Do you think that poses a conflict of interest?

I would call them experienced. They should sign a contract that covers these issues. Just like when they change companies. It should not be that big of an issue and I always suspected that it was government interference rather than corruption on the regulators side that was the issue.

bnt · 20-02-2014 03:35PM

The time for protests was 8-10 years ago, against the policies that fuelled the housing boom and other reckless borrowing. Throwing a wobbly today would be like trying to unscramble an egg by shouting at it. I think most sensible people get that.

KyussBishop · 20-02-2014 04:00PM

Potatoeman wrote: »

I would call them experienced. They should sign a contract that covers these issues. Just like when they change companies. It should not be that big of an issue and I always suspected that it was government interference rather than corruption on the regulators side that was the issue.

So you have regulators coming in from the financial/banking industry, who are ripe with opportunity for corrupt personal incentive, for not regulating properly - and you think it's government interference?

You already think regulators aren't enforcing regulations well enough, i.e. you already think the financial/banking industry are prone to breaching regulations, but when it comes to ex-finance/banking people running as regulators, they are saints and any problem in regulation must be government interference?

It's pretty easy to Google influential folk in regulatory positions, who are ex-banking/finance - have you got anything that will give an indication of government interference?

I'm not saying government have no responsibility here, but it always strikes me in these discussions that people bend reality over backwards, to pin all blame on government - even when it's extremely obvious, that the potential for massive conflict of interest exists, between regulators and banking/finance.

Potatoeman · 20-02-2014 05:03PM

KyussBishop wrote: »

So you have regulators coming in from the financial/banking industry, who are ripe with opportunity for corrupt personal incentive, for not regulating properly - and you think it's government interference?

You already think regulators aren't enforcing regulations well enough, i.e. you already think the financial/banking industry are prone to breaching regulations, but when it comes to ex-finance/banking people running as regulators, they are saints and any problem in regulation must be government interference?

It's pretty easy to Google influential folk in regulatory positions, who are ex-banking/finance - have you got anything that will give an indication of government interference?

I'm not saying government have no responsibility here, but it always strikes me in these discussions that people bend reality over backwards, to pin all blame on government - even when it's extremely obvious, that the potential for massive conflict of interest exists, between regulators and banking/finance.

The government could have investigated this if they suspected it. I suspect he was told to not enforce regulation and allow the housing market to grow.

You need people with financial experience and most would come from this industry.

KyussBishop · 20-02-2014 05:21PM

Potatoeman wrote: »

The government could have investigated this if they suspected it. I suspect he was told to not enforce regulation and allow the housing market to grow.

You need people with financial experience and most would come from this industry.

No, you don't need people with previous industry experience, you need regulatory and criminal prosecution experience - if you're taking people with industry experience, those people have a much higher chance of having a professional conflict of interest, that compromises their integrity.

Don't you think the banking/financial industry have a much bigger incentive, to influence the financial regulator, into letting the housing market grow - seeing as they are both the ones that gain from it most, and are in a pretty good position to do that?

If someone commits a crime, that is generally the fault of the person committing the crime yes? And if the crime was preventable, that blame is shared with the authorities, it doesn't all get lumped on the authorities, right?

DistanceVector · 20-02-2014 06:35PM

bnt wrote: »

The time for protests was 8-10 years ago, against the policies that fuelled the housing boom and other reckless borrowing. Throwing a wobbly today would be like trying to unscramble an egg by shouting at it. I think most sensible people get that.

So we all should quit moaning and keep quite, like good little proles?

Jonny7 · 20-02-2014 07:18PM

KyussBishop wrote: »

I've replied with this 3 times at least thus far, in answer to that:
"and not even proper investigation into fraud that people have tried to blow the whistle about, in the current crisis (like from Jonathan Sugarman - a whistleblower who was implicitly threatened with him being referred to the Gardai by the central-bank/financial-regulators, if he exposed wrongdoing to them)."

https://www.google.ie/search?q=Jonathan%20Sugarman

Hadn't heard of him until now, would like to know the details of the meeting between himself and the regulatory authority

The sparse story seems to have been largely hijacked by crazies, so apart from an interview and a couple of news articles there's very little in the way of actual objective info on the whole thing

Also, in fairness, his twitter feed isn't exactly doing him any favours in the credibility department

Don't think I would be taking to the streets over something like this unless I had some serious solid info

bnt · 20-02-2014 08:06PM

DistanceVector wrote: »

So we all should quit moaning and keep quite, like good little proles?

Moan all you want, if that makes you feel better. You can even play the blame game, start public enquiries and all that jazz, as discussed elsewhere in this thread. Riot all you want - after all, it will provide work for the glaziers needed to replace all those broken windows.

But don't confuse that for constructive action, or anything else that will prevent the same things from happening again. Maybe financial regulations are too lax, but why do we need regulations in the first place? Because people are too dumb and/or greedy to see that there is no such thing as a free lunch. Anyone who sells you a financial product - mortgages, investments, insurance, whatever - is in business to make money off of you.

So now, Ireland is in a macroeconomic hole. How will a riot get it out of that hole? Will a protest bring back all the money poured in to the property bubble, in to the hands of investment bankers? Or do you imagine that you can somehow claw it back, from wherever it is now, by another tax? Or, perhaps, learn from the mistakes (yours or those of others), and practice personal financial discipline in the future?

Jim van Morrison · 20-02-2014 09:09PM

DistanceVector wrote: »

So we all should quit moaning and keep quite, like good little proles?

You mean, "keep, quite like good little proles"? Keep what? Or did you mean "quiet"?

The_Kew_Tour · 20-02-2014 09:14PM

Not read the whole thread but if its not been brought up then The Love Ulster Riots should prove why its best not to go like mad ejits.

Lads in Celtic jerseys singing our National Anthem showing their so called love for their country as they burn, steal and rob from Irish people and Irish Business.

True Patriots those guys.

Sh1tbag OToole · 20-02-2014 09:41PM

We all love the status Quo and doing what we're told. Most of us actually believe we deserve to be shafted by Europe and our own government because we had the celtic tiger

20-02-2014 09:51PM

You cant discount cultural influences, the Catholic Church telling people for decades, suffer in this life and get your rewards in heaven and all that kind of thing, probably produced a population which is more likely to be compliment and accepting.

Filibuster · 20-02-2014 10:00PM

The reason why the Irish don't riot is because we have it so good here. If you don't want to work or cant find work the government will pay you €180pw + rent allowance + medical card + pay your bills. The average salary in the Ukraine is c. €450 per month.

mbur · 20-02-2014 10:13PM

teR_ wrote: »

You turn on the news and ya see all these countries around us that were/are in the shlt, there all running around like lunatics breaking things and burning stuff.

Here we are and we don't even do the peaceful side of it, am I the only one disappointed in our incapacity to do anythings?

, over 320 replies and the OP answered his own question in the title of his post.

"Why don't we riot like mad ejits"

SpaceTime · 20-02-2014 10:18PM

We also tend to forget that as an electorate we have huge power. We opt not to use it very effectively though.

Too many TDs are elected due to their excellent constituency services - behaving like the local mayor or councillors would elsewhere.

How many people here voted for a candidate because they had excellent policies on political reform and tackling corruption?

Ireland's electoral system actually keeps parties weak and gives us huge choice yet we tend to not make as much use of it as we could.

We get the governments we elect. Pot hole filling publicans who would ensure your house price kept going up were all the rage a few years ago!

renegademaster · 20-02-2014 10:21PM

Filibuster wrote: »

The reason why the Irish don't riot is because we have it so good here. If you don't want to work or cant find work the government will pay you €180pw + rent allowance + medical card + pay your bills. The average salary in the Ukraine is c. €450 per month.

tell that to the many many under 24 year olds not working here!!

Filibuster · 20-02-2014 10:22PM

SpaceTime wrote: »

We also tend to forget that as an electorate we have huge power. We opt not to use it very effectively though.

Too many TDs are elected due to their excellent constituency services - behaving like the local mayor or councillors would elsewhere.

How many people here voted for a candidate because they had excellent policies on political reform and tackling corruption?

Ireland's electoral system actually keeps parties weak and gives us huge choice yet we tend to not make as much use of it as we could.

We get the governments we elect. Pot hole filling publicans who would ensure your house price kept going up were all the rage a few years ago!

idk the Irish whip ensures the political parties have a tight grip on power. Don't toe the party line and you're out, along with all the funding for your reelection campaign.

The_Kew_Tour · 20-02-2014 10:24PM

Filibuster wrote: »

The reason why the Irish don't riot is because we have it so good here. If you don't want to work or cant find work the government will pay you €180pw + rent allowance + medical card + pay your bills. The average salary in the Ukraine is c. €450 per month.

Ever been to Ukraine? I guess not. Yes poor wages by European standards then again food is 3 times cheaper over there compared to here too.

Why don't we riot like mad ejits

Comments