Its not just the money, the lies and the fraud committed by Fine Gael party its the things that are not as publicised.

The Ryan Commission in to child sexual abuse has had figures that were drastically undervalued. the figure of 170,000 abuse victims is only about 25% of the actual numbers. Then there are the steps Fine Gael have taken to obstruct and destroy these victims including:

• Removing the three commission reports into the child sex abuse fromt eh FOI Act. IOW you cannot get the information.
• Seal away records for 75 years so no one can get the information
• Introducing legislation that makes it illegal for people that are victims to discuss or write about their abuse
• The above point has led to victims not coming forward for fear of prosecution
• No legislation for people to get their own records of adoption.

There are more things done. Watch this video and see what FG are doing to victims of sexual abuse and think of the court "sentences" of abusers and it might become clear what is happening in "Gud ould Catholic Ireland".

https://twitter.com/rtebrainstorm/status/1169197547027607552?lang=en


As this is the same FG Government that says it's sorry to the victims of the cervical smear scandal but continue to make them fight in court and then use the same company to continue getting testing done, is it a shock? :mad::(

Frankly i don't care what he had or did not. The police acted correctly and swiftly, but if history is anything to go by you'll see some or all of the police team on trial within a year for offending someone's sensibilities. :rolleyes:

deezell wrote: »

1. €100,000 a year is the average salary in Google, no election or public persecution required, just be handy with a keyboard.

There is no persecution because of the salary of a TD. There is "judgement" on someone earning over €2,000 a week needing €1,000 a week extra for "expenses".

Especially one that has the lowest Dail attendance, but someone managed to "clock in" while pending the last two years in Brussels. So cherry picking a single point and ignoring the context of the post does not support your rebuttal.

2. The CEO of a similarly sized organization as a Department of health or finance would likely earn ten times that.

Yup, and a private company is not in the least bit the same as a public office.

3. To protect the constitution primarily, and prevent coups.

I know what the constitution says, but in real world situations, what is the difference? The President has no veto power and the best he can exercise is a 7 day "stall" of an financial legislation to confirm its legal. At which point s/he must sign it.

His role could not be more different than that of Taoiseach.

My point is the President is meant as a figure head (to represent and "advertise" Ireland to the world) so the Taoiseach should not be spending the vast sums of money he is trying to do the same.

He's paid less than some RTE presenters.

That is a weak argument. The President is paid less than a lot of others not only in Ireland but around the world, however the argument, or more accurately my argument, is not to validate the position of President it is to criticise the expenditure of the office of the Taoiseach on functions that are best served by the President (seeing as how we have one, he might as well fulfill a role).

As the Dail oversees its own expenses and wages including pay rises and pensions ( non contributory ones at that) there is no real oversight bar a expense account committee for "show".

I've often defended, if that is the right word, the high wages of CEOs, company directors, even charity chairmen. In a capitalistic system you get paid what the market will bear, and bonuses are paid on a performance basis. Whether i think what Zuckerberg or Bezos gets paid is morally right or not is irrelevant.

Ireland is a Republic. Those in the Dail represent us and they work for us, not the other way around. Even if you don't agree with my points about their salaries and expenses you must agree that the wanton waste of public finances on Hospitals, voting machines, commissions (that are buried), tribunals, foreign aid, etc. is a result of mismanagement that in Google or Amazon or any other company would see the CEO fired/sacked.

HAH.



Maybe now people will realise the TV/news and other media are lying to you. I know it's only an exit poll and the same type of polling data was used in 2016 to say hillary was going to win, but even if it off by 10% it's still a Conservative majority.

Corbyn is toxic to Labour and twice the party had a chance to remove him and didn't. Maybe now they will.

There is always room for something, but two years ago the Con. needed the DUP to maintain a Government and the DUP wanted to stay. They also had to put up with a 268 seat Labour party that opposed EVERYTHING regardless of content.

Now they have the majority and such a majority that even with some "defectors", within their own party, against Brexit happening the Conservatives will have enough to vote it through.

yubabill wrote: »

Long video, but once you start, you will watch it all and want more;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sfyrURHpUcM

Watched it, then watched most of it a second time. That was educational, informative, eye opening and i'd be truly interested if some of his predictions come to pass. Great video.

2. Grizz is right about climate change, it's a fraud, take it from me as a chemist.

I remember this war cry from when i was a teen and that was 30+ years ago. Every decade Al Gore or some other "celebrity" was decrying our way of life and saying the sky was falling. Then it never happened so we got the excuse of the "wrong model" but now it's coming in the next ten years.

I'm not a believer in most conspiracy theories and i'll chose doubt over belief when i'm not sure. My reason for saying this is the data, actual hard data, does not support it (the climate change narrative that is). We are being fed, i won't say lies, but a certain portion of the narrative and being blinded to the whole picture. Recently even David Attenborough was found to be doing this. He done a documentary which showed Walrus falling to their death off a cliff because of climate change. He never mentioned that this happened back in the 80s and also failed to elaborate on the population explosion due to a ban on hunting and the fact that all the animals chose the same spot to return to to breed.

The same with the "starving polar bear" picture. It was shown to be a "false flag" climate repercussion and the Nat. Geo had to apologise for their story and documentary.

The numbers being cited by the UN have been, according to one side of the argument, falsified and massaged to support the agenda of the UN, and the papers which support climate change claim to have thousands of Doctors and scientists signatures, but again they fail to mention that some of those signatories are Professors/Doctors of English, Math, history, and every other topic not even remotely associated with a basic understanding of climatology, meteorology, etc.

Then we move onto the celebs that bash us for not making a difference while jetting around the world, a 16 yr old with learning difficulties that has never suffered a days hardship in her short life, and bartenders from New York politicians that speak out of the side of their mouths for the sole purpose of scaring the living s**t out of us while using the imaginary or perhaps more aptly named, unproven, claim that it [climate change] will kill us all in 12, sorry 9 years.

Even if it were all true what solutions have they offered? Workable ones that are based in reality and not on Unicorn farts and fairy dust.

So the EU is proposing trillions of our money in spending on a folly, including compensating nations affected by climate change.

An exposé by the BBC [i think] into the EU (Parliament, commission, etc) about 4 years ago showed the vast and i mean VAST sums of money they pay themselves and award themselves in salary, benefits, school allowances for their children, travel, clothing, staff, etc. and as climate change will be a never ending issue it is the golden Goose of revenue streams.

Then look at how they spend, what they do actually spend, on the "problem". 64% of recyclable waste is not recycled in the UK and Ireland. Manufacturers of products list what is recyclable and what is not and if you look carefully, as i have, you'll be shocked at the amount of packaging that is not actually recyclable. Wind farms and solar power is a pipe dream that accounts for less than 1% of total power requirements in most countries and less in most other countries. It has devastating effects on wildlife, habitat, and CO2 footprint in the manufacturing process is in most cases far more than what the item will return in power production.

We can do more to keep things cleaner and recycle more, but that focus should be on the offenders and not those that are currently improving. China, India, and America are the three largest producers of waste/CO2 in the world. America has dropped it's output by almost 2% in the last few years to 15% of the world total while China and India have increased their output to a combined total of over 65%, in just TWO countries.

9 out of the 10 most polluted rivers are in Asia. They import other countries waste and dump it in rivers and other methods which are not even in the slightest way renewable. They are increasing their coal burning plants, manufacturing plants and other CO2 producers, but the focus by Greta and her ilk is steadily focused on countries that are improving and where she will not be "put up against a wall" for voicing her opinion while the true culprits are given a pass for fear of economical and social persecution for something as simple as accusing them.