murphaph wrote: » I shared it and only 3 friends even liked it. 1 shared it. People just don't seem to care.
Grandeeod wrote: » Your right. People don't care. However, it shouldn't be about the public caring. Realistically it should be about responsible governence. Leadership. Pride. A will to deliver public transport projects to make Dublin more than just a drinking den for stag parties or an over compensated tax haven for multi-nationals that will trade ****ty services for profit. The only thing keeping Dublin going are the people ready and willing to put up with outrageous planning and crap public transport. Meanwhile our administrators plod along boasting about how great Dublin is. Dublin is a repetitive ticking time bomb propped up by people accepting things they shouldn't accept, in return for the honour of earning a wage.
Idbatterim wrote: » Nail on the head. I have said before on this thread, it has gone too far. At what stage do you say enough is enough. A huge amount of people don't want water charges, why not get rid of that? I'm sure everyone would love no income tax... If put to a vote, I'm sure bank guarantee would have been shot down. If we had the public running our country, we would be a worse version of Greece. I understand they want to reelected and are appealing to lowest common denominator for the most part. But sometimes, they should give the people what they need rather this what they think they need...
Amirani wrote: » Hence why most modern systems of government aren't democracies as people claim, but representative democracies. Pure democracies aren't an effective way of governing.
Sam Russell wrote: » Works quite well in Switzerland. They have referendums often about most things. The only bank guarantee they have is that they will guarantee to not divulge the owner of your numbered account to anybody.:)
Amirani wrote: » They did bail out UBS with $60bn though...
Sam Russell wrote: » Did they have a referendum - or just do it?
Idbatterim wrote: » Nail on the head. I have said before on this thread, it has gone too far. At what stage do you say enough is enough. A huge amount of people don't want water charges, why not get rid of that? I'm sure everyone would love no income tax... If put to a vote, I'm sure bank guarantee would have been shot down. If we had the public running our country, we would be a worse version of Greece. I understand they want to reelected and are appealing to lowest common denominator for the most part. But sometimes, they should give the people what they need rather this what they think they need... This is why I said Donahue should put pressure on behind closed doors to resign... It should be about responsible governance!
Deleted User wrote: » The government went out on a limb to introduce a proper water infrastructure and introduced a tax for everybody to pay for it. They got hung out to dry for it by the people of Dublin with the AAA and a number of independents almost having its removal as its sole purpose for existence. It got to the point of almost bringing down a government with many communities in Dublin turning violent over the issue with court cases to follow. Meanwhile their country cousins have always and continue to pay for water that they use and its infrastructure. The government will be in no hurry to spend money on big ticket infrastructure again if they have to raise taxes to pay for it or divert monies from several other smaller projects. Maybe if instead of protesting against new water infrastructure again the wise people of Dublin might protest for infrastructure whether its for water, DU or Metro North.........it might be more productive for the people of Dublin, the government and the rest of the country.
Schadenfreudia wrote: » So, that's why we're going to get a different Government after the election I guess Current lot not fit for purpose on so many levels.....
Deleted User wrote: » Unfortunately we probably got the government we deserve. A forward thinking party with real policies and change would not get elected here. You can't touch the welfare or the public service , once they are paid for there is very little left for real infrastructure spending. The past few years have proven this out.
strassenwo!f wrote: » They used to be quite tight here about keeping the discussion strictly to DART Underground. Obviously that's all changed.
Lenton Lane wrote: » This is very much an issue. The Irish media are so happy to take bones thrown at them from sources in government that they are incapable of independent thought and analysis. That's why the Irish Times leader the other day was giving credence to the ridiculous BRT airport proposals and why the only time the Indo covers Irish Rail is when there is a problem or a potential strike. We deserve better!
Banjoxed wrote: » Journalism by recycled press release. It has always been thus.
Lenton Lane wrote: » Absolutely - we don't have proper investigative journalism regarding the workings of the government in this country. Instead we have a golden circle happy to take leaks from government sources and regurgitate in the press. I see where Paul Melia of the Indo was challenged on Twitter to commentate on the Dart Underground fiasco. And what did he say? Nothing. You can bet your bottom dollar as soon as there's another bad news story about Irish Rail industrial relations or a major complaint he'll be onto it like a shot.
lxflyer wrote: » To be honest, part of the problem is that no newspaper or broadcaster in the country has a dedicated transport correspondent. Without any form of specialist correspondent, it is very difficult to get informed journalism on the subject. Paul Melia was the correspondent who earlier this year alleged that Bus Eireann was threatening to cut hundreds of bus services each day, leading to a frenzied Dáil discussion on the topic, when in fact the number of services to be cut was something like 10 and most were going to be either re-routed or replaced. Sadly transport is a topic that the press don't view as one that merits a full correspondent.
salmocab wrote: » Cant expect good journalism anymore its all '5 points to improve' or '5 things we learnt from' its all gutter press taking scraps from politicians/business mens/football managers and passing it off as news. Unfortunately for the DU the only time a journo will take any interest is when they are given something by the govt. So it will always contain the party line.
Bray Head wrote: » As a share of GDP, public capital investment is at its lowest in 50 years.
Bray Head wrote: » There is a lot of talk on this thread on how these decisions are taken by politicians and civil servants. A lot of it is speculative and plain wrong. I learn a lot in this forum about civil engineeering. But very little about how political decisions are taken.Read closely and I will explain how it works. Public capital spending in Ireland at the moment has to satisfy a number of criteria: 1) As a share of GDP, public capital investment is at its lowest in 50 years. Ironically, the public capital stock (the sum of all bridges, hospitals, schools, etc) is at its highest ever. This means that the vast bulk of spend goes on maintaining the stock at its current level. Not much left for new build of any kind. 2) New European fiscal rules are biting. Nominal GDP will grow by 10% this year. Public spending growth will be close to flat. This means to meaningfully boost capital spend you would have to eat into current spend. I don't have to explain the politics of this. 3) Unlike most countries, the capacity to spend local revenues locally on infrastructure basically does not exist in Ireland. All resources are pooled and spent centrally. No part of the country can absorb a disproportionate share of the capital spend. See point on politics in 2). 4 Given that capital spend is so low, no project can absorb too much of the pie. See 3) above. 5) Policymakers are also inherently nervous about the risk of delays/cost overruns/archaeology on large, lengthy projects and their capacity to absorb too much of the capital budget and for too long. Memories are long. The early 2000s were characterised by overruns on quite a few road projects. It is inherently less risky to have a large number of small projects rather than a small number of large ones. 6) Economic output in Ireland is extremely volatile. Demand projections that looked prudent in 2007 looked silly by 2009. A large infrastructure project can take a decade to deliver. Forecasting demand ten years ahead in Ireland is very difficult. Consensus forecasts for today's population in the early 90s were in the region of 20% below what it has turned out to be. The same issues face both water and energy infrastructure. To a certain extent these issues have been de-politicised by giving the job of investment decisions to faceless regulators and utility operators. I doubt this will ever happen with transport though. It is the most visible of all infrastructure. I have seen many the plaque with the name of the politician who opened the road, but I have yet to see one outside a sewage treatment plant! -
Schadenfreudia wrote: » And that is the problem.
Godge wrote: » What is amazing is that so many people who bemoan the lack of capital spending are also against the only attempt the Government made to try and boost capital spending - get water investment off the Government balance sheet so as to free up expenditure possibilities. The short-sightedness of those who oppose Irish Water is incredible.
cgcsb wrote: » The problem with Irish water is I'm spending €120/year in un-metered charges and I'm also getting the water conservation grant of €100, effectively the water charges have raised €20 from me and my % of the administrative costs of running Irish water most likely exceed that €20, so it's actually a revenue drain on infrastructural development.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://www.boards.ie/applications/dashboard/design/images/banned.png)
