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
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Treaty Referendum: 31 May 2012

Options
124

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    Sierra Oscar
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 8,458 CMod ✭✭✭✭Sierra Oscar


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    This blatant lie has a ridiculous amount of currency.

    We're spending vastly more than we're taking in. We need to raise taxes and cut spending. The process of raising taxes and cutting spending is called "austerity". The alternative to austerity is borrowing even more money than we currently do, which we can't afford to do.

    A little bit of honesty wouldn't go astray.

    So true. The fact of the matter is that should we vote no, we will have more difficulty gaining access to extra funding should it be required as compared to if we vote yes and have access to the ESM.

    Accordingly, as the terms for our funding for a second bailout will be far more strict should we vote no, voting no will actually ensure greater austerity.


  • Options
    #93
    messymess
    Registered Users Posts: 359 ✭✭messymess


    Question! I'm a bit stupid. But why do we have to vote on the treaty? If this allows us access to cheaper money, then surely it's a no brainer?

    What exactly is going to 'change' in terms laws, constitution etc .. etc, that makes it necessary to go for a public vote?


  • Options
    #94
    meglome
    Registered Users Posts: 7,980 ✭✭✭meglome


    messymess wrote: »
    Question! I'm a bit stupid. But why do we have to vote on the treaty? If this allows us access to cheaper money, then surely it's a no brainer?

    What exactly is going to 'change' in terms laws, constitution etc .. etc, that makes it necessary to go for a public vote?
    Scofflaw wrote: »
    Let's see:
    1. We have to transpose the treaty limits into law.
    2. We have to create a 'correction mechanism' that kicks in automatically if we breach the limits, covering "in particular the nature, the size and the time-frame of the corrective action to be undertaken, also in the case of exceptional circumstances, and the role and independence of the institutions responsible at national level for monitoring the observance of the rules".
    3. If we fail to put such a correction mechanism into law properly within a year, we can be taken to the Court of Justice by one of the other Contracting Parties. If the Court finds against us, and then finds that we have not complied with its judgement, we can be fined.
    4. If our debt/nominal GDP ratio is greater than 60%, we have to reduce the ratio at a rate of one-twentieth per year. So if our ratio is 120%, we have to reduce the ratio by 3% per year either by reducing the debt or growing the economy, or a combination of both. Or, since it's nominal GDP, by letting inflation grow our nominal GDP.
    5. If our government deficit is greater than 3% of nominal GDP, it needs to go back under 3%.
    6. We need to run a 'structural deficit' of 0.5% or less of nominal GDP.
    7. The above applies unless (a) we are in a programme; (b) we are less than three years out of a programme; or (c) there are 'exceptional circumstances', which are defined as any extended period of negative or low GDP growth, or any unusual events which impact our GDP.
    8. If we are in breach of targets, and there are no 'exceptional circumstances', we need to produce a credible plan for reaching them.
    9. If we are both in breach of targets and making no apparent effort to reach them, then, after the convoluted Article 126 process for registering an excessive deficit procedure against us has completed, then we have to produce a "budgetary and economic partnership programme including a detailed description of the structural reforms which must be put in place and implemented to ensure an effective and durable correction of their excessive deficits". The "content and format of such programmes" is to be defined in EU law.
    10. The Council and Commission then endorse and monitor our programme plan.
    11. If the Commission makes recommendations in respect of our excessive deficit programme plan, we support them unless a majority of the other Member States who have signed up to the Fiscal Treaty block them.
    12. On an ongoing basis, all signatories agree to notify the Commission and Council of their debt issuance plans, and of any major economic reforms.
    13. There will be a regular conference of the national parliaments' relevant committees and the relevant committees of the European Parliament to "discuss budgetary policies and other issues covered by this Treaty".

    That's more or less it.Ideally, one would do a point by point comparison with the Stability & Growth Pact.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw

    Scofflaw posted this yesterday.


  • Options
    #95
    meglome
    Registered Users Posts: 7,980 ✭✭✭meglome


    Scofflaw wrote: »
    No, we have three years after the end of the excessive deficit procedure:

    So, assuming we're out of the excessive deficit procedure we're currently in by 2015, the rules in the Treaty apply at the earliest in 2018. Realistically, though, I would have said we won't have corrected our excessive deficit much this side of...what, maybe 2025?

    cordially,
    Scofflaw

    Saw this over on the Journal... anyone with more of a clue than me have any comment on its accuracy.
    The IMF brought out a report last month outlining projections for 2015, which put Ireland’s projected debt-to-GDP ratio at 114.7 per cent, with gross government debt standing at €205.2 billion. Under the fiscal compact, we have to reduce this debt at a rate of 5 per cent a year until the ratio is below 60%. The IMF reckons our GDP will grow at 2.9% a year from 2015 onward, but if it were to remain flat as you suggest, we would therefore have to wipe €10.26 billion off our debt every year until we reached the 60% mark (which would take eight or nine years).


  • Options
    #96
    K-9
    Registered Users Posts: 43,311 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    meglome wrote: »
    Saw this over on the Journal... anyone with more of a clue than me have any comment on its accuracy.

    Seamus Coffey, the UCC professor wrote a piece on it. From my understanding and going on Scofflaws post, it would be 3 years after we exit the bail out before we'd have to cut the debt, so 2017 at the earliest.

    My understanding is we have to reduce our total debt, less the 60% limit, by one twentieth, not the total debt as per that post on the journal.ie.

    So it would be 114.7-60 = 54.7/20 = 2.7%.

    Would be roughly €5.5 Billion, not €10.26 Billion. That would be on top of interest payments.

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    Lantus
    Registered Users Posts: 3,027 ✭✭✭Lantus


    The ref booklet landed tonight through the door. Really cannot understand how they expect anyone to read and understand it and make a rational decision. I'm pretty intelligent and it was heavy going.

    The media will direct peoples voting decision.

    Anyway, we voted in a referendum before and we all got the answer wrong. It's lucky we have a democracy where our political elite take pity on us and offer us a second chance to redeem ourselves. I am confident that whatever the outcome we will be able to change our minds freely until the right decision (allready made safe and sound by far more intelligent people) is arrived at by the people. Democracy in action.

    On a serious note Europe has fought hand and fist to prop up all these countries without this policy. If Ireland was at risk we would get the cash as if we were to fall markets all over Europe would collapse and the contagion would spread like wildfire. The thought that they can now set us free is just crazy. We dont need the treaty to get cash if we need it. The damage to France and other countries including the UK would be far too great and permanently damaging. It's why a real flake of a country like greece has been saved when all common sense said let it go back to it's own currency and leave the EU. You can't then put out better countries like Ireland and expect the EU to survive. It would fireball in hours if not minutes. NO ONE WILL LET THIS HAPPEN!

    Stay calm and vote no........


  • Options
    #98
    Sully
    Moderators, Education Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 24,056 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sully


    Lantus wrote: »
    The ref booklet landed tonight through the door. Really cannot understand how they expect anyone to read and understand it and make a rational decision. I'm pretty intelligent and it was heavy going.

    The media will direct peoples voting decision.

    Anyway, we voted in a referendum before and we all got the answer wrong. It's lucky we have a democracy where our political elite take pity on us and offer us a second chance to redeem ourselves. I am confident that whatever the outcome we will be able to change our minds freely until the right decision (allready made safe and sound by far more intelligent people) is arrived at by the people. Democracy in action.

    On a serious note Europe has fought hand and fist to prop up all these countries without this policy. If Ireland was at risk we would get the cash as if we were to fall markets all over Europe would collapse and the contagion would spread like wildfire. The thought that they can now set us free is just crazy. We dont need the treaty to get cash if we need it. The damage to France and other countries including the UK would be far too great and permanently damaging. It's why a real flake of a country like greece has been saved when all common sense said let it go back to it's own currency and leave the EU. You can't then put out better countries like Ireland and expect the EU to survive. It would fireball in hours if not minutes. NO ONE WILL LET THIS HAPPEN!

    Stay calm and vote no........

    Well, if the booklet is that confusing you have a number of other options;

    Explanations;
    stabilitytreaty.ie (Government website, so you may think they twisted it and wont read it)

    www.referendum2012.ie (Setup by the government to be Independent, but wont be ready until this week)

    www.thejournal.ie/translated-the-fiscal-compact-treaty-in-laymans-terms-387666-Mar2012 (Media, TheJournal.ie, converting the treaty to simple English).


  • Options
    #99
    Hotblack Desiato
    Registered Users Posts: 33,871 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    Lantus wrote: »
    Stay calm and vote no........

    Why? What is the benefit of voting no?

    Life ain't always empty.



  • Options
    #100
    ixtlan
    Registered Users Posts: 1,209 ✭✭✭ixtlan


    Lantus wrote: »

    On a serious note Europe has fought hand and fist to prop up all these countries without this policy. If Ireland was at risk we would get the cash as if we were to fall markets all over Europe would collapse and the contagion would spread like wildfire. The thought that they can now set us free is just crazy. We dont need the treaty to get cash if we need it. The damage to France and other countries including the UK would be far too great and permanently damaging. It's why a real flake of a country like greece has been saved when all common sense said let it go back to it's own currency and leave the EU. You can't then put out better countries like Ireland and expect the EU to survive. It would fireball in hours if not minutes. NO ONE WILL LET THIS HAPPEN!

    Stay calm and vote no........

    It might be true that some mechanism would be found to keep us afloat but...

    Are you 100% sure that the same amount of money will be available as from the ESM?
    Are you 100% sure that the conditions attached to that money will be more favourable than from the ESM?
    Are you 100% sure that the interest rate on the money will be less than the interest rate we would have got from the ESM?

    It's quite true that Greece was propped up, but do you really want things to get as bad as they are in Greece just so that the EU will give us the money that we could have got in a controlled calm way by voting yes?

    Ix.


  • Options
    #101
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    meglome wrote: »
    Saw this over on the Journal... anyone with more of a clue than me have any comment on its accuracy.
    The IMF brought out a report last month outlining projections for 2015, which put Ireland’s projected debt-to-GDP ratio at 114.7 per cent, with gross government debt standing at €205.2 billion. Under the fiscal compact, we have to reduce this debt at a rate of 5 per cent a year until the ratio is below 60%. The IMF reckons our GDP will grow at 2.9% a year from 2015 onward, but if it were to remain flat as you suggest, we would therefore have to wipe €10.26 billion off our debt every year until we reached the 60% mark (which would take eight or nine years).
    K-9 wrote:
    My understanding is we have to reduce our total debt, less the 60% limit, by one twentieth, not the total debt as per that post on the journal.ie.

    So it would be 114.7-60 = 54.7/20 = 2.7%.

    That's correct. But another important point is being left out - it's debt to nominal GDP, which means inflation also counts. Here's a worked example:

    Year|Debt Capital (€bn)|Nominal GDP|Debt Reduction|Inflation|Real GDP Growth|Nominal GDP Growth|Debt Repayment (€bn)|Debt/GDP Ratio
    2018|209.19|182.7|0.00%|1.95%|1.25%|3.22%|0|114.50%
    2019|209.19|188.59|0.00%|1.95%|1.25%|3.22%|0|110.92%
    2020|209.19|194.67|0.00%|1.95%|1.25%|3.22%|0|107.46%
    2021|209.19|200.95|0.00%|1.95%|1.25%|3.22%|0|104.10%
    2022|209.19|207.43|0.00%|1.95%|1.25%|3.22%|0|100.85%
    2023|209.19|214.12|0.00%|1.95%|1.25%|3.22%|0|97.70%
    2024|209.19|221.02|0.00%|1.95%|1.25%|3.22%|0|94.65%
    2025|209.19|228.15|0.00%|1.95%|1.25%|3.22%|0|91.69%
    2026|209.19|235.5|0.00%|1.95%|1.25%|3.22%|0|88.83%
    2027|209.19|243.1|0.00%|1.95%|1.25%|3.22%|0|86.05%
    2028|209.19|250.93|0.00%|1.95%|1.25%|3.22%|0|83.36%
    2029|209.19|259.03|0.00%|1.95%|1.25%|3.22%|0|80.76%
    2030|209.19|267.38|0.00%|1.95%|1.25%|3.22%|0|78.24%
    2031|209.19|276|0.00%|1.95%|1.25%|3.22%|0|75.79%
    2032|209.19|284.9|0.00%|1.95%|1.25%|3.22%|0|73.43%
    2033|209.19|294.08|0.00%|1.95%|1.25%|3.22%|0|71.13%
    2034|209.19|303.57|0.00%|1.95%|1.25%|3.22%|0|68.91%
    2035|209.19|313.36|0.00%|1.95%|1.25%|3.22%|0|66.76%
    2036|209.19|323.46|0.00%|1.95%|1.25%|3.22%|0|64.67%
    2037|209.19|333.89|0.00%|1.95%|1.25%|3.22%|0|62.65%
    2038|209.19|344.65|0.00%|1.95%|1.25%|3.22%|0|60.70%

    Inflation is enormously important here. And this is Ireland's historical real GDP growth rate: http://www.google.ie/publicdata/explore?ds=d5bncppjof8f9_&met_y=ny_gdp_mktp_kd_zg&idim=country:IRL&dl=en&hl=en&q=ireland+real+gdp+growth+rate

    There is virtually no period in recent Irish history when we haven't been able to pull off a sustained real GDP growth rate of 1.25%. In fact, we've only fallen below 1.25% in 6 years of the last 40, 4 of which are in the current crisis.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    swampgas
    Registered Users Posts: 3,535 ✭✭✭swampgas


    Lantus wrote: »

    [...]

    On a serious note Europe has fought hand and fist to prop up all these countries without this policy. If Ireland was at risk we would get the cash as if we were to fall markets all over Europe would collapse and the contagion would spread like wildfire. The thought that they can now set us free is just crazy. We dont need the treaty to get cash if we need it. The damage to France and other countries including the UK would be far too great and permanently damaging. It's why a real flake of a country like greece has been saved when all common sense said let it go back to it's own currency and leave the EU. You can't then put out better countries like Ireland and expect the EU to survive. It would fireball in hours if not minutes. NO ONE WILL LET THIS HAPPEN!

    Stay calm and vote no........

    And what is the mechanism to make sure this doesn't happen? Oh yeah, it's the ESM (Eurpean Stability Mechanism), the very thing you want to vote NO to. So, tell me why would other EU countries bother to give us a good deal, or any deal at all in fact, if we have voted to reject the very mechanism that they went to a lot of trouble to create for that very purpose?

    Are you that much of a gambler?


  • Options
    #103
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    Scofflaw wrote: »
    That's correct. But another important point is being left out - it's debt to nominal GDP, which means inflation also counts. Here's a worked example:

    There is virtually no period in recent Irish history when we haven't been able to pull off a sustained real GDP growth rate of 1.25%. In fact, we've only fallen below 1.25% in 6 years of the last 40, 4 of which are in the current crisis

    Just to update that - I plugged in the growth figures from the early Eighties, and it still works:

    Year|Debt Capital (€bn)|Nominal GDP|Debt Reduction|Inflation|Real GDP Growth|Nominal GDP Growth|Debt Repayment (€bn)|Debt/GDP Ratio
    2018|209.19|182.7|0.00%|1.95%|2.90%|3.22%|0|114.50%
    2019|209.19|190.94|0.00%|1.95%|2.51%|4.51%|0|109.56%
    2020|209.19|197.56|0.00%|1.95%|1.49%|3.47%|0|105.89%
    2021|209.19|199.94|0.00%|1.95%|-0.73%|1.21%|0|104.62%
    2022|209.19|210.39|0.00%|1.95%|3.21%|5.22%|0|99.43%
    2023|209.19|218.67|0.00%|1.95%|1.95%|3.94%|0|95.66%
    2024|209.19|223.89|0.00%|1.95%|0.43%|2.39%|0|93.43%
    2025|209.19|236.57|0.00%|1.95%|3.64%|5.66%|0|88.43%
    2026|209.19|248.18|0.00%|1.95%|2.90%|4.91%|0|84.29%
    2027|209.19|259.37|0.00%|1.95%|2.51%|4.51%|0|80.65%
    2028|209.19|268.36|0.00%|1.95%|1.49%|3.47%|0|77.95%
    2029|209.19|271.6|0.00%|1.95%|-0.73%|1.21%|0|77.02%
    2030|209.19|285.78|0.00%|1.95%|3.21%|5.22%|0|73.20%
    2031|209.19|297.04|0.00%|1.95%|1.95%|3.94%|0|70.43%
    2032|209.19|304.13|0.00%|1.95%|0.43%|2.39%|0|68.78%
    2033|209.19|321.35|0.00%|1.95%|3.64%|5.66%|0|65.10%
    2034|209.19|337.12|0.00%|1.95%|2.90%|4.91%|0|62.05%
    2035|209.19|352.32|0.00%|1.95%|2.51%|4.51%|0|59.38%
    2036|209.19|364.54|0.00%|1.95%|1.49%|3.47%|0|57.38%
    2037|209.19|368.93|0.00%|1.95%|-0.73%|1.21%|0|56.70%
    2038|209.19|388.2|0.00%|1.95%|3.21%|5.22%|0|53.89%

    The real GDP growth figures there are the figures from 1981-1988, which were very poor years for the Irish economy. If we assume the next 20 years are as bad as that decade, we still meet our Fiscal Treaty targets in time without repaying a penny of the debt capital.

    I'm afraid Sinn Fein and the ULA are really talking utter rubbish claiming this treaty enshrines "perpetual austerity".

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • Options
    #104
    stonetrower
    Registered Users Posts: 52 ✭✭stonetrower


    We already have a treaty and it has not worked. Germany were first to pull out when they had enough of carrying the minnows. The same will happen again. www.irishexaminer.com/business yesterday had a report that the EU policy makers admitted that they got their economics wrong and have now changed tack. Loosen the purse strings they are saying. The EURO will be gone in 3 years time so why should we agree to a doomed fiscal treaty. It will cost us €11Billion as a non returnable entrance fee. A waste of money IMO. Its a bad treaty so why are we not waiting for the French to decide and we can renegociate a better deal. We are being bullied into it and that is why the head of EU Finance resigned yesterday


  • Options
    #105
    Hotblack Desiato
    Registered Users Posts: 33,871 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    What? Is there any part of that post that makes any sense at all??

    Life ain't always empty.



  • Options
    #106
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    stonetrower wrote: »
    We already have a treaty and it has not worked. Germany were first to pull out when they had enough of carrying the minnows. The same will happen again.

    Actually, they breached the limits - nothing to do with anyone else - and didn't want to face an excessive deficit procedure. The Stability & Growth Pact, which this one is an update of, made it relatively easy to do that, because a majority had to vote for sanctions. This one makes that harder, because a majority has to vote against them.
    www.irishexaminer.com/business yesterday had a report that the EU policy makers admitted that they got their economics wrong and have now changed tack. Loosen the purse strings they are saying.

    Austerity isn't popular anywhere, but our austerity isn't being imposed on us from outside - we just don't have any money.
    The EURO will be gone in 3 years time so why should we agree to a doomed fiscal treaty.

    In that case, why not? It wouldn't even start to apply to us before it disappeared, if you're right.
    It will cost us €11Billion as a non returnable entrance fee. A waste of money IMO.

    Er, no. That's referring to the ESM, not the Fiscal Treaty, it refers to the maximum capital not the initial capital, the money is returnable, and the ESM can be ratified separately from the Fiscal Treaty. Access to ESM funding isn't related to ESM membership - we can be members without being able to access the funds ourselves if we vote No.
    Its a bad treaty so why are we not waiting for the French to decide and we can renegociate a better deal.

    Because we're not French. Why not make our own decision?
    We are being bullied into it and that is why the head of EU Finance resigned yesterday

    There is no "head of EU finance", and the guy who resigned as head of the Euro Group did so because Germany and France interfered too much with his job. It has nothing to do with the ESM-Fiscal Treaty linkage, or Ireland.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • Options
    #107
    RandomName2
    Registered Users Posts: 5,565 ✭✭✭RandomName2


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    This blatant lie has a ridiculous amount of currency.

    We're spending vastly more than we're taking in. We need to raise taxes and cut spending. The process of raising taxes and cutting spending is called "austerity". The alternative to austerity is borrowing even more money than we currently do, which we can't afford to do.

    A little bit of honesty wouldn't go astray.

    Well from a certain logical pov you could argue that a no vote would destabilise the government and boost sinn fein; and that if sinn fein got into power that austerity measures would be removed.. that is, until the country collapsed.


  • Options
    #108
    MrSing
    Registered Users Posts: 107 ✭✭MrSing


    I bet there is someone somewhere in FG that wishes they didn't use the slogan "yes for jobs" in a previous campaign, we only LOST about 70,000 since. Listen to the guff from Richard Bruton today on RTE news at 1, he is speaking from some "jobs mission" in the US and telling us that the people in the states are concerned about creating jobs in Ireland at the moment because of how we might vote in the upcoming referendum. Its the same old nonsense and BS from them, seems like they(FG) are pretty hapless when it comes scare tactics surrounding referenda in Ireland, I guess this is because they have nothing more plausible to say and the expectation is that everyone will support job creation, this is pure guff on behalf of the FG PR company and probably does have the desired effect on the feeble minded electorate. At a time like this I always remember the wise words of Leo Varadkar regarding referenda "by and large” never what they are supposed to be about". Its yes for jobs 2. Can someone sack that PR company that runs FG please, its getting embarrassing


  • Options
    #109
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,791 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    MrSing wrote: »
    ...seems like they(FG) are pretty hapless when it comes scare tactics surrounding referenda in Ireland...
    Yup. If they want to learn all about scare tactics, they need to do so at the feet of the masters. "A 'yes' vote will permanently enshrine austerity" - now that's proper scaremongering.


  • Options
    #110
    Godge
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21,727 ✭✭✭✭Godge


    Scofflaw wrote: »
    Just to update that - I plugged in the growth figures from the early Eighties, and it still works:

    Year|Debt Capital (€bn)|Nominal GDP|Debt Reduction|Inflation|Real GDP Growth|Nominal GDP Growth|Debt Repayment (€bn)|Debt/GDP Ratio
    2018|209.19|182.7|0.00%|1.95%|2.90%|3.22%|0|114.50%
    2019|209.19|190.94|0.00%|1.95%|2.51%|4.51%|0|109.56%
    2020|209.19|197.56|0.00%|1.95%|1.49%|3.47%|0|105.89%
    2021|209.19|199.94|0.00%|1.95%|-0.73%|1.21%|0|104.62%
    2022|209.19|210.39|0.00%|1.95%|3.21%|5.22%|0|99.43%
    2023|209.19|218.67|0.00%|1.95%|1.95%|3.94%|0|95.66%
    2024|209.19|223.89|0.00%|1.95%|0.43%|2.39%|0|93.43%
    2025|209.19|236.57|0.00%|1.95%|3.64%|5.66%|0|88.43%
    2026|209.19|248.18|0.00%|1.95%|2.90%|4.91%|0|84.29%
    2027|209.19|259.37|0.00%|1.95%|2.51%|4.51%|0|80.65%
    2028|209.19|268.36|0.00%|1.95%|1.49%|3.47%|0|77.95%
    2029|209.19|271.6|0.00%|1.95%|-0.73%|1.21%|0|77.02%
    2030|209.19|285.78|0.00%|1.95%|3.21%|5.22%|0|73.20%
    2031|209.19|297.04|0.00%|1.95%|1.95%|3.94%|0|70.43%
    2032|209.19|304.13|0.00%|1.95%|0.43%|2.39%|0|68.78%
    2033|209.19|321.35|0.00%|1.95%|3.64%|5.66%|0|65.10%
    2034|209.19|337.12|0.00%|1.95%|2.90%|4.91%|0|62.05%
    2035|209.19|352.32|0.00%|1.95%|2.51%|4.51%|0|59.38%
    2036|209.19|364.54|0.00%|1.95%|1.49%|3.47%|0|57.38%
    2037|209.19|368.93|0.00%|1.95%|-0.73%|1.21%|0|56.70%
    2038|209.19|388.2|0.00%|1.95%|3.21%|5.22%|0|53.89%

    The real GDP growth figures there are the figures from 1981-1988, which were very poor years for the Irish economy. If we assume the next 20 years are as bad as that decade, we still meet our Fiscal Treaty targets in time without repaying a penny of the debt capital.

    I'm afraid Sinn Fein and the ULA are really talking utter rubbish claiming this treaty enshrines "perpetual austerity".

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


    A good table to illustrate how easy it would be to achieve the 60% target on time without any extra austerity. Interestingly, you fail to update the inflation amount with the 1980s figures. If you included those, we could hit the target sometime in the middle of the next decade.


  • Options
    #111
    carveone
    Registered Users Posts: 1,212 ✭✭✭carveone


    Godge wrote: »
    A good table to illustrate how easy it would be to achieve the 60% target on time without any extra austerity. Interestingly, you fail to update the inflation amount with the 1980s figures. If you included those, we could hit the target sometime in the middle of the next decade.

    I said that yesterday too - Scofflaw said he was being deliberately as conservative as possible - ECB inflation figures and 80s growth. We could do 1970s UK inflation and hit the target next year ;)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #112
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    carveone wrote: »
    I said that yesterday too - Scofflaw said he was being deliberately as conservative as possible - ECB inflation figures and 80s growth. We could do 1970s UK inflation and hit the target next year ;)

    We could do 1970s UK inflation and late 1990s Irish growth, and probably have to try to hit the thing from the other side...

    Seriously, though, I don't think this is a bed of roses, but it's not the rack either.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • Options
    #113
    RandomName2
    Registered Users Posts: 5,565 ✭✭✭RandomName2


    MrSing wrote: »
    I bet there is someone somewhere in FG that wishes they didn't use the slogan "yes for jobs" in a previous campaign, we only LOST about 70,000 since.

    IMO they could have just reused those posters and saved us some money in the process. Yes for "A Working Ireland"? :rolleyes:

    Accountability
    and
    Sustainability

    would have been far preferable tag lines to that of

    Investment
    and
    Recovery.

    Recovery. Seriously? Totally should have used old posters...
    Again, I have to ask, does the government even know what it is about, or are they just being disingenuous? :D


  • Options
    #114
    carveone
    Registered Users Posts: 1,212 ✭✭✭carveone


    RandomName2 wrote: »
    IMO they could have just reused those posters and saved us some money in the process. Yes for "A Working Ireland"? :rolleyes:

    The Yes side are being unimaginative as usual. As opposed to the No side which is being extra imaginative this time around. I've seen "Vote No" posters with something about the household tax and water charges (didn't quite see it all as I was driving past it at the time).

    The ULA have a 'Rule by unelected bankers' poster which is fun... Oooh. Best one yet - "No to upward only rents, no to liars, no to the fiscal compact'.. WTF!


  • Options
    #115
    RandomName2
    Registered Users Posts: 5,565 ✭✭✭RandomName2


    carveone wrote: »
    The Yes side are being unimaginative as usual. As opposed to the No side which is being extra imaginative this time around. I've seen "Vote No" posters with something about the household tax and water charges (didn't quite see it all as I was driving past it at the time).

    The ULA have a 'Rule by unelected bankers' poster which is fun... Oooh. Best one yet - "No to upward only rents, no to liars, no to the fiscal compact'.. WTF!

    Sigh.

    As long as Coir don't get involved. (please God don't let Coir get involved)

    At least "no to the fiscal compact" is accurate enough. Other than that it's an "it's the economy, stupid" approach coupled with a tenuous connection to the terms of Ireland's bailout. What the bailout has to do with the treaty though...


  • Options
    #116
    Dartz
    Registered Users Posts: 4,366 ✭✭✭Dartz


    Honestly, after thinking quite deeply about all this, I may have to abstain from voting, which is rather galling. The truth of the matter is, I don't want to vote 'No' because I understand how necessary this is, while at the same time I don't want to vote 'Yes' because I don't like how necessary this is. And given the choice.... I don't know.


  • Options
    #117
    Ozymandius2011
    Registered Users Posts: 1,149 ✭✭✭Ozymandius2011


    Note that Pierre Moscovici of the French Socialist Party refused to call for a yes vote when pressed by Tony Connelly of RTE on the news,not to say whether or not the Treaty would be changed.


  • Options
    #118
    Sierra Oscar
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 8,458 CMod ✭✭✭✭Sierra Oscar


    Ozymandius2011 wrote: »
    Note that Pierre Moscovici of the French Socialist Party refused to call for a yes vote when pressed by Tony Connelly of RTE on the news,not to say whether or not the Treaty would be changed.

    And he did not call for a no vote either.

    You forgot to mention that he quite clearly stated that it was a sovereignty matter for Ireland and France would not be dictating how Ireland should vote - and rightfully so.


  • Options
    #119
    Ozymandius2011
    Registered Users Posts: 1,149 ✭✭✭Ozymandius2011


    Sierra Oscar wrote: »
    And he did not call for a no vote either.

    You forgot to mention that he quite clearly stated that it was a sovereignty matter for Ireland and France would not be dictating how Ireland should vote - and rightfully so.
    The significance is that it is very different to the usual experience of EU referenda where other EU member states govts demand we vote to ratify. As stated by the presenter on Newstalk, Hollande's comment that the Irish 'have been capable of voting no' comes across as tacit support for the no side.


  • Options
    #120
    ixtlan
    Registered Users Posts: 1,209 ✭✭✭ixtlan


    Ozymandius2011 wrote: »
    The significance is that it is very different to the usual experience of EU referenda where other EU member states govts demand we vote to ratify. As stated by the presenter on Newstalk, Hollande's comment that the Irish 'have been capable of voting no' comes across as tacit support for the no side.

    Hmmm... you somewhat exxagerate there. Some individuals (elected or not they never spoke on behalf of a government) have in the past advocated a yes vote, and that's been followed by the Irish media trumpeting this as interference in Irish politics. Yet when they refuse to advocate any choice you decide that is a request for a no vote, again interference. Can't really win I think...

    However... in this case I'll grant you that Hollande might welcome a no... just so that he can blame the Irish when he goes to talk to Merkel. I personally would rather we not be the ones to precipitate a crisis. Let Hollande do that himself if he really believes it needs to be done. Though Greece may do it too.

    ix.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #121
    meglome
    Registered Users Posts: 7,980 ✭✭✭meglome


    RandomName2 wrote: »
    Sigh.

    As long as Coir don't get involved. (please God don't let Coir get involved)

    I can't help but miss the crazy loons, in a way. Though on places like the Journal there are plenty of good citizens doing their bit in the Coir stylee.


Advertisement