# FG mugged the middle class and never touched the banks.



## Clonback (24 Feb 2016)

An extract from a letter to the Indo.
"FG have presided over beating after beating for the Irish citizen at the hands of Banks,foreign and domestic,and never lifted a finger to protect us.As international rates plummeted,Irish Banks charged--and continue to charge --gouging rates from variable interest rate holders and small businesses."

Vote FG out on Friday


----------



## moneybox (25 Feb 2016)

Clonback said:


> Vote FG out on Friday




And bring back the crowd that brought us into the mess in the first place


----------



## Cervelo (25 Feb 2016)

If the only reason you're voting FG out is the interest rate issue then you know less about politics then I do.
I'm not a FG/Lab supporter but I do feel overall they have done a good job and I'm prepared to let them continue the job.
As Dr Pepper says "sure what can go wrong"


----------



## odyssey06 (25 Feb 2016)

I'm not in any doubt that FG mugged ordinary Irish citizens - interest rates, water charges, pension levy, not delivering on USC promises - rather than face down Europe over banks, burning bondholders etc etc. As an ordinary Irish citizen, this time my vote will be going elsewhere. Even regardless of the fact that introducing water charges was part of the IMF deal, the absolute omnishambles of its introduction is entirely down to the coalition. No government that made such a mess of that can be reliably expected to do anything to sort out health, crime etc


----------



## Brendan Burgess (25 Feb 2016)

odyssey06 said:


> the absolute omnishambles of its introduction is entirely down to the coalition. No government that made such a mess of that can be reliably expected to do anything to sort out health, crime etc



This is a very interesting point. There is very little in policy differences between all the parties. They all want to take more people out of the tax net, maintain high taxes on the higher paid and continue to pay very high rates of social welfare. 

So maybe we should decide based on which party we think would be the most capable administrators?  Had FF been returned to power at the last election, would the introduction of Irish Water have been any more efficient and effective?  If Paul Murphy were to be the Minister for the Environment, would the operation of the water system in Ireland be any more efficient or effective? We wouldn't have the water charges or the entity called Irish Water, but we would still have to spend €6 billion on water infrastructure over the next few years.

Brendan


----------



## Firefly (25 Feb 2016)

odyssey06 said:


> Even regardless of the fact that introducing water charges was part of the IMF deal, the absolute omnishambles of its introduction is entirely down to the coalition. No government that made such a mess of that can be reliably expected to do anything to sort out health, crime etc



I think one of the main reasons water charges have proved so unpopular is that those who are used to getting so much for nothing are now being asked to contribute. Ever notice the types of areas that have the large, anti water charges signs? The water charges are a lot less than the property tax, which in turn is dwarfed by the USC. That is if you are stupid enough to be working and have bought a house in the first place.

I think, overall, FG have done a good job. It's easy to say we should have burned the bond holders, but the consensus is that the net cost of "bailing out the banks" is around 45bn. A nice wedge to be sure, but this only represents 25% of our national debt....


----------



## Steven Barrett (25 Feb 2016)

Brendan Burgess said:


> This is a very interesting point. There is very little in policy differences between all the parties. They all want to take more people out of the tax net, maintain high taxes on the higher paid and continue to pay very high rates of social welfare.
> 
> *So maybe we should decide based on which party we think would be the most capable administrators?*  Had FF been returned to power at the last election, would the introduction of Irish Water have been any more efficient and effective?  If Paul Murphy were to be the Minister for the Environment, would the operation of the water system in Ireland be any more efficient or effective? We wouldn't have the water charges or the entity called Irish Water, but we would still have to spend €6 billion on water infrastructure over the next few years.
> 
> Brendan



When the real administrators are the civil service, who are there regardless of which party is in power...so does it make a difference at all?


----------



## odyssey06 (25 Feb 2016)

I think it's possible to coherently defend a proper and efficient system for charging for water use (though I personally am not convinced of its necessity given that when introduced in UK, consumption dropped by 10% - versus the 40% being lost here to leaky pipes for last 20 years). I think Irish Water is indefensible.

I think for two reasons FF would not have made quite such a mess of its introduction:
(1) They would have had more experienced ministers overseeing its introduction. The Coalition brought very little ministerial experience to the table. That said, in the UK the Conservative\LibDem brought almost none in 2010 and yet seemed to manage capably.
(2) Fianna Fail would have been much closer (by necessity) to the possible public backlash against the charges (no landslide majority) and would have been more careful about anything that would spook the horses, so to speak.

IF in government this time around, would FF bring the same level of experience? No, think it's fairly thin on the ground with this front bench.
But, if we did get a FG \ FF coalition, I wonder if the Fianna Failers especially would try to use competence and be more mindful of public opinion in their decisions to distinguish themselves from FG ministers - as it would be hard to distinguish on policy.


----------



## odyssey06 (25 Feb 2016)

SBarrett said:


> When the real administrators are the civil service, who are there regardless of which party is in power...so does it make a difference at all?



That's obviously a part of it, but the way Phil Hogan on behalf of the coalition rail roaded in water charges in total disregard of public opposition to it's mechanics (as opposed to the principle of it) seemed to be under political control.


----------



## odyssey06 (25 Feb 2016)

Firefly said:


> I think one of the main reasons water charges have proved so unpopular is that those who are used to getting so much for nothing are now being asked to contribute. Ever notice the types of areas that have the large, anti water charges signs? The water charges are a lot less than the property tax, which in turn is dwarfed by the USC. That is if you are stupid enough to be working and have bought a house in the first place.
> I think, overall, FG have done a good job. It's easy to say we should have burned the bond holders, but the consensus is that the net cost of "bailing out the banks" is around 45bn. A nice wedge to be sure, but this only represents 25% of our national debt....



Except that FG promised to abolish USC, and promised to make bondholders share in the losses and were elected on that basis. Whatever job they did, and I don't think they did a good one (see Irish Water), it was not the job they said they would do. So I'm not sure what I'd be voting for if I voted for them again.

I don't approve of that, I think it is fundamentally bad for democracy. Furthermore, they have made so many needless mistakes and own goals (appointments to state boards and the seanad etc) they have not done enough to deserve re-election in my view which is why I won't be voting for them again.
Together FG and Labour look set to lose 20% out of the total electorate - 20% who voted for them last time out. 
The Conservative\LibDem coalition who also had to make tough economic decisions, didn't take that kind of damage; although the Lib Dems were hit with seat losses and the Conservatives were helped by having an unimpressive main opposition leader. By contrast I think most commentators have said that Michael Martin was the most impressive performer in the leader debates.


----------



## Leo (25 Feb 2016)

Clonback said:


> An extract from a letter to the Indo.
> "FG have presided over beating after beating for the Irish citizen at the hands of Banks,foreign and domestic,and never lifted a finger to protect us.As international rates plummeted,Irish Banks charged--and continue to charge --gouging rates from variable interest rate holders and small businesses."
> 
> Vote FG out on Friday



I'd never make a decision on something as trivial as breakfast let alone government based on a letter to one of the papers.


----------



## so-crates (25 Feb 2016)

I have to agree with Cervelo. Your premise is flawed. FG/Lab have done a good job under very difficult circumstances and have proven to be sensible and measured, taking unpopular steps for the good of the country instead of playing the populist card. FF on the other hand have a history of crashing Ireland, in the 1930's they decimated the country in the prosecution of a pointless "Ecomonic "War"" - out of that they basically set up a vulture fund by buying up the remaining debt of Irish farmers to the British Crown (debt accrued purchasing the land they farmed financed by very long term low cost loans provided by the goverment - as an example... Ashbourne: 1885 - £5m - *4%*- 49 years, further acts with larger fund values followed in 1887, 1890, 1903 & 1909). All for the princely sum of £10m. Dev's vulture fund continued to receive payments from farmers across the country well into the 1960's. Having destroyed the farmer's access to market with their pointless war they then proceeded to extract their pound(s) of flesh from them for the next 20 years. The state pocketed the write-down. In 1977, a significant watershed in FF control ,  they promised the sun, the moon and the stars and I think managed to actually deliver it - but only at enormous cost to us (anyone fancy the 12% + mortgage rates?). Their most recent debacle has not left my memory - though many seem to be in a forgive and forget mood. We've a bad habit of kicking them out when they hurt us and re-electing them again later when they make puppy eyes and say "sorry". We've given them too many chances - we need to stop behaving like victims.

And if I am in no mood to vote FF, why would I ever consider voting for their scary older brother? The one with guns and a criminal record? The pseudo-socialists espousing isolationism? We deserve better than revisiting the moribund economy Dev fostered with similar notions.

As for the loony left, the Anti-Reality Alliance and the Politics Before People offer nothing. Leaving aside the obvious example of what a good job Syriza did in crashing the Greeks out of growth and the bailout exit .... The Anti-Reality Alliance want to institute a "mass party for the 99%" - so what they are promising is a single-party state. Amazing how many times those particular philosophies have proved disastrous in other countries. Every single example of a socialist state that has ever occurred in history ends up a big man patronage state whereby the aggrandisement of the new king takes paramount importance. Who needs that sort of crap?


----------



## odyssey06 (25 Feb 2016)

so-crates said:


> I have to agree with Cervelo. Your premise is flawed. FG/Lab have done a good job under very difficult circumstances and have proven to be sensible and measured, taking unpopular steps for the good of the country instead of playing the populist card. FF on the other hand...



I agree with almost everything in your post *after *the ellipsis... But I can't look at Irish Water and see anything about it that remotely qualifies as 'good job', 'sensible' or 'measured'. Ditto for the pension levy.

FG may (or may not be) the least worst of the main parties, and that could be a reason to vote for them - but that's a different argument to saying that the reason to vote for them is because they did a good job. Purely judged on what they did in office, I couldn't vote them back in.

ps actually I'm voting Renua #1 and Independent Alliance #2.


----------



## Firefly (25 Feb 2016)

@so-crates - excellent post


----------



## cremeegg (25 Feb 2016)

odyssey06 said:


> I'm not in any doubt that FG mugged ordinary Irish citizens - interest rates, water charges, pension levy, not delivering on USC promises - rather than face down Europe over banks, burning bondholders etc etc.



What you say is true, but it could have been much worse, they could have tried and failed to face down the ECB and bondholders. Like Greece.



odyssey06 said:


> Even regardless of the fact that introducing water charges was part of the IMF deal, the absolute omnishambles of its introduction is entirely down to the coalition. No government that made such a mess of that can be reliably expected to do anything to sort out health, crime etc



I agree with this analysis as well. But it makes me glad that the govt didn't try to "face down Europe" imagine the mess they could have made of that. They couldn't even introduce Irish Water much less "face down Europe"


----------



## Cervelo (25 Feb 2016)

I see we have a "Castlebar Whinger"


----------



## Purple (25 Feb 2016)

Clonback said:


> An extract from a letter to the Indo.
> "FG have presided over beating after beating for the Irish citizen at the hands of Banks,foreign and domestic,and never lifted a finger to protect us.As international rates plummeted,Irish Banks charged--and continue to charge --gouging rates from variable interest rate holders and small businesses."
> 
> Vote FG out on Friday


If anyone was mugged it was high earners and people with private pensions.
We are now closer to a communist state than at any time in our history. Equality now means equality of outcomes; if you work hard the state takes over half your income. If you never work the state gives you all of your income. People who work for 40 years and lose their job get the same, or more likely less, than people who have never worked. There is no individual responsibility and our new "rights based  society" means that nobody has a duty to work and contribute to society if they don't want to but if they choose to do so they will be punished relative to how  hard they work.
The options are to maintain this system or make it even worse. I hope my children emigrate.


----------



## so-crates (25 Feb 2016)

odyssey06 said:


> I agree with almost everything in your post *after *the ellipsis... But I can't look at Irish Water and see anything about it that remotely qualifies as 'good job', 'sensible' or 'measured'. Ditto for the pension levy.
> 
> FG may (or may not be) the least worst of the main parties, and that could be a reason to vote for them - but that's a different argument to saying that the reason to vote for them is because they did a good job. Purely judged on what they did in office, I couldn't vote them back in.
> 
> ps actually I'm voting Renua #1 and Independent Alliance #2.



Aside from the sustained negative media campaign Irish Water have been subjected to what exactly do you know about them? My only gripe with them is something that was out of their control - the charges should be usage based. Other than that, when you look at what they have actually done (as opposed to reading what the newspapers choose to report) they have a good track record. Boil water notices have been minimised or eliminated in several areas, especially Roscommon. New waste water treatment facilities are being opened up across the country at a previously unachievable rate - with the latest industry technology and they have actually started to address the severe issues of severe constraint in the Dublin water supply. None of which is allowed more than a page 5 in newspapers. Getting bogged down in an agenda set by vociferous, loony left politicos and using Irish Water as a kicking target is not sensible.


----------



## Purple (25 Feb 2016)

I agree on Irish Water. So far they have done a good job. It's not their fault they were stuffed with thousands of staff that they didn't want or need or that the environmentally sound idea of a basic free water allowance with a usage based charge on top of that has been changed to a tax which serves no environmental purpose.


----------



## odyssey06 (25 Feb 2016)

Purple said:


> I agree on Irish Water. So far they have done a good job. It's not their fault they were stuffed with thousands of staff that they didn't want or need or that the environmentally sound idea of a basic free water allowance with a usage based charge on top of that has been changed to a tax which serves no environmental purpose.



But that's exactly what I mean, that's how the Coalition setup Irish Water. When I look at Irish Water, that's what I see.


----------



## Purple (25 Feb 2016)

odyssey06 said:


> But that's exactly what I mean, that's how the Coalition setup Irish Water. When I look at Irish Water, that's what I see.


So they are overstaffed, just like every other semi-state, what did you expect?
Unlike many other semi-states they are doing a good job.


----------



## odyssey06 (25 Feb 2016)

Purple said:


> So they are overstaffed, just like every other semi-state, what did you expect?
> Unlike many other semi-states they are doing a good job.



It *was* setup and *is* funded with about the maximum deliberate pain inflicted on ordinary Irish people... It failed the EU capitalization test which is what the whole scam with the back of an envelope charges was about from the get go.
I wasn't aware that the previous bodies (in Dublin at least) responsible for water were doing a bad job, except for the obvious 40% lost through dodgy pipes. And we didn't need irish water and meters outside every home to tackle that, especially not an Irish water that fails the EU test.


----------



## Jazz01 (25 Feb 2016)

> So they are overstaffed, just like every other semi-state, what did you expect



This was a BRAND new set up, clean slate so to speak. It was an opportunity to exceed expectations of the general population. A "statement enterprise" by the government to say "although we are stuck with setting up Irish water, lets do the best job we can"

They could have redefined what a "state body" could be / should be. Yet, from the outset they stumbled along,  shooting themselves in the foot, and continue to stumble, surprised they have any toes left to shoot!


----------



## so-crates (25 Feb 2016)

What pain exactly? I pay considerably more to have electricity supplied to my house by Electricity Ireland (even though there is no need for treatment of "waste" electricity , it should cost half of what my water services cost!). It failed the EU capitalisation tests because to take the sting out of the protests AK performed a volte face. Prior to the establishment of IW the government did ask what the preferred method of payment should be and the general response was usage based. It was only when faced with the reality of paying that the rows erupted.
Water supply and treatment services across the country were at the mercy of individual town and county councils and corporations. Large scale cross-boundary projects were virtually impossible and a political minefield. Even trying to do projects within a fiefdom were at the mercy of whichever (probably FF) councillor could be bought. The quality of service varied enormously across the country and was entirely dependent on the local fiefdom. Water services were invisible to most people (the one positive I can take from the nasty anti-water campaign is it has put water services on the agenda like nothing else, it has made people conscious of water - even if it was in the worst possible way). As for Dublin, it has experienced a considerable growth with no new supplies coming on line, it has been operating pretty close to capacity for years. Extending and supporting Dublin's supply was always going to need cross boundary work. That has finally become possible.
IW has had to take on more people than it needed, however - in case you missed the headline that made me smile - a cull is coming. Having expended an enormous amount of spittle giving out about IW being too large, the same politicos recently started whinging (yes I AM using that word) about potential lay-offs in Irish Water. Those were always necessary, what we do not want is another HSE, overloaded with people who should have rightly been made redundant in the "rationalisation" that the set up of the HSE was supposed to provide. We did need meters. Otherwise usage based charging was not going to be an option. We need to see what it is we are using and start becoming properly aware of our precious water supply and stop taking for granted the process that converts rain into a potable supply piped directly to your house and business.


----------



## so-crates (25 Feb 2016)

Jazz01 said:


> This was a BRAND new set up, clean slate so to speak. It was an opportunity to exceed expectations of the general population. A "statement enterprise" by the government to say "although we are stuck with setting up Irish water, lets do the best job we can"
> 
> They could have redefined what a "state body" could be / should be. Yet, from the outset they stumbled along,  shooting themselves in the foot, and continue to stumble, surprised they have any toes left to shoot!


<sigh> It was never going to be a clean slate. The services were already in existence and people employed across the country running them. There was ALWAYS going to be a staff transfer to deal with and rationalisation to occur.

The optics are really the issue here. A very successful, concerted and nasty campaign has been waged by the same people who tried to get a revolution started on the back of other measures (e.g. local property tax). This one succeeded where the others failed because water charges affected a new cohort of people who generally never have to pay for anything. They had no special investment in property tax, pension levies, USC or the vast majority of the austerity measures that were imposed but they were facing paying water charges.


----------



## orka (25 Feb 2016)

Purple said:


> If anyone was mugged it was high earners and people with private pensions.
> We are now closer to a communist state than at any time in our history. Equality now means equality of outcomes; if you work hard the state takes over half your income. If you never work the state gives you all of your income. People who work for 40 years and lose their job get the same, or more likely less, than people who have never worked. There is no individual responsibility and our new "rights based  society" means that nobody has a duty to work and contribute to society if they don't want to but if they choose to do so they will be punished relative to how  hard they work.
> The options are to maintain this system or make it even worse. I hope my children emigrate.


Your post actually made me sad Purple as it is so true.  I'm a high earner with a private pension and I feel monumentally screwed over.  It seems that using the high earners in the nations time of need was a one-way release valve.  High earners were first hit (which I was okay with at the time) but there seems to be no question of reversing any of the hit as this would be seen now as enriching 'the rich' and 'regressive'.

No party or candidate seems to care about those who contribute most - there aren't enough votes to be worthwhile so we'll just continue being used as an ATM.  The Irish Times have a 'match your views to a candidate' Q&A for each constituency and my views weren't considered a match to any of them - the closest I got was a 36% match.

For me, voting will mean starting with the least bad option and working down from there.


----------



## ivannomonet (25 Feb 2016)

orka said:


> For me, voting will mean starting with the least bad option and working down from there.



I think this is the only option open to people with full-time employment.... :-(


----------



## odyssey06 (25 Feb 2016)

so-crates said:


> We did need meters. Otherwise usage based charging was not going to be an option. We need to see what it is we are using and start becoming properly aware of our precious water supply and stop taking for granted the process that converts rain into a potable supply piped directly to your house and business.



Amount of reduction in UK water use due to metered usage = 10%
Amount of loss in water supply in Ireland due to leaking pipes = 40% (which has been going on for decades).
I'm not sure who the "we" is in the above, but the above figures suggest metered residential usage is not essential to proper use of water supply.

Water charges were only introduced to pay back the banks, and they are paid for by the Irish people. Any other purpose was nowhere in the minds of the main players who signed off on it.

Anyhow, this is descending into another Irish Water debate. If I return to the original comment about FG mugging the middle class and never touching the banks, I am in no doubt that this is true. They did mug the middle class (and other classes). They never touched the banks. They were elected on a platform which promised the opposite. The prosecution rests. Guilty as charged.


----------



## Cervelo (25 Feb 2016)

I would have said water charges were introduced to fix the broken system once and for all


----------



## noproblem (25 Feb 2016)

A lot of people saying it was part of the Troika deal to bring in water charges, but was it? Anyone got a detailed link showing it as such?


----------



## so-crates (25 Feb 2016)

Exactly what makes you think that metering is only about reduction in usage?

Water charges were not "introduced to pay back the banks". We didn't "pay back" the banks. We yanked them out of a gaping hole that they had fallen into. And water charges alone would be a very, very, very, very, very long time managing to put a filling in that particular cavity. Water charging was included in the agreement concluded with the Troika because it was one of the REALLY obvious gaps they identified. Something that should have been in place a long time ago but was never politically expedient for FF to implement. We had a tax system that was insufficiently broad and was too dependent on property transactions.

I can't agree you have presented any tenable case. if you are the prosecution you are hardly fit to present in any court. Your entire case is based on the fact that you are in no doubt it is true - hardly a convincing argument. "It's true cos I say so"

FF agreed the bailout, FG/Lab largely implemented it. Protection for the vulnerable and the lowest waged was one of the things Labour in particular endeavoured to ensure. The burden of paying the cost of austerity (despite what the loony left would assert) fell largely on your so-called "middle class". That does not mean they were "mugged" - a particularly emotive word frankly. We all form the state, those of us in a position to pay were largely "middle-class". In large part, by September 2010 the banks were close to (or already) insolvent. *What that means is that they did not have money*. There was ZERO point in attempting to extract money from them. By nationalising them and keeping them running we managed to have a country that didn't descend into widespread anarchy (much to the chagrin of the Anti-Reality Alliance - they'd have loved a nice revolution handed to them on a platter). When they are sold off the state will be in a position to recoup at least some of that. In the meantime, the banks have actually been paying back monies the government provided to back them.

it is silly and ill-informed to assert they never touched the banks. After all, some have been destroyed (Anglo), most others were nationalised (AIB) and even the one that wasn't nationalised had a large lump taken on by the state (BOI). *All of the banks were touched*. (Some might say many of the bankers had probably been touched in the head for years but that is a different tale). But there was no pot of gold there for any government to draw on. And even if there was - that pot of gold would have still been the middle class who actually use the banking system.

You have not proven anything. Get yourself some facts first.


----------



## Purple (25 Feb 2016)

so-crates said:


> Exactly what makes you think that metering is only about reduction in usage?
> 
> Water charges were not "introduced to pay back the banks". We didn't "pay back" the banks. We yanked them out of a gaping hole that they had fallen into. And water charges alone would be a very, very, very, very, very long time managing to put a filling in that particular cavity. Water charging was included in the agreement concluded with the Troika because it was one of the REALLY obvious gaps they identified. Something that should have been in place a long time ago but was never politically expedient for FF to implement. We had a tax system that was insufficiently broad and was too dependent on property transactions.
> 
> ...


Good post and I agree but with the clarification that the people who shouldered the largest burden and were hit most, were high earners. Not the so-called squeezed middle, most of whom are net recipients from the state. That's as it should be but the notion that removing that disproportionate emergency burden would somehow be unjust is nonsense. The state should never take more than half of anyone's income in tax, no matter how much they earn.


----------



## Delboy (25 Feb 2016)

Jazz01 said:


> This was a BRAND new set up, clean slate so to speak. It was an opportunity to exceed expectations of the general population. A "statement enterprise" by the government to say "although we are stuck with setting up Irish water, lets do the best job we can"
> 
> They could have redefined what a "state body" could be / should be. Yet, from the outset they stumbled along,  shooting themselves in the foot, and continue to stumble, surprised they have any toes left to shoot!


How could they start with a clean slate when Unions insisted all water staff in the Co Co's had to be transferred (probably paid 'relocation money' as well even if they didn't physically move work locations) no matter whather they were needed or not. And if I was a Co Co Manager I would have been moving my worst and most troublesome staff into the water section for at least a year before the transfer was due to take place.
Thats how the PS/CS works....Managers can't manage and everything is a compromise with the Unions. The Customer comes a distant second


----------



## so-crates (25 Feb 2016)

Purple said:


> Good post and I agree but with the clarification that the people who shouldered the largest burden and were hit most, were high earners. Not the so-called squeezed middle, most of whom are net recipients from the state. That's as it should be but the notion that removing that disproportionate emergency burden would somehow be unjust is nonsense. The state should never take more than half of anyone's income in tax, no matter how much they earn.



I do take your point, and yes, absolutely, the more you earned the more you were milked. Whatever about the tax burden, my pension fund is still smarting from the cash grab and probably will always bear the scar - that is probably the bit I like the least. However, I would point out that "middle class" encompasses more than middle earners  I would agree that handing over 50% of your salary should never be endured, I would argue though that as a short term measure it was warranted - operative word though "short".


----------



## Firefly (25 Feb 2016)

so-crates said:


> Water charges were not "introduced to pay back the banks". We didn't "pay back" the banks. We yanked them out of a gaping hole that they had fallen into.



Exactly. And anyway, weren't the banks re-capitalised before water charges were brought in?



so-crates said:


> When they are sold off the state will be in a position to recoup at least some of that. In the meantime, the banks have actually been paying back monies the government provided to back them.


Some of the money has been paid back, in fact, BOI are in the clear completely. What I would like to know is where did this money go - was it used to pay down the debt that was borrowed for it or did it end up somewhere else?
[/QUOTE]


----------



## so-crates (25 Feb 2016)

They were recapitalised before the charges came in. LONG before the charges came in!.

It is a good question - I don't know the answer. I would assume it went into the pot for the government to spend on several things, including bailout payback.


----------



## Jazz01 (25 Feb 2016)

> Unions insisted all water staff in the Co Co's had to be transferred



I agree that unions got their oar in BUT this was still a missed opportunity for the government. It seemed like a poison chalice to them, no one wanting it, all hoping it would just go away.

It was given to Bord Gais Éireann to set up but still had to spend 10s of millions on "consultants", then the charges fiasco, what a unit of water would cost. It was mis-managed from the start. As they did u-turn after u-turn in relation to charges it just made those opposed to it more reason to continue protest against it & gain momentum.

We need an "Irish Water" to run the water network in this country - there is no doubting that, but it's been a fiasco from the start - a reflection on the governments failings... and then there's the "Health System Reform"...


----------



## Purple (25 Feb 2016)

There are two classes in Ireland;

The working class; those who derive their income from their labour or from a pension or other income which they funded with prior earned income (e.g. pensioners). Levels of income vary greatly within this class.
The dependency class; those who derive their income from the department of Social Welfare (I'm not calling it social protection as it sounds too Orwellian). Levels of income also vary greatly within this class as it includes the majority of the black economy.


----------



## Purple (25 Feb 2016)

Jazz01 said:


> I agree that unions got their oar in BUT this was still a missed opportunity for the government.


 How so? The same opportunistic clowns like Ruth Cop-whinger and Paul Murphy would have been out protesting about that. The same morally bankrupt opportunist supreme Brendan Ogle who gives out about Irish Water was happy to have 3000 unnecessary staff in the County Councils. Even if their average pay and cost of employment was only €40'000 per person per year that's still €120'000'000. How many A&E's would that sort out  or primary care centers would it build? Hypocrites, utter hypocrites.


----------



## so-crates (25 Feb 2016)

Jazz01 said:


> I agree that unions got their oar in BUT this was still a missed opportunity for the government. It seemed like a poison chalice to them, no one wanting it, all hoping it would just go away.
> 
> It was given to Bord Gais Éireann to set up but still had to spend 10s of millions on "consultants", then the charges fiasco, what a unit of water would cost. It was mis-managed from the start. As they did u-turn after u-turn in relation to charges it just made those opposed to it more reason to continue protest against it & gain momentum.
> 
> We need an "Irish Water" to run the water network in this country - there is no doubting that, but it's been a fiasco from the start - a reflection on the governments failings... and then there's the "Health System Reform"...



Ah yes, the old dig at consultants. Nothing gets the outrage flowing like a good dig at consultants costing millions. Of course Bord Gáis brought in consultants to assist in the set up - Bord Gáis are not in the business of setting up businesses and they were setting up a company to do a task that was not quite in Bord Gáis experience. Consultants are very frequently called in in situations like that to provide short-term manpower and/or expertise in a particular area. The advantage to the company is they don't have to identify and directly employ a team of people with a focus and/or an expertise not required in the long term. It is cheaper in the long run. At least until apoplectic lefties get twisty knickers thinking about it.


----------



## Purple (25 Feb 2016)

I work in a small business. If we are implementing a new process or technology we employ people to help and to train us to operate it. These people can be called consultants. It's no different to a Carpenter employing a Plasterer to plaster a partition wall he just built.


----------



## so-crates (25 Feb 2016)

noproblem said:


> A lot of people saying it was part of the Troika deal to bring in water charges, but was it? Anyone got a detailed link showing it as such?



This will probably help...
http://www.thejournal.ie/ge16-fact-check-election-2016-water-charges-irish-water-2622813-Feb2016/


----------



## dereko1969 (26 Feb 2016)

Delboy said:


> How could they start with a clean slate when Unions insisted all water staff in the Co Co's had to be transferred (probably paid 'relocation money' as well even if they didn't physically move work locations) no matter whather they were needed or not. And if I was a Co Co Manager I would have been moving my worst and most troublesome staff into the water section for at least a year before the transfer was due to take place.
> Thats how the PS/CS works....Managers can't manage and everything is a compromise with the Unions. The Customer comes a distant second


Sorry but have you not heard of TUPE? Bit childish to blame the PS/CS for that.


----------



## Purple (26 Feb 2016)

dereko1969 said:


> Sorry but have you not heard of TUPE? Bit childish to blame the PS/CS for that.


Why were the employees of one body transferred into a new body which did not need them. TUPE kicks in when they are transferred and that's right and proper. The question is why were they transferred in the first place?


----------



## T McGibney (26 Feb 2016)

They were transferred as the civil & public service can't countenance the prospect of compulsory redundancies for superfluous staff.


----------



## Purple (26 Feb 2016)

T McGibney said:


> They were transferred as the civil & public service can't countenance the prospect of compulsory redundancies for superfluous staff.


Exactly. Nothing to do with TUPE. That transfer costs the state €120 million a year in totally wasted money. Irish Water has served as a great example of why labour inflexibility costs so much money.


----------



## Deiseblue (26 Feb 2016)

T McGibney said:


> They were transferred as the civil & public service can't countenance the prospect of compulsory redundancies for superfluous staff.


 
Nor indeed could the Government as employers who vetoed compulsory redundancies in order to get the Croke Park Agreement over the line , the Unions didn't even have to argue the point.


----------



## Purple (26 Feb 2016)

Deiseblue said:


> Nor indeed could the Government as employers who vetoed compulsory redundancies in order to get the Croke Park Agreement over the line , the Unions didn't even have to argue the point.


Good point. It shows a systemic failing in how we run our country and we all suffer as a result.
If this is indicative of practice in the state sector one can only presume that the problem is the same in an employer such as the HSE and they employ one in every 20 people who work in this country.


----------



## 44brendan (26 Feb 2016)

with apologies to those who have already read this one. I think it deserves a new dust off!!
http://www.snopes.com/business/taxes/howtaxes.asp


----------



## Purple (27 Feb 2016)

44brendan said:


> with apologies to those who have already read this one. I think it deserves a new dust off!!
> http://www.snopes.com/business/taxes/howtaxes.asp


Copy cat


----------



## Clonback (27 Feb 2016)

The title of this post is now fact.


----------



## odyssey06 (27 Feb 2016)

2/3 Labour voters and 1/3 FG voters have deserted them since 2011. That's some amount of the electorate to lose.


----------



## Cervelo (28 Feb 2016)

I'm sorry to say but I've just woken up to an Ireland I just don't recognise or understand


----------



## Conan (28 Feb 2016)

For half the population it looks like "protest" has become "policy". Looking at most of the Independents and Looney Left I suspect most of them could not even agree on what day of the week it is!
Despite what they say, at least SF did not do as well as they expected. Still transfer toxic for most people.
So I can only hope for FG/ FF to act in the "national interest" but I cannot see the likes of O'Cuiv burying his Civil War politics. Otherwise it's another election.


----------



## jim (28 Feb 2016)

Conan the people have spoken you may not like it but thats the beauty of a democracy. We have to accept it and hopefully a gove can be formed.


----------



## Purple (28 Feb 2016)

Im reminded of the words of Spike Milligan; "eventually the Don't Know's will get in."


----------



## Purple (28 Feb 2016)

Cervelo said:


> I'm sorry to say but I've just woken up to an Ireland I just don't recognise or understand


I'm fearful for my future and my children's future. If I was in my 20's I'd emigrate.


----------



## Mr Holmes (28 Feb 2016)

Yes, Fine Gaels astonishing inaction on the plight of 300,000 home owners that are being abused by the banks with regard to variable mortgage interest rates has come home to bite them. The middle class of this Country are not stupid and have spoken with their vote.

Take a cursery look at the female candidates FG put forward in Election2016

Anne Marie Dermody Solicitor

Thomasina Connell Solicitor

Ciara McPhilips Solicitor

Josephina Madigan Solicitor

Personally, I have no problem with solicitors, female or otherwise, but really, is Fine Gael the party to take on the banks ? I think not. "The dog who bites the hand that feeds it, regularly goes hungry."

Fine Fail would do well to take notice ! 300,000 homeowners equates to 500,000 voters approx.


----------



## Cervelo (28 Feb 2016)

I don't think its any governments role to tackle the banks over their interest rates, I do agree that they are overcharging the variable customers but that's a business decision based in my opinion on the trackers and the general profit line.


----------



## Agent 47 (28 Feb 2016)

One wonders if the government had dropped the water charges what the result would have been. No water protests, less legs for AAA to stand on, FG & Labour really did not see the wood for the trees and were in the end after just 5 years so out of touch with the way the electorate felt.


----------



## jim (28 Feb 2016)

Purple you could always emigrate now if your that upset with the state of things. Stop whinging and do something productive.


----------



## Mr Holmes (28 Feb 2016)

Cervelo said:


> I don't think its any governments role to tackle the banks over their interest rates, I do agree that they are overcharging the variable customers but that's a business decision based in my opinion on the trackers and the general profit line.



Variable mortgage interest rates cannot be increase solely to increase the profits of a bank as this is not a valid reason for raising same. Interest rates are usually increased pro rata to offset any increase in the cost of funds ( short term and long term ) that banks have to pay in the money market.


----------



## Dermot (28 Feb 2016)

jim said:


> Purple you could always emigrate now if your that upset with the state of things. Stop whinging and do something productive.



And why should someone like Purple who is doing something productive emigrate while paying their way and no burden to the country leave.

I would think that someone who has not ever done something productive and who "whinge" that there should be more entitlements for them would be the first that you would be advocating this solution to jim


----------



## so-crates (28 Feb 2016)

The result of the election is dreadful. Too many people appear to think that rectification of the ENORMOUS debacle that FF led us into should have happened lickety-split with no burden on them. So they vote out FG/Lab because they don't like the necessary medicine. Short-sighted to say the least.


----------



## so-crates (28 Feb 2016)

jim said:


> By "do something productive" i dont mean work i mean contribute productively to the forum, or to the country instead of bloody whingin.



Ahhh, so work is not productive? Work doesn't contribute to the country? Purple does have a right to his opinion and frankly he has a point. The current Dáil should be an interesting beast - not even Gerry "I don't know what a tracker mortgage is" Adams has any faith in its longevity. We need stability not fecking around with half-baked populist promises from FF (extend TRS again?) and nasty shenanigans from SF.



jim said:


> Everyone should respect the result of the election whether or not your happy with it and please dont insult the intelligence of the electorate.



We are all entitled to call it into question. None of us are fomenting rebellion and advocating ignoring the rule of law or taking up arms against the state (except perhaps SF). As for the intelligence of the electorate - there is little of that in evidence in the selection of this Dáil - but leaving aside that, whoever thought the mob was intelligent? I am a big fan of universal suffrage, I just regret that that has to include people who think that the end of their own nose is the best place ever.


----------



## Purple (28 Feb 2016)

jim said:


> Purple you could always emigrate now if your that upset with the state of things. Stop whinging and do something productive.


I've too many commitments and family reasons to go. My kids might miss me a little too. 
By the way, how do you know what I do outside work to contribute to society? This forum is good and fun and informative but it's the Internet, not real life. The social media generation doesn't seem to realise the difference.


----------



## Cervelo (29 Feb 2016)

so-crates said:


> Ahhh, so work is not productive? Work doesn't contribute to the country? Purple does have a right to his opinion and frankly he has a point. The current Dáil should be an interesting beast - not even Gerry "I don't know what a tracker mortgage is" Adams has any faith in its longevity. We need stability not fecking around with half-baked populist promises from FF (extend TRS again?) and nasty shenanigans from SF.
> 
> 
> 
> We are all entitled to call it into question. None of us are fomenting rebellion and advocating ignoring the rule of law or taking up arms against the state (except perhaps SF). As for the intelligence of the electorate - there is little of that in evidence in the selection of this Dáil - but leaving aside that, whoever thought the mob was intelligent? I am a big fan of universal suffrage, I just regret that that has to include people who think that the end of their own nose is the best place ever.



For some reason I cant "Like" posts here so instead I'll say Hear, Hear.


----------



## Mr Holmes (29 Feb 2016)

so-crates said:


> As for the intelligence of the electorate - there is little of that in evidence in the selection of this Dáil - but leaving aside that, whoever thought the mob was intelligent? .


So-crates I think that the process is called democracy, where each individual is allowed to vote, if a lot of citizens vote one way you seem to be calling them a mob, maybe you should think about moving to China, where you can exercise your vote more constructively, provided you vote for the only show in town, the communist party.


----------



## Delboy (29 Feb 2016)

The re-emergence of FF is staggering. I expected some sort of bounce for them but this is GUBU.


----------



## Mr Holmes (29 Feb 2016)

Delboy said:


> The re-emergence of FF is staggering. I expected some sort of bounce for them but this is GUBU.


Yes, the last Government can definitely be accused of sitting on their hands ( smugly)


----------



## Mr Holmes (29 Feb 2016)

Delboy said:


> The re-emergence of FF is staggering. I expected some sort of bounce for them but this is GUBU.


Yes, the last Government can definitely be accused of sitting on their hands ( smugly)


----------



## Purple (29 Feb 2016)

Mr Holmes said:


> So-crates I think that the process is called democracy, where each individual is allowed to vote, if a lot of citizens vote one way you seem to be calling them a mob, maybe you should think about moving to China, where you can exercise your vote more constructively, provided you vote for the only show in town, the communist party.


You are not disagreeing with So-crates then, just affirming that the mob gets a vote. 
If the AAA-PBP looneys get their way we won't have to move to China, but we'll get 1970's China, not the current version.


----------



## Purple (29 Feb 2016)

Delboy said:


> The re-emergence of FF is staggering. I expected some sort of bounce for them but this is GUBU.


People can only select from what's on offer. "None of the above" doesn't count.


----------



## Cervelo (29 Feb 2016)

Mr Holmes said:


> Yes, the last Government can definitely be accused of sitting on their hands ( smugly)


if you honestly think that then I would call into question the intelligence of the vote


----------



## odyssey06 (29 Feb 2016)

Couldn't agree more about the smugness... The arrogance of the coalition was boundless... so many needless political own goals. Roscommon hospital with Kenny caught lying, stroke politics with John McNulty's state board appointment setting him up for the Seanad, the botched Seanad referendum, the ridiculous one about voting age, the Alan Shatter \ Garda Commissioner debacle... and they are just the ones off the top of my head.

I can't say I agree with all the decisions the electorate made, but certainly they've seen 5 years of FG\Labour and voted accordingly and I can't fault their desertion of the coalition.


----------



## so-crates (29 Feb 2016)

Mr Holmes said:


> So-crates I think that the process is called democracy, where each individual is allowed to vote, if a lot of citizens vote one way you seem to be calling them a mob, maybe you should think about moving to China, where you can exercise your vote more constructively, provided you vote for the only show in town, the communist party.



As I've already stated I'd never swap universal suffrage for a "benign" dictatorship of any description (such as AAA's election promise -read the literature-  of founding "a party for the 99%"). But a mob is a mob and while it can make decisions it is in no way guaranteed that the outcome of asking everyone the same question is either a unified answer, a sensible answer or an intelligent answer.

Recent election results are an obvious example. No matter how much they've been beaten up by FF over the last century, the forgive-and-forget FF supporters are back backing them in droves a mere five years after the last thrashing at FF's hands. Then there are those who've suddenly discovered this radical "new" politics (that has failed miserably and repeatedly across the world for the last 100+ years)... Where's the intelligence in that?


----------



## Mr Holmes (29 Feb 2016)

Purple said:


> You are not disagreeing with So-crates then, just affirming that the mob gets a vote.
> If the AAA-PBP looneys get their way we won't have to move to China, but we'll get 1970's China, not the current version.


Socrates the philosopher was not a big fan of democracy, I am. I find it amusing to see politicians pander to the public with auction and parish pump politics. Same old, same old. Meanwhile, the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.


----------



## Purple (29 Feb 2016)

Mr Holmes said:


> Socrates the philosopher was not a big fan of democracy, I am. I find it amusing to see politicians pander to the public with auction and parish pump politics. Same old, same old.


I find it amusing to see the public elect politicians who pander to them with auction and parish pump politics. The public have the option of electing TD's to act in the national interest but consistently opt for the gombeens. We get the politicians we deserve.


----------



## Mr Holmes (29 Feb 2016)

Purple said:


> I find it amusing to see the public elect politicians who pander to them with auction and parish pump politics. The public have the option of electing TD's to act in the national interest but consistently opt for the gombeens. We get the politicians we deserve.


National interest or their own personal interest, I think a lot of politicians get this one mixed up.


----------



## Gerry Canning (29 Feb 2016)

The Post is FG .1.mugged middle class and 2. never touched the Banks.

1. By and large the middle class (who I take to be still in reasonable employment) were inconvenienced, not mugged.
I now see them arising ! with their 161 cars , and fair dues to them.
2. No doubt the Banks were not touched, and it might be ,it had to be that way ?

I would not be so despairing of our TD,s
Maybe FF has learned ,eg, in this Dial they were largely reasonable.
Maybe FG will now learn to listen to the mood of the electorate and realise the electorate are more than an economy.
Maybe all the Independent ie the Rest ,will realise that objections and anger ,whilst getting you elected, is not a good policy and builds no houses !.

I think result is a fair reflection on what our Td,s have to agree on,

 I think they will .


----------



## Ceist Beag (29 Feb 2016)

All I see from this election is that it is becoming increasingly harder to govern as the gap between the expectation of the people and the reality of the situation we are in seems to be widening. As one pundit put it yesterday, it is ironic that the only people who are really keen on a FF-FG coalition here are the left parties! SF, AAA, PBP all know damn well that their policies don't stack up if actually faced with implementing them so they have no intention of going into government. Much easier to remain in opposition and hammer whoever next takes on the task of trying to govern. We lost a high number of TDs in this election who took responsibility in the last term and who tried to tackle the mess they inherited. Sure they made mistakes along the way but at least they had the courage to take it on. They have now been replaced in part by more individuals who have no intention of taking on the responsibility of governing in the national interest so from my point of view this has been a very disappointing election. Sure the people have spoken but sure there are a lot of people talking out of their hole in this country...


----------



## Mr Holmes (29 Feb 2016)

Ceist Beag said:


> All I see from this election is that it is becoming increasingly harder to govern as the gap between the expectation of the people and the reality of the situation we are in seems to be widening. As one pundit put it yesterday, it is ironic that the only people who are really keen on a FF-FG coalition here are the left parties! SF, AAA, PBP all know damn well that their policies don't stack up if actually faced with implementing them so they have no intention of going into government. Much easier to remain in opposition and hammer whoever next takes on the task of trying to govern. We lost a high number of TDs in this election who took responsibility in the last term and who tried to tackle the mess they inherited. Sure they made mistakes along the way but at least they had the courage to take it on. They have now been replaced in part by more individuals who have no intention of taking on the responsibility of governing in the national interest so from my point of view this has been a very disappointing election. Sure the people have spoken but sure there are a lot of people talking out of their hole in this country...


Your last sentence definitely includes politicians, let's see do they learn this time round.


----------



## odyssey06 (29 Feb 2016)

The thought occurs... "How many Healy Raes does it take to fix a pothole" ?

But maybe voting for them is a logical response to a broken system where you have to get your local TD into play to sort out issues that (a) shouldn't need any political involvement to get done and should be done as a matter of course or (b) local councillors don't seem to be able to get moving.
Until we have a system that can be managed directly between the public, local government and councillors, we're going to see strong independents like this.


----------



## Purple (29 Feb 2016)

odyssey06 said:


> The thought occurs... "How many Healy Raes does it take to fix a pothole" ?
> 
> But maybe voting for them is a logical response to a broken system where you have to get your local TD into play to sort out issues that (a) shouldn't need any political involvement to get done and should be done as a matter of course or (b) local councillors don't seem to be able to get moving.
> Until we have a system that can be managed directly between the public, local government and councillors, we're going to see strong independents like this.


Fair Points.


----------



## Dermot (1 Mar 2016)

I am not in the Multi millionaire class but I am quite tired listening to certain parties and Independents coming out with slogans of "tax the rich" and the "rich getting richer" and the "poor getting poorer" and by taxing all the billionaires in this country that we can create Utopia.
The reality I would think is a lot different.
Are there any people in this country with assets worth a billion in the country.
How many of the millionaires have the vast majority of their money tied up in the businesses which is giving employment in the country.
There is inequality in the country in a lot of ways but it is quite difficult to avoid all inequality.

A lot of successful businesses are owned and run by driven people.  Do we want to drive them out of the country.
I am not very political just a mild interest but I just hate to see certain political parties promising the unattainable to people.

It is not to long ago since Syriza in Greece were being portrayed in this country as the model to follow.

To be quite honest we are in potentially very difficult  and politically unstable times and we need quite an amount of realism from all parties.

The Shinners are promising their supporters the sun/moon etc but they are too cowardly to enter Government until they are the largest party.  That in my book is party before country in a very blatant way.  Everyone else's responsibility to govern and theirs to oppose everything.


----------



## Conan (1 Mar 2016)

Dermot, I fully agree. Lots of political groups (and Vincent Browne in his recent article in the IT) drone on about inequality. Life is unequal:

Not everybody can play golf like Rory McIlroy (will SF solve that inequality?)
Some people are more intelligent than others (who will solve that inequality?)
Some people are better looking than others
Some people are more driven/ambitious than others
Some people earn more than others
Some people are more successful than others (the SF solution is to penalise those who are successful so as to re-distribute their success to those who are less successful/less ambitious/could not be bothered)
The so called "wealth tax" might satisfy the Looney Left supporters (a policy of jealousy masquerading as equality), but it has little thought for the impact it would have on many family/small businesses who employ lots of people in this country. So if the owner(s) of such businesses have to pay a wealth tax on top of income tax, Corporation tax, PRSI, USC it would not take long for such additional costs to impact business growth and employment.
Rather than penalise success (jealousy) we need to encourage more ambition, risk taking and success. I look at those two young Collison brothers from Limerick (I think) who are well educated, clearly intelligent, won the Young Scientist award some years ago and have now developed a business worth over €1bn. That should be celebrated and we need to encourage more of their like. But the "wealth tax" brigade simply see such people as capitalists to be stripped (albeit slowly) of the wealth to support those who (in many cases) have no education and/or no ambition, other than getting somebody else to finance their lifestyle. And unfortunately the Looney Left are only pandering to such groups by letting them believe that their plight is somebody else's fault.
If protest was a policy this country would have solved all its problems. But unfortunately certain groups are more interested in protest than finding workable solutions.
One may campaign in poetry but one must govern in prose.


----------



## Purple (1 Mar 2016)

Vinnie Browne is a communist. I don't understand why he is taken seriously by anyone.


----------



## Cervelo (1 Mar 2016)

I don't understand why I can't like a post here, must be something to do with the Lefties, anyhow Conan I like it "Hear, Hear".


----------



## AlbacoreA (5 Mar 2016)

Dermot said:


> ...
> There is inequality in the country in a lot of ways but it is quite difficult to avoid all inequality.
> A lot of successful businesses are owned and run by driven people.  Do we want to drive them out of the country.
> I am not very political just a mild interest but I just hate to see certain political parties promising the unattainable to people....



The problem is the inequality appears to be getting worse for a increasing numbers of people. Its now sucking in some of what was previous middle earners. So its a bigger vote.

I would say its more about people wanting to reduce their costs of living (bills & expenses) which is cripplingly them. They are getting hit by new and increasing bills all the time and are less able to pay. If this was improved, they wouldn't be that interested what others are paying. The pressure to tax the wealthy more is a symptom of that. "tax the rich" is not an issue in itself.


----------



## Mick Fitzgerald (5 Mar 2016)

AlbacoreA said:


> The problem is the inequality appears to be getting worse for a increasing numbers of people. Its now sucking in some of what was previous middle earners. So its a bigger vote.
> 
> I would say its more about people wanting to reduce their costs of living (bills & expenses) which is cripplingly them. They are getting hit by new and increasing bills all the time and are less able to pay. If this was improved, they wouldn't be that interested what others are paying. The pressure to tax the wealthy more is a symptom of that. "tax the rich" is not an issue in itself.



The two best ways to control a society is by the sword ( fear of death ) and by debt.


----------



## Cervelo (5 Mar 2016)

AlbacoreA said:


> The problem is the inequality appears to be getting worse for a increasing numbers of people. Its now sucking in some of what was previous middle earners. So its a bigger vote.
> 
> I would say its more about people wanting to reduce their costs of living (bills & expenses) which is cripplingly them. They are getting hit by new and increasing bills all the time and are less able to pay. If this was improved, they wouldn't be that interested what others are paying. The pressure to tax the wealthy more is a symptom of that. "tax the rich" is not an issue in itself.



So how do you reduce the inequality?? reduce taxes, increase pay, more state benefits


----------



## Gordon Gekko (5 Mar 2016)

Inequality is something of a myth. We have an excellent State education system here. And nowadays there is no place for people in businesses based solely on who they are or who their parents are. Everyone I know who has done well has done so through hard work. And where people have not done as well, it's been a result of laziness, plain and simple. Yet you hear comments like "he/she has been lucky" etc. No, he/she actually got up in the morning notwithstanding the hangover, got the bus to UCD, went to the lecture rather than playing pool, studied rather taking a holiday, got the 1st, and then went to work as an underpaid and indentured slave in a graduate trainee programme. Yeah, it's all about luck alright...


----------



## Mr Holmes (5 Mar 2016)

Gordon Gekko said:


> Inequality is something of a myth. We have an excellent State education system here. And nowadays there is no place for people in businesses based solely on who they are or who their parents are. Everyone I know who has done well has done so through hard work. And where people have not done as well, it's been a result of laziness, plain and simple. Yet you hear comments like "he/she has been lucky" etc. No, he/she actually got up in the morning notwithstanding the hangover, got the bus to UCD, went to the lecture rather than playing pool, studied rather taking a holiday, got the 1st, and then went to work as an underpaid and indentured slave in a graduate trainee programme. Yeah, it's all about luck alright...



So, the people who do not get on are lazy, is that right! What a wonderfully simple and naive view to have of the world, almost childlike. I am afraid hard work alone is not a panacea for financial success. Other factors including, right place at the right time, good patronage, certain circumstances and indeed good old fashioned luck do all play important parts in achieving financial success. Read about Warren Buffet, Chuck Fenney etc and you will get a feel for what I am talking about. I do agree with the point that hard work does significantly contribute to a possible successful outcome, as the odds increase of attaining financial success ( i.e. You are not banking on winning the lottery as your strategy for becoming financially successful ) but that is all.


----------



## AlbacoreA (5 Mar 2016)

Someone watched too much Disney as a kid. The the thread isn't about the meaning of life. Its about the election result.


----------



## Gordon Gekko (5 Mar 2016)

Mr Holmes said:


> So, the people who do not get on are lazy, is that right! What a wonderfully simple and naive view to have of the world, almost childlike. I am afraid hard work alone is not a panacea for financial success. Other factors including, right place at the right time, good patronage, certain circumstances and indeed good old fashioned luck do all play important parts in achieving financial success. Read about Warren Buffet, Chuck Fenney etc and you will get a feel for what I am talking about. I do agree with the point that hard work does significantly contribute to a possible successful outcome, as the odds increase of attaining financial success ( i.e. You are not banking on winning the lottery as your strategy for becoming financially successful ) but that is all.



I fundamentally disagree. In a country like ours that doesn't have class structures like (say) the UK and which provides excellent State education, 99 times out of 100 hard work will get you ahead. I'd also be interested to hear your definition of "getting on". How are Warren Buffett and Chuck Feeney relevant? The standard of living in Ireland is excellent relative to other 1st world countries. Someone on €50k a year has a great standard of living. In London, they wouldn't. There will always be hard luck stories, but in the main you get out of life what you put in.


----------



## AlbacoreA (5 Mar 2016)

Cervelo said:


> So how do you reduce the inequality?? reduce taxes, increase pay, more state benefits



Not sure. But unless its addressed, people will eventually vote a very different government in.


----------



## Cervelo (5 Mar 2016)

AlbacoreA said:


> Not sure. But unless its addressed, people will eventually vote a very different government in.



But have the people not just voted in a very different government.


----------



## AlbacoreA (5 Mar 2016)

Gordon Gekko said:


> ....The standard of living in Ireland is excellent relative to other 1st world countries. Someone on €50k a year has a great standard of living. ...





> ...Of the two million tax cases, which represent 2.85 million adults, two-thirds have gross annual incomes of under the average earnings of €35,600. ....





> The top 10 per cent of tax cases, representing 200,000 households, report incomes above €75,000.



That obviously has an impact on how people vote.


----------



## Gordon Gekko (5 Mar 2016)

AlbacoreA said:


> That obviously has an impact on how people vote.



Indeed it does. Which is why FG's slogan around "keeping the recovery going" was so ill advised. There is a huge cohort of people who do not understand how bad things were with the Troika. The mainstream parties ran such a bad campaign. Naive almost. Groups such as Sinn Fein and AAA are soft targets if you go after them properly. For example, remember their trips to Greece and the arguments for "doing what the Greeks did". They're no different to the wannabe beauty queen who craves world peace, other than the fact that they don't even want the tiara!


----------



## AlbacoreA (5 Mar 2016)

Cervelo said:


> But have the people not just voted in a very different government.



They voted for change. 

I think FG and Labour have managed to make themselves very similar to FF for many voters. So they voted for something different.


----------



## AlbacoreA (5 Mar 2016)

Gordon Gekko said:


> Indeed it does. Which is why FG's slogan around "keeping the recovery going" was so ill advised. There is a huge cohort of people who do not understand how bad things were with the Troika. The mainstream parties ran such a bad campaign. Naive almost. Groups such as Sinn Fein and AAA are soft targets if you go after them properly. For example, remember their trips to Greece and the arguments for "doing what the Greeks did". They're no different to the wannabe beauty queen who craves world peace, other than the fact that they don't even want the tiara!



So much Disney. 

For many things haven't changed. Other than its got even more expensive and their quality life has fallen. For others they are doing ok. That proportion was (as a sweeping generalization) reflected in the election results.


----------



## Mr Holmes (5 Mar 2016)

Gordon Gekko said:


> I fundamentally disagree. In a country like ours that doesn't have class structures like (say) the UK and which provides excellent State education, 99 times out of 100 hard work will get you ahead. I'd also be interested to hear your definition of "getting on". How are Warren Buffett and Chuck Feeney relevant? The standard of living in Ireland is excellent relative to other 1st world countries. Someone on €50k a year has a great standard of living. In London, they wouldn't. There will always be hard luck stories, but in the main you get out of life what you put in.



Both Warren Buffet and Chuck Feeney have stated that luck was a major factor in their accumulation of significant wealth. Once you get there money makes money. As regards class structures, we still have the old school tie system, live and kicking. It is cheaper to live in Berlin or Madrid than it is to live in Dublin.


----------



## Gordon Gekko (5 Mar 2016)

Mr Holmes said:


> Both Warren Buffet and Chuck Feeney have stated that luck was a major factor in their accumulation of significant wealth. Once you get there money makes money. As regards class structures, we still have the old school tie system, live and kicking. It is cheaper to live in Berlin or Madrid as it is to live in Dublin.



Luck with regard to becoming billionaires!

There is far less luck involved where someone achieves a comfortable middle-class standard of living.


----------



## AlbacoreA (5 Mar 2016)

I dunno what point if any you're trying to make tbh.

The parties who did better in this election are working harder? They earned this result.


----------



## Mr Holmes (5 Mar 2016)

Gordon Gekko said:


> Luck with regard to becoming billionaires!
> 
> There is far less luck involved where someone achieves a comfortable middle-class standard of living.



You are making a lot of assumptions. For example, how would you rate the chances of someone coming from a dysfunctional lower class family making it to a comfortable middle class standard of living.


----------



## cremeegg (5 Mar 2016)

One of the claims in this thread's title is completely untrue.

Shareholders in the AIB, Bank of Ireland, and Anglo Irish bank lost ALL their investment.

It is amazing how many people I talk to who don't know this and don't believe me when I tell them.


----------



## Mr Holmes (5 Mar 2016)

cremeegg said:


> One of the claims in this thread's title is completely untrue.
> 
> Shareholders in the AIB, Bank of Ireland, and Anglo Irish bank lost ALL their investment.
> 
> It is amazing how many people I talk to who don't know this and don't believe me when I tell them.



Yes, this is true, most joe soaps took it in the neck, 100% haircuts etc, but all the serious investors took preferential shares, institutional investors took  junior and senior bonds. They all got paid !


----------



## Gordon Gekko (5 Mar 2016)

Mr Holmes said:


> You are making a lot of assumptions. For example, how would you rate the chances of someone coming from a dysfunctional lower class family making it to a comfortable middle class standard of living.



Far greater than in the UK or the US. And with our excellent education system, that person would have a good chance of escaping their circumstances.


----------



## cremeegg (5 Mar 2016)

Gordon Gekko said:


> Far greater than in the UK or the US. And with our excellent education system, that person would have a good chance of escaping their circumstances.



I have serious doubts about this "excellent" education system of ours. After 12 years of studying Irish very few students can hold even a basic conversation.

There is no reason to believe that the system is better at any other subject.



Mr Holmes said:


> You are making a lot of assumptions. For example, how would you rate the chances of someone coming from a dysfunctional lower class family making it to a comfortable middle class standard of living.



Much less than in the past. In previous decades any one who got through secondary school, no matter how difficult that was for them or their family, had achieved something worthwhile. Something which could allow them to enjoy a middle class life.

This is no longer the case. Many students now leave second level without a good level of functional literacy or numeracy.


----------



## Dermot (5 Mar 2016)

Mr Holmes said:


> For example, how would you rate the chances of someone coming from a dysfunctional lower class family making it to a comfortable middle class standard of living.



I am not intending to be smart here but I would not rate the chances of someone coming from a dysfunctional middle or upper class family making it to a comfortable middle class standard of living either. There are dysfunctional families in every category of society and what can a Government do about it



cremeegg said:


> This is no longer the case. Many students now leave second level without a good level of functional literacy or numeracy.



I agree to an extent but on average it is pretty good.  Having had children that finished 3rd level in the recent past I have to say that the opportunity is there for all to go to 3rd level if they want to.  From what I heard from my own family and other families incl social welfare families it was a level enough playing field if you want to get on.  Not everyone wants to follow the academic route.

BTW I was unable to avail of 3rd level due to financial reasons in my era.


----------



## odyssey06 (5 Mar 2016)

cremeegg said:


> One of the claims in this thread's title is completely untrue.
> Shareholders in the AIB, Bank of Ireland, and Anglo Irish bank lost ALL their investment.
> It is amazing how many people I talk to who don't know this and don't believe me when I tell them.



The banks are not their shareholders... AIB bank and bankers seemed to carry on pretty much the same... the ship hit an iceberg and the only passengers to be thrown over were the shareholders... Shareholders are supposed to run companies to protect their investment. We need a system where that is true. It would be a better one that the current one where shareholders and regulators cannot trust the people running banks not to destroy them with reckless lending (or why would we need the 3.5 lending rules etc).

As an aside - and I could be wrong - I thought Bank of Ireland wasn't nationalised.

Besides, the title of this thread is that *FG *never touched the banks. *They didn't*. The losses the shareholders suffered, and nationalisation, were set in play before FG came to power. FG came to power promising to share the bank losses with bondholders (primarily banks and foreign financial institutions). They didn't.

Instead of facing down the troika on this score, they preferred to face down the Irish people over water charges, not ending USC and austerity in general.
They thought they were choosing the path of least resistance. *They were wrong.
*


----------



## Mr Holmes (5 Mar 2016)

Gordon Gekko said:


> Far greater than in the UK or the US. And with our excellent education system, that person would have a good chance of escaping their circumstances.



Ireland spends 9.7% on education as oppose to the 13% average in the OECD and despite what you say there is significant socio economic barriers to entry into third level college in this Country. Do some research in this field. Your ascertion that we currently have an excellent education system does not stand up to any scrutiny.


----------



## Mr Holmes (5 Mar 2016)

Dermot said:


> I am not intending to be smart here but I would not rate the chances of someone coming from a dysfunctional middle or upper class family making it to a comfortable middle class standard of living either. There are dysfunctional families in every category of society and what can a Government do about it
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Maybe the Government should employ more social workers and early interventionists to deal with dysfunctional families. Currently there are two social workers employed to service the whole Dublin area after hours ( outside 9am to 5pm ). That might be a starting point.

BTW families are still unable to avail of 3rd level due to financial reasons.


----------



## Conan (5 Mar 2016)

One of the mantras of the "left" was that the Government (whether FF or FG/ Lab) bailed out the Banks. In reality, shareholders (investors) lost all their Equity (virtually all) but it was Depositors who were bailed out. These would have been mostly ordinary citizens with Deposit Accounts and Current Accounts.  Imagine the protests if all depositors were bailed in.


----------



## Mr Holmes (5 Mar 2016)

That why there was a bail out and not a bail in. Was Anglo a SIFI, I do not think so.


----------



## PGF2016 (6 Mar 2016)

Mr Holmes said:


> BTW families are still unable to avail of 3rd level due to financial reasons.



Families don't avail of third level education, individuals do. 

If an individual is unable to afford university at 18 what's to stop them working for 4-5 years and saving for University. They could enter at 22 or 23. The opportunity is there. 

Wealth equality will never happen and should not be a goal. Equality of opportunity should be the goal and by and large that exists in Ireland. 

There's nothing to stop someone with work ethic and a good attitude doing well.


----------



## Mr Holmes (6 Mar 2016)

PGF2016 said:


> Families don't avail of third level education, individuals do.
> 
> If an individual is unable to afford university at 18 what's to stop them working for 4-5 years and saving for University. They could enter at 22 or 23. The opportunity is there.
> 
> ...



These individuals also have the opportunity to be an astronaut or President of Ireland, the question is, statistically, how likely is this going to happen. Equality of opportunity is a mirage and is subject to a myriad of outside factors such as political connections, old school ties, religion, etc., to think otherwise is to bury one's head in the sand. Take off the rose coloured spectacles.

During Fine Gaels and Labours ( shame on you ) reign in government, the number of millionaires in this Country increase significantly, while, at the same time, the number of people living below the poverty line increased dramatically. In other words, the wealth divide increased. Equality of opportunity my eye, how can a child even get a good primary school education when they are living day to day in different hotel rooms. This is a problem that will come back and bite Irish society's This post will be deleted if not edited to remove bad language in 20 years time.

Oh, and by the way, families certainly do avail of third level education for their children, ever hear of family education trust funds for little Fiachra to attend college, very big in the USA, U.K. In upper and upper middle class Ireland, Mammy and Daddy usually put aside a little nest egg for the kids education ( their very own little fund ! )


----------



## odyssey06 (6 Mar 2016)

Mr Holmes said:


> Ireland spends 9.7% on education as oppose to the 13% average in the OECD and despite what you say there is significant socio economic barriers to entry into third level college in this Country. Do some research in this field. Your ascertion that we currently have an excellent education system does not stand up to any scrutiny.



My understanding is that OECD figures use GDP as a basis. Any figures quoted for spending in Ireland that do not use GNP are unreliable due to our exceptional multinational basis.

When the OECD actually ranks Ireland's education system as a whole, not just counting input percentages, we regularly get very good to excellent ratings. I can't post links for some reason but just google, Ireland OECD education ranking.


----------



## Mr Holmes (6 Mar 2016)

odyssey06 said:


> My understanding is that OECD figures use GDP as a basis. Any figures quoted for spending in Ireland that do not use GNP are unreliable due to our exceptional multinational basis.
> 
> When the OECD actually ranks Ireland's education system as a whole, not just counting input percentages, we regularly get very good to excellent ratings. I can't post links for some reason but just google, Ireland OECD education ranking.



Ireland now lags behind the UK when it comes to world educational systems ( Mr Gekko will not like this fact or indeed post ). Our universities have also fallen in the ranking tables, due in no small part, to the Government's underfunding of the universities infrastructure. These are all facts! Say what you will, but the last Government mugged not only the middle class but also the lower class. Meanwhile, those well heeled, send their kids in droves to private schools, like the Institute of Education, Leeson St, Dublin, in order for them to achieve higher results in their leaving certificate as compared with their compatriots in the public educational system ( fact ). Equality of opportunity, my foot.


----------



## Dermot (6 Mar 2016)

Mr Holmes said:


> BTW families are still unable to avail of 3rd level due to financial reasons.



Well all I can say to that I am well aware of many many families who are on social welfare and have their children in 3rd level education.  They are availing of the grants and are not living in areas where 3rd level institutions are close by.

Equally I am aware of people who are in relatively good jobs who are struggling massively to put their children through 3rd level.

As we are essentially talking on this thread about the last 5 years what are the real figures during this period that led to the massive sea change in education in the last 5 years.

Where is the utopian state that has all the perfect scenarios that are being complained about in this country and in this thread.  Is it Greece?.


----------



## Mr Holmes (6 Mar 2016)

Dermot said:


> Well all I can say to that I am well aware of many many families who are on social welfare and have their children in 3rd level education.  They are availing of the grants and are not living in areas where 3rd level institutions are close by.
> 
> Equally I am aware of people who are in relatively good jobs who are struggling massively to put their children through 3rd level.
> 
> ...



Yes Dermot, I know of these types of situations as well, but these are exceptions to the general convention as to how our two tiered  educational system operates.

Look up the CSO figures for the last five years, regarding socio economic barriers to entering third level.

In relation to your last question, maybe we should cast our eyes to Finland or Germany, and not Ireland or Greece.


----------



## odyssey06 (6 Mar 2016)

Mr Holmes said:


> Yes Dermot, I know of these types of situations as well, but these are exceptions to the general convention as to how our two tiered  educational system operates.
> Look up the CSO figures for the last five years, regarding socio economic barriers to entering third level.
> In relation to your last question, maybe we should cast our eyes to Finland or Germany, and not Ireland or Greece.



We have an entire grant system designed to get people into third level instutitions.
In the last year there were 60,000 successful applicants. I think that constitutes more than an exception. Are FG mugging the middle class by giving the grants to the wrong people??? 

I don't see how a two-tiered education system even begins to describe the complexity of the system across three levels, urban and rural, community schools versus religious schools, across household income levels, fee paying versus free schools, the grinds brigade etc  - in all the things it does well and does badly.


----------



## Dermot (6 Mar 2016)

Mr Holmes said:


> In relation to your last question, maybe we should cast our eyes to Finland or Germany, and not Ireland or Greece.



Yes Finland is at the top so every other country is below them.  Their economy is not in such great shakes currently and their education system is being targeted for cuts as well as wages and salaries throughout the economy.  So the Government have to prioritise and some areas will receive bigger cuts than others and maybe Finland will be close to the bottom in some areas when these are implemented.  All not rosy in Finland.

I do not know enough about Germany but as the richest economy in Europe and currently running a budget surplus with a history of an ability to borrow at very low interest rates I would feel it a bit unfair to compare Ireland's economic situation with Germany's in the last 5 years.  

You have to have the mental ability to be able to get into 3rd level education in Germany as well.  That could be classed as discriminatory by some people as well.

I would hardly class Angela Merkel as a socialist or SF leaning


----------



## Mr Holmes (6 Mar 2016)

odyssey06 said:


> We have an entire grant system designed to get people into third level instutitions.
> In the last year there were 60,000 successful applicants. I think that constitutes more than an exception. Are FG mugging the middle class by giving the grants to the wrong people???
> 
> I don't see how a two-tiered education system even begins to describe the complexity of the system across three levels, urban and rural, community schools versus religious schools, across household income levels, fee paying versus free schools, the grinds brigade etc  - in all the things it does well and does badly.




By two tiered, I mean how persons can access good schools, universities, teachers ( grinds ) depending on how much money they, or their parents have, that is all. Read the previous posts.

Do the third level grants you refer to cover the expense of student accommodation and living expenses that are incurred by students residing in the cities in which the colleges are located  (for example, if you are travelling from a council estate located outside the cities to study in a college, I think not. )


----------



## Dermot (6 Mar 2016)

Mr Holmes said:


> Do the third level grants you refer to cover the expense of student accommodation and living expenses that are incurred by students residing in the cities in which the colleges are located (for example, if you are travelling from a council estate located outside the cities to study in a college, I think not. )



There are accommodation grants.

On the other hand what country provides Free fees, accommodation grants, pocket money clothing free food and maybe a few drinks as well as free text books etc because this is where this argument is going. 
I think if all this was included even though I am in pretty advanced years I might do all those 3rd level courses that I wished for many years ago for the next 10 years or so.


----------



## odyssey06 (6 Mar 2016)

Mr Holmes said:


> By two tiered, I mean how persons can access good schools, universities, teachers ( grinds ) depending on how much money they, or their parents have, that is all. Read the previous posts.



I don't see anything wrong with fee paying schools or grinds. But I do see something wrong if that is the only way to get a good education.

I just don't think two-tiers is an accurate or useful term to describe the situation. 
Our education system, which is a reflection of our society, has a lot more than two tiers. So when I see someone use a phrase like two tiers which is objectively inaccurate, it immediately predisposes me against their argument. 

Our universities contain students from a wide range of income backgrounds.
We have free tuition and a grant system in place supposedly to prevent income from blocking qualified candidates from third level. I think it's more useful to focus on its specific shortcomings (as you noted, not covering X) than throw out terms like two tiers. What specifically did the last government do to reduce access to third level education, or what promise did they not fulfil in that area?


----------



## Mr Holmes (6 Mar 2016)

Dermot said:


> Yes Finland is at the top so every other country is below them.  Their economy is not in such great shakes currently and their education system is being targeted for cuts as well as wages and salaries throughout the economy.  So the Government have to prioritise and some areas will receive bigger cuts than others and maybe Finland will be close to the bottom in some areas when these are implemented.  All not rosy in Finland.
> 
> I do not know enough about Germany but as the richest economy in Europe and currently running a budget surplus with a history of an ability to borrow at very low interest rates I would feel it a bit unfair to compare Ireland's economic situation with Germany's in the last 5 years.
> 
> ...



What are you trying to say ? What point are you making ? 

Surely Angela Merkel, by allowing over a million Syrian immigrants to enter the German State displayed socialist tendencies rather than right wing tendencies, but what has that got to do with the thread. Tell me Dermot, with regard to the subject matter of the thread, how did Fine Gael and Labour take on the banks ? Why did they not insist that the bank's lower their variable mortgage rates to borrowers in line with their European counterparts ?


----------



## Mr Holmes (6 Mar 2016)

odyssey06 said:


> I don't see anything wrong with fee paying schools or grinds. But I do see something wrong if that is the only way to get a good education.
> 
> I just don't think two-tiers is an accurate or useful term to describe the situation.
> Our education system, which is a reflection of our society, has a lot more than two tiers. So when I see someone use a phrase like two tiers which is objectively inaccurate, it immediately predisposes me against their argument.
> ...



You should read the previous posts and it would be plainly intelligible to the average Joe, what I was referring to when I said two tier. If a technical inaccuracy predisposes you against someone's argument as a whole, that is your problem, not mine. With regard to Fine Gael/ Labour they increased student fees, reduced spending within the Department of Education,etc.


----------



## Dermot (6 Mar 2016)

There are several threads on why bank interest rates are higher here and why no other banks want to come into this country so will leave it at that on that subject.

As for access to education what major impediments were introduced in the last 5 years as you appear to be inferring happened.


----------



## Mr Holmes (6 Mar 2016)

Dermot said:


> There are several threads on why bank interest rates are higher here and why no other banks want to come into this country so will leave it at that on that subject.
> 
> As for access to education what major impediments were introduced in the last 5 years as you appear to be inferring happened.


You are going well off thread, I suggest you start a new thread maybe "Fine Gaels glorious Educational triumphs in the last 5 years."  Sure FG are planning to introduce a new graduate tax on top of registration fee of 3,000 euro, decreased spending on Education, etc., what next, hedge schools to do away with overhead costs. 
P.S. By the way there are new banks coming into this Country to operate, just open your eyes and look at other threads on the site


----------



## Dermot (6 Mar 2016)

I am not going off thread


----------



## Mr Holmes (6 Mar 2016)

You are, the thread is Fine Gael mugged the middle class ( which they did ) and never touched the banks ( which they didn't )


----------



## Conan (6 Mar 2016)

Mr Holmes said:


> You are, the thread is Fine Gael mugged the middle class ( which they did ) and never touched the banks ( which they didn't )


What is it you wanted the Government to do to the Banks? Banks are just organisations. Do you want them nationalised ( which most of them were)? Do you want the Directors jailed? Do you want the staff jailed? Do you want Depositors "bailed in"? 
What specifically do you think should have happened to Banks?


----------



## PGF2016 (6 Mar 2016)

Mr Holmes said:


> Equality of opportunity is a mirage and is subject to a myriad of outside factors such as political connections, old school ties, religion, etc., to think otherwise is to bury one's head in the sand. Take off the rose coloured spectacles.



You don't need old school ties or political connections to get a good education and a well paying job in one of the large multi nationals in Ireland. To think otherwise is nonsense. Yes, being rich is an advantage. It is everywhere and always will be. Being poor in Ireland though is better than being poor in most other countries in the world.


----------



## cremeegg (6 Mar 2016)

Mr Holmes said:


> how did Fine Gael and Labour take on the banks ? Why did they not insist that the bank's lower their variable mortgage rates to borrowers in line with their European counterparts ?



For two connected reasons.

1. So that the banks could return to profitability and rebuild their reserves. With a view to re-privatising them.

2. So that the cost of this wouldn't fall entirely on general taxation.


----------



## Mr Holmes (6 Mar 2016)

Conan said:


> What is it you wanted the Government to do to the Banks? Banks are just organisations. Do you want them nationalised ( which most of them were)? Do you want the Directors jailed? Do you want the staff jailed? Do you want Depositors "bailed in"?
> What specifically do you think should have happened to Banks?



Banks should be forced to reduce their variable rate mortgages in line with their European counterparts, while offsetting the above average cost of repossession in this Country. Instead the Government has knowingly allowed them to avail of a cartel system were each bank charges roughly the same exorbitant interest rates to these trapped borrowers ( 300,000 variable rate mortgage approx, that is  approx 500,00 voters ). The banks will defend their actions with the mantra, well the borrower can always move to another bank if they believe that they are being overcharged by us. However the banks know full well that a lot of these properties are in negative equity and will not be touched by any competition ( if that exists ) within the market. Heaven knows, car companies can provide their customers with 0% finance options with no deposits to purchase their cars ( assets that will almost always depreciate to a negligible amount, as oppose to an asset ( bricks and mortar )  that over the test of time will usually always increase in value ); that how cheap money has become.

In relation to the tracker mortgages issue, maybe Padraic Kissane can give you some insights into the skullduggery that the banks engage in. In relation to consumer protection law, the Government should  immediately bolster same. Serious breaches of the CCMA and the Consumer Protection Act etc by the banks should be a bar to repossession and indeed summary judgment. This would be a start. I am not a banker, but I regularly see the end results in our courts system, which is not a pretty sight.


----------



## Mr Holmes (6 Mar 2016)

cremeegg said:


> For two connected reasons.
> 
> 1. So that the banks could return to profitability and rebuild their reserves. With a view to re-privatising them.
> 
> 2. So that the cost of this wouldn't fall entirely on general taxation.



Why not keep AIB as a national bank in the medium term, this would enable the bank to purchase monies at the same low rate that the Irish Government can purchase it at. This in turn would create competition within the marketplace, something that has been sorely missing to date. Leaving mortgage interest rates artificially high so that the banks can rebuild profitability is not a valid reason for high interest rates that variable rate borrowers are being forced to pay ( contractually, I cannot believe that this has not been challenged ). Depositors are currently receiving no interest at all for their deposits. Think of all the monies in deposit and current accounts that the banks utilise to help their capital and liquidity ratios and pay almost nothing for.

Allowing this cost to fall on general taxation within the economy as a whole is fairer than lumping the load onto the shoulders of some.


----------



## Gerry Canning (7 Mar 2016)

cremeegg said:


> For two connected reasons.
> 
> 1. So that the banks could return to profitability and rebuild their reserves. With a view to re-privatising them.
> 
> 2. So that the cost of this wouldn't fall entirely on general taxation.



..........................................
So the Banks once they return to profitability  are re-privatized ?
No -way should that be done unless we do very very well from said sale. . Surely what you are saying is that Mr Middle Class bailed out the Banks , paid dearly for their mortgages ,sorted failed mortgages and after that some privite people take the now tidy profits of the Bank.
I consider that an insult upon an insult upon an insult.
It is even worse than that ,because in time Mr Bank will revert to form and Mr Middle Class will re-re bail them out again and again. We have bailed AIB out twice already and the same management style is in place.

Cost has already fallen on general taxation .

Comment,
I just do not get this wish to tidy up something and when it is running well we flog it and forego future profits.


----------



## 44brendan (7 Mar 2016)

Mr Holmes said:


> Why not keep AIB as a national bank in the medium term, this would enable the bank to purchase monies at the same low rate that the Irish Government can purchase it at.


National banks do not work in any country. This has been tried before unsuccessfully in Ireland with ACC and ICC. Both were high cost institutions which were subject to political interference by successive governments. Having worked in government owned banks abroad I have yet to see one that has been profitable and run without Government interference. The concept just does not work. Cost of borrowed funds is not an issue for the main banks.
Direct interference in the banking system by FG or any future Government will not resolve any of the primary concerns relating to the banking system. I.e. The concept of a new party in Government ordering AIB to cut its mortgage rates to certain classes of borrower will immediately devalue AIB and result in a consequent loss to the taxpayer. It could similarly be posited that the cost of Insurance in Ireland is well above the European average. Why not set up a Government insurance company to offer low cost insurance to undercut the market.
There is a utopian group think out there by many of the Social parties that a Government can freely meddle in the marketplace to provide a level playing field with all benefits and no cost. Theoretically communism as a concept should work. However in practice in never has. Life will always be unfair and unequal until we are all cloned to act and think the same (Stepford wives concept). Some people will win the Lotto, some people will inherit family fortunes. Some people will get high office and use that power to benefit themselves and their cronies. We live in an imperfect society but in my own experience ( having lived and worked in more than a dozen countries) I am still happy that Ireland is well up in the top 5% of countries where equality and fairness is generally evident. Virtually all of our citizens has the means (if not the motivation) to get a good education and by dint of hard work and application a good standard of life.


----------



## Gerry Canning (7 Mar 2016)

44 Brendan,

You mentioned ACC .
1. Whilst it operated it DID turn a profit for us and only when it was sold to the MARKET did it fail.
...............................................................................................................................................................
2. It is very obvious that our State owned Bank AIB , is returning to a sense of profitability and I see minimal State interference.
................................................................................................................................................................
3. Should (in the unlikely event) of AIB being ordered to reduce mortgage rates, the beneficiaries are its owners who bailed them out.
We have as taxpayers already lost , so now we lose on the double while some Market buys it ?
......................................................................................................................................................................
4. Devalue AIB , hmn ! its already devalued , if what you mean is Taxpayers reprop it to benefit Mr Market, that is insult upon injury.
....................................................................................................................................................................
5. This  ingrained concept  needs to be challenged that Market = good .
......................................................................................................
6. We are in the midst of a huge upheavel ,so lets think a bit sideways, and challenge Mr Market & Mr Utopia !.

I have NIL issue selling AIB provided WE GET WELL PAID.
IN USA the bastion of Capitalism I believe Government GOT more back than they bailed Banks for,
So do not let us be the suckers. 
ps . I agree life can be (unfair)
.,  ,


----------



## Conan (7 Mar 2016)

What many seem (choose) to forget in relation to mortgage interest rates is that the relatively high rate applicable to variable mortgages is impacted by the very low rates applicable to ECB fixed rate mortgages. So if those seeking "fairness" are prepared to even up the differential between the two rates that might work. But the problem with "fairness" is that some might have to loose out to make it fair.
Establishing a State owned bank, subject to political interference, would likely only transfer the so called "unfairness" to taxpayers as a whole. We are currently seeing how politicians are can be utterly populist when it comes to hard decisions, so can you imagine how politicians would feel the need to interfere with Bank policy in relation to mortgage rates, deposit rates, lending criteria etc.
I fully agree with 44Brendan, the world/life is not perfect or perfectly fair. But too many of those thinking that life is unfair is in reality lack of motivation. An increasing number of people (if the election results are a barometer) seem to think that the world / other people owe them a living. There seems to a section of the population that will not pay for anything and don't have the motivation to change their lives. And they won't if they continue to be encouraged by the likes of AAA-PBP, SF, and assorted Looney Left to believe that they are victims.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (7 Mar 2016)

This has gone off topic and has resulted in personalised attacks. 

Brendan


----------

