swimming in a sea wrote: » I always saw them as a party of the left, during the 00s they inflated the civil service to heights way above the poor private workers whose taxes paid for it. They should have kept the spending tight and cut the taxes, that's how to run an economy.
dxhound2005 wrote: » A Donegal man on the TV was just remarking how many houses there belong to SF politicians from other parts of the country. The only one that I knew about was Gerry's and he has one in Louth and another in Belfast at present. The Donegal man was perplexed how this is possible when they are all on the average industrial wage.
Banjo String wrote: » Attempting to portray him as owning some kind of multi million euro property empire is doing you no favours.
Birdie Num Num wrote: » You see through strange coloured glasses. How did the poster attempt to portray him as owning some kind of multi million euro property empire?
Santa Cruz wrote: » Labours big mistake was pulling the plug on the Reynolds Government for short term gain. They lost out on the good years when they could have made a big difference. Now the "dustbin of history" beckons
tayto lover wrote: » If they elect Burton or Howlin as leader their problems will only get worse. They need new blood at the helm. I also think FF need to get rid of Martin as leader to progress and Sinn Fein will do even better when Adams and Mc Guinness retire.
Bannasidhe wrote: » However, if they elect Alex FG-Lite White they will compound their problems. The LP threw away the left wing vote which swung Ind/SF/SP - if they do not elect a leader that represent the disaffected left but appeals to the centre then they may as well join the great FF/FG merger.
tayto lover wrote: » Did not all of the contenders vote to cut medical cards for special needs kids and sick people? Some Labour party.
Bannasidhe wrote: » Oh, I'm not disputing that. My argument is that the motivation behind the party determines their position on the left-right spectrum rather than the policies they actually implement/legislation they introduce. FF's policies can vary between extremes but the underlying motivation remains the same - let's get in/ stay in power. They have little in the way of motivating political ideology. So I put them in the centre. Neither fish nor fowl. FG I would place right of centre as they have an attitude that society as a whole is fine so no need for real change combined with a hint an old school school principle 'straighten up and fly right' towards those they perceive as not playing the game - not quite Tebbit's on yer bike but certainly 'firm father figuresque'. Absolutely fowl but a wren rather than an eagle. LP - FF with added Political Correctness and a nod at an ideology but no real desire to bring about any radical change - sure if a few schemes mean some members of 'minorities' rise to the top of the socio-economic ladder that'll do. A fishy fowl. SF are fish - they want to change Ireland including the most radical change of all - to bring the Unionist Presbyterian into the fold of a United Ireland - that will really stir things up. However, it remains to be seen how much they want to change the way society itself is structured. Some accuse them of being Marxist but they really are not that radical by a long shot. So, the interesting thing is will they seek a big tweak* or will they try and build something genuinely new. Our founding father's failed to build something new, they simply adopted the existing UK structure of the turn of the 20th century they were used to and then began to tinker as they went along. Not always successfully. So - the question is - is SF a minnow, trout, pike or swordfish? *á la NHS style of 'social engineering' - to explain, opponents at the time worried that free healthcare would result in the rise in the numbers of working class tipping the vote balance away from the traditional ruling political elite. It did - Labour replaced the Whigs
mickydoomsux wrote: » Lynn Boylan is on Radio 1 now. She dodged a question about whether she agreed with the armed struggle and when she was asked about public salary capping she said that consultants, for example, are paid less in other countries so it shouldn't be a problem.
mickydoomsux wrote: » Welfare rates are less in other countries as well so I presume she has no problem cutting those to bring them in line with our foreign counterparts.
mickydoomsux wrote: » Lynn Boylan is on Radio 1 now. She dodged a question about whether she agreed with the armed struggle and when she was asked about public salary capping she said that consultants, for example, are paid less in other countries so it shouldn't be a problem. Welfare rates are less in other countries as well so I presume she has no problem cutting those to bring them in line with our foreign counterparts.
Banjo String wrote: » Ireland's expensive.
mickydoomsux wrote: » For everyone.
Bannasidhe wrote: » Oh, I'm not disputing that. My argument is that the motivation behind the party determines their position on the left-right spectrum rather than the policies they actually implement/legislation they introduce.
FF's policies can vary between extremes but the underlying motivation remains the same - let's get in/ stay in power. They have little in the way of motivating political ideology. So I put them in the centre. Neither fish nor fowl.
FG I would place right of centre as they have an attitude that society as a whole is fine so no need for real change combined with a hint an old school school principle 'straighten up and fly right' towards those they perceive as not playing the game - not quite Tebbit's on yer bike but certainly 'firm father figuresque'. Absolutely fowl but a wren rather than an eagle.
LP - FF with added Political Correctness and a nod at an ideology but no real desire to bring about any radical change - sure if a few schemes mean some members of 'minorities' rise to the top of the socio-economic ladder that'll do. A fishy fowl.
SF are fish - they want to change Ireland including the most radical change of all - to bring the Unionist Presbyterian into the fold of a United Ireland - that will really stir things up. However, it remains to be seen how much they want to change the way society itself is structured. Some accuse them of being Marxist but they really are not that radical by a long shot. So, the interesting thing is will they seek a big tweak* or will they try and build something genuinely new. Our founding father's failed to build something new, they simply adopted the existing UK structure of the turn of the 20th century they were used to and then began to tinker as they went along. Not always successfully. So - the question is - is SF a minnow, trout, pike or swordfish? *á la NHS style of 'social engineering' - to explain, opponents at the time worried that free healthcare would result in the rise in the numbers of working class tipping the vote balance away from the traditional ruling political elite. It did - Labour replaced the Whigs
Birdie Num Num wrote: » And why not also bring the state pension rate to a similar lower level as they currently oversee in the north .
Banjo String wrote: » They don't.
Iwasfrozen wrote: » They do oversee the North.
Banjo String wrote: » I agree. USC is crippling.
Dan_Solo wrote: » Explain how being a junior partner in a powersharing arrangement means they are in charge in the North please.
Banjo String wrote: » They do not oversee pension or welfare rates. Nor control tax rates. You know that. Stop trying to be difficult.
Birdie Num Num wrote: » You are changing the text. Not in charge but yes power sharing and therefore part of. I assume you have the very same sympathies for Labour so?
Iwasfrozen wrote: » They aren't the junior partner. Martin McGuinness has equal power to Peter Robinson.
Iwasfrozen wrote: » They oversee it. The poster was careful of their language. Oversee does not imply they have control.
Birdie Num Num wrote: » And why not also bring the state pension rate to a similar lower level as they currently oversee in the north.
Banjo String wrote: » Maybe they would bring the north's pension rates in line with the south's (if they had control of it)
mickydoomsux wrote: » Do magic money trees grow up in Northern Ireland as well?
