# Would an International bailout and the IMF be a bad thing?



## censuspro (2 Nov 2010)

If you were to go by today's indo we potentially have only one month before the IMF are running the show. Can someone explain how this would be a bad thing?


----------



## jhegarty (2 Nov 2010)

We have enough money though April next year, don't see how anything could possibly happen before then.


----------



## tiger (2 Nov 2010)

It probably removes some of the politics from the decision making so in that sense might be good, but as a soverign country we should be making the decisions that affect us.

Would you give me your weekly shopping budget and allow me to go to tescos and decide for you what was "best"?


----------



## FioBi (2 Nov 2010)

tiger said:


> It probably removes some of the politics from the decision making so in that sense might be good, but as a soverign country we should be making the decisions that affect us.
> 
> Would you give me your weekly shopping budget and allow me to go to tescos and decide for you what was "best"?


 

And because you are earning 30 bn and spending 50 bn I would decide how I can reduce your spending to 30 bn.  i.e. Wage cuts, SW cuts, Pension cuts ec.., much much larger and faster than is currently being done


----------



## Shawady (2 Nov 2010)

The government has taken 14.5 billion out of the economy and is planning for another 15. That is just under 30 billion in spending cuts and extra taxes. 
I cannot see how the IMF/EU would be much worse. I also think it would be unlikely they would implement it all together so they would probably spread it out over a few years like is already planned.
What may happen is decisions taken without emotion i.e. large cuts in PS pay, SW benefits, old age pension. Also probably see a rise in corporation tax and a property tax. As discussed in another thread the overseas aid would probably be scrapped completely.


----------



## Marietta (2 Nov 2010)

Mr jim McDaid resigned from the Dail today apparently he wrote a scathing letter to Brian Cowen last week.  Are we closer to a General Election?  http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/1102/mcdaid.html


----------



## TLC (2 Nov 2010)

Rats & sinking ships comes to mind!!


----------



## jpd (2 Nov 2010)

Hopefully, first on the list would be reneging on pensions to ex-ministers and the like!


----------



## shnaek (3 Nov 2010)

TLC said:


> Rats & sinking ships comes to mind!!



Indeed. What a fine caliber of politician we have, that stays when there's money to throw at everyone, and runs away when the going gets tough.


----------



## Chris (3 Nov 2010)

tiger said:


> It probably removes some of the politics from the decision making so in that sense might be good, but as a soverign country we should be making the decisions that affect us.
> 
> Would you give me your weekly shopping budget and allow me to go to tescos and decide for you what was "best"?



But the "sovereign" country is under the control of career politicians who do not have the public interest at heart but their own interests and those of their most influencial lobbyists. We, as in the taxpayers of this country, are not making the dicisions; the decisions are being made by people who are not restricted in their actions they supposedly do on our behalf and for our good.
At this stage I believe the IMF would make better decisions in a much shorter time frame without any of the political crap that comes from politicians.


----------



## ontour (3 Nov 2010)

Chris said:


> But the "sovereign" country is under the control of career politicians who do not have the public interest at heart but their own interests and those of their most influencial lobbyists.



Leaving the whole medical side of things out of it, I do not believe that Brian Lenihan's actions are motivated by his political career aspirations.

There are plenty of useless politicians in the Dail and who puts them there.....  I think that we under estimate our responsibility for who is in power and over estimate the power that they have.  Many decisions are 'guided' by senior civil servants who are pulling the strings.

The assumption that the decisions made by the IMF would not be politically influenced is crazy.  I don't know whether it is the view that the grass is always greener on the other side that makes us believe that the actions of the IMF would be better.  

I don't think that the IMF would remove our overseas aid budget, they would add another percent to corporation tax instead.  Everyone is a winner - more jobs for other European countries as we lose our tax advantage and they do not have to pick up the aid shortfall.


----------



## Ceist Beag (3 Nov 2010)

censuspro said:


> If you were to go by today's indo we potentially have only one month before the IMF are running the show. Can someone explain how this would be a bad thing?



Can someone explain to me why it would be a good thing (preferably citing some examples of where they improved things rather than the tired old line of "well they can't be any worse than our politicians")? The thoughts of the IMF coming in here scares the hell out of me, so I'm hoping someone can show me where they have actually improved things in a country!


----------



## shnaek (3 Nov 2010)

You don't bring them in to improve things. You bring them in as a last resort.


----------



## Strathspey (3 Nov 2010)

The IMF are not concerned with growing an economy or improving the daily lives of citizens. They concern themselves only with balacing the books. In the short term this involves slashing public sector jobs and wages. As the only guy in town supplying the money, it makes the descions that weak governments or incapable of making themselves.


----------



## joeryan (3 Nov 2010)

Apologies if this is a really stupid question but...

A colleague of mine said he was in Argentina when the IMF took over and the IMF took half of all the money in peoples bank accounts to help run the country.

Is that a load of bull?
Could anything like that happen here?

EDIT: Thread titled "What happens to our deposits if IMF step in" answers my question.
(Would post a link but not allowed until have 15 posts)


----------



## Chris (4 Nov 2010)

ontour said:


> Leaving the whole medical side of things out of it, I do not believe that Brian Lenihan's actions are motivated by his political career aspirations.
> 
> There are plenty of useless politicians in the Dail and who puts them there.....  I think that we under estimate our responsibility for who is in power and over estimate the power that they have.  Many decisions are 'guided' by senior civil servants who are pulling the strings.


Yes indeed we put them there, but given the amount of things that they have control over, and take control over, I think it is very wrong to say that I am over-estimating their power. Just look at the risk they have taken by bailing out banks, do you think the public voted for this by voting for their preferred candidates? Or do you think that labour voters in the UK voted for Blair to go to war in Iraq? Or SPD voters in Germany voted for Schroeder to underwrite a gas pipeline to Russia in order to get a job on the board of Gazprom?

Given the amount of things that politicians intrude on you never actually know what you are voting for. It's like going to a supermarket for bread, butter, cheese and wine. When you get there you are given the choice of 3 shopping trolleys packed to the rim. In one you see bread and wine, in another you see only cheese; in the third you see bread, butter and something that looks like wine. You opt for option 3 and when you get home you realise that what you thought was wine is actually white wine vinegar.
Unless there is some restriction on what governments can do, voting people into office is nothing more than a PR exercise to give the public the impression that they are governed in a way they chose.



ontour said:


> The assumption that the decisions made by the IMF would not be politically influenced is crazy.  I don't know whether it is the view that the grass is always greener on the other side that makes us believe that the actions of the IMF would be better.


What this country most desparately needs is to balance the books, and the IMF would do so in the shortest possible time frame. There would be no quibbling over should we extend the time frame, or not front load the whole thing, etc. They would simply make the cuts regardless of the impact on an election.



ontour said:


> I don't think that the IMF would remove our overseas aid budget, they would add another percent to corporation tax instead.  Everyone is a winner - more jobs for other European countries as we lose our tax advantage and they do not have to pick up the aid shortfall.


The IMF would not be motivated by providing jobs to other European countries. It is motivated by providing emergency funding and balancing the books.



Ceist Beag said:


> Can someone explain to me why it would be a good thing (preferably citing some examples of where they improved things rather than the tired old line of "well they can't be any worse than our politicians")? The thoughts of the IMF coming in here scares the hell out of me, so I'm hoping someone can show me where they have actually improved things in a country!


Iceland. 
When Iceland voted to not bail out bond holders in its banks, and when the IMF had to be called upon, it was said that that would be the end for Iceland and the proverbial blood would hit the streets. At this stage, Iceland is in a better position to rebuild its economy than Ireland is. I'm always sceptical of political and IMF predictions, but the IMF is anticipating/predicting "a rebound in growth is expected later in 2010" (). That's more than Ireland can boast.



shnaek said:


> You don't bring them in to improve things. You bring them in as a last resort.


I would actually say you bring them in to improve things that you are incapable or unwilling to improve yourself.


----------



## ontour (4 Nov 2010)

Chris said:


> ........ Just look at the risk they have taken by bailing out banks, do you think the public voted for this by voting for their preferred candidates?



If the public got to vote on the bank bailout, it would not have happened but the same people that were going to vote No would have taken their money out so by the time there was a vote, it would have been mute anyway as the run would have collapsed the banks.

5 years is a long time so to think that we elect TDs with the knowledge of the issues that they will face and the decisions that they will make over the term of office is unrealistic.  You elect them based on very broad brush strokes of policies.  It is a lot like marraige, you take them for better/worse, richer/ poorer, in sickness and in IMF.


----------



## Potatoeman (4 Nov 2010)

So what does that say about us a country as a whole? I can’t believe people voted for Bertie when it came out he had no bank account while minister for finance.


----------



## Chris (4 Nov 2010)

ontour said:


> 5 years is a long time so to think that we elect TDs with the knowledge of the issues that they will face and the decisions that they will make over the term of office is unrealistic.  You elect them based on very broad brush strokes of policies.  It is a lot like marraige, you take them for better/worse, richer/ poorer, in sickness and in IMF.



But this is exactly the problem I am pointing out. That politicians are left to their own vested interests when it comes to interfereing in our lives. That is not what democracy and personal liberty are about; that is what totalitarianism and facism is about. This is hardly something that can be just brushed asside and accepted. 
As the saying goes: "just because something is doesn't mean it ought to be"


----------



## ontour (4 Nov 2010)

But the solution to your problem Chris is unworkable.  You don't want to trust someone to make decisions, you want to make the decisions.  In that case we could get rid of TDs altogether.  Every day we would get some issues to vote on and we could vote from our iPhone or Android application.... actually it might actually be possible!

*PLEASE SELECT ONE OF THE BELOW OPTIONS: 

*0  - Introduce Fees for 3rd Level
0  - No third level fees - increase taxes to fund
0 -  No third level fees -cut hospital spending
0 - Introduce 3rd level fees for children whose parents have BMW or Mercedes cars or Lambourgini tractors
*(Voting ends at midnight.  This is a subscription service)
*
The next day you would have a policy decision !


----------



## Complainer (4 Nov 2010)

ontour said:


> But the solution to your problem Chris is unworkable.  You don't want to trust someone to make decisions, you want to make the decisions.  In that case we could get rid of TDs altogether.  Every day we would get some issues to vote on and we could vote from our iPhone or Android application.... actually it might actually be possible!
> 
> *PLEASE SELECT ONE OF THE BELOW OPTIONS:
> 
> ...



You left out a few options. How about the option of cutting out some of the €11.4 billion odd of tax reliefs to fund 3rd level (and 2nd level and 1st level too).

The iPhone or Android app opens up opportunities for vote selling and voting under duress. The private ballot box is there for a reason.


----------



## Chris (5 Nov 2010)

ontour said:


> But the solution to your problem Chris is unworkable.  You don't want to trust someone to make decisions, you want to make the decisions.  In that case we could get rid of TDs altogether.  Every day we would get some issues to vote on and we could vote from our iPhone or Android application.... actually it might actually be possible!


How would it be unworkable? If you restrict what government can interfere in then you automatically reduce the amount of decisions they make, making it more transparent to voters what they are actually voting for. And the public would not have to be called to vote for every decision, only ones that government, or the public, deem as important. 
The Swiss governmental system is far more democratic than any other in the world. If the Swiss government decides to pass a law or take some action, and more than 50000 (I believe this number is correct) signatures from the public are collected to call for a referendum, then a referednum must be held. This does not mean that every government decision calls for a public vote. But if the public decides that a government is overstepping its boundaries, the decision is taken away from them.



Complainer said:


> The iPhone or Android app opens up opportunities for vote selling and voting under duress. The private ballot box is there for a reason.



Absolutely agree, secret/private voting is of utmost importance, wether it is for government or union decisions, or any other publicly made votes.


----------



## shammy feen (27 Nov 2010)

jhegarty said:


> we have enough money though april next year, don't see how anything could possibly happen before then.


 
:-o


----------

