# "Why aren't people rioting in the streets?"



## tiger (18 Apr 2010)

I've heard this bandied about on many media & web discussions on our current financial crisis.  I think most people don't fully understand what's going on, plus the pain will be spread out over years, and there's no leadership.  Rioting is for angry young students, not for angry couch potatoes (like me...).

Equally I've seen plenty of "web campaigns", but I don't see that these as carrying any weight.  It's too easy for people to send an email, click on an online survey, etc. for it to have much significance.

I do think there have been criminal acts, and acts of corruption which have helped bring us to our current situation.  My idea would be to setup a reward scheme for information leading to criminal convictions, along the lines of what lead to the Mahon tribunal
.
Idea would be along the lines of:
1. Set up a "clean up Ireland" fund which would.
2. provide rewards for people providing info to the authorities which leads to criminal convictions of senior businessmen/bankers, politicians or senior public servants.
3. money to come from the "people of Ireland" who feel aggrieved enough to contribute.

The scheme would need some form of legal trust to administer it.
People would donate via a website.
If successful claims aren't made after a 5-10 year period, they money is divided amongst a group of charities.

Any thoughts on the feasibility of such an idea, & what it would take to set it up?
If a few hundred or few thousand people were each willing to contribute a few hundred or thousand euro, we'd have a good sized fund.


----------



## Mpsox (19 Apr 2010)

One small problem, did any of the senior bankers/politicians/senior public servants actually break any laws or were they just incompetent chancers? In some cases perhaps they have broken the laws but part of the issue was lack of regulation in the first place


----------



## z104 (19 Apr 2010)

Irish people don't do riots or protests very well.  You would be lucky to get a few people organized and at that they would only protest for an hour or so before going to the pub for some lunch and a few drinks.

In Iceland they stayed outside the local parliament until their minister resigned. They stayed for a few days in shifts and only left when he resigned. 

No that's protesting.


----------



## ivuernis (19 Apr 2010)

Niallers said:


> Irish people don't do riots or protests very well.


These riots and protests weren't too shabby.


----------



## cork (19 Apr 2010)

Who bid up the price of property at home + abroad?

Who will be protest aganist?
Auditors. Newspaper Supplements, RTE, Bankers, Builders, Regulators, Block Layers, Carpenters, Car Sales Men, Politicians?


----------



## cork (19 Apr 2010)

If a few hundred or few thousand people were each willing to contribute a few hundred or thousand euro, we'd have a good sized fund. 

If people saw a wrong doing - why would would they want a monetary reward?

Tribunerals etc solved nothing for this country. Their operation and bloated exixtance has been a disgrace.

They just drag on & on.

Costing millions & millions.

It is high time people started protesting aganist jornalists and politicians who sought these bodies.


----------



## RMCF (2 May 2010)

Well they have been rioting recently in the streets in Greece.

But I see the IMF and EU agreed a massive aid package today, but it involves Greece having to make 'massive cuts' as part of the deal.

This is the bit I can't understand about the problems in Ireland. No-one wanted to take any cuts but yet if the IMF was called in then the cuts would be compulsory and people would suffer more.

Just heard on the radio this morning that the Greek PS had some crazy bonus schemes added in the boom times. One even involved getting a bonus for coming to work on time !!! Madness. 

They are paying for it now.


----------



## UptheDeise (3 May 2010)

In greece if you are a forrester you get paid an allownace for working outdoors. unmarried or divorced daughters can collect their dead parents pensions and some can even return on a full pension in their 40's.

As OP said, they are paying for it now.

http://www.thestar.com/business/art...you-get-a-bonus-jfor-showing-up-for-work?bn=1


----------



## Caveat (5 May 2010)

RMCF said:


> But I see the IMF and EU agreed a massive aid package today, but it involves Greece having to make 'massive cuts' as part of the deal.
> 
> This is the bit I can't understand about the problems in Ireland. No-one wanted to take any cuts but yet if the IMF was called in then the cuts would be compulsory and people would suffer more.


 
This is the stark simple truth that the selfish foot stamping children that seem to make up most union voices don't realise.


----------



## Complainer (5 May 2010)

Caveat said:


> This is the stark simple truth that the selfish foot stamping children that seem to make up most union voices don't realise.


Strangely enough, most union members aren't foolish or childish, and have the same level of understanding of our economic position as most other people.

But I guess it is easier just to attack the person instead of trying to understand their POV.


----------



## Mpsox (5 May 2010)

Complainer said:


> Strangely enough, most union members aren't foolish or childish, and have the same level of understanding of our economic position as most other people.
> 
> .


 
In fairness, anyone I know in the Public Sector I know does understand the economic position. The problem/issue is that some don't understand why they have to pay for it in reduced take home pay. Instead these seem to think that "going after the bankers" or "making senior civil servants pay their fair share" or things like that will result in some magic pill that will make everything ok. Reality is, we can't afford the current public sector costs.


----------



## z107 (5 May 2010)

> Reality is, we can't afford the current public sector costs.


No, we can't afford public sector costs. Neither can we afford Anglo and bank bailout costs.


----------



## Complainer (5 May 2010)

Mpsox said:


> In fairness, anyone I know in the Public Sector I know does understand the economic position. The problem/issue is that some don't understand why they have to pay for it in reduced take home pay. Instead these seem to think that "going after the bankers" or "making senior civil servants pay their fair share" or things like that will result in some magic pill that will make everything ok. Reality is, we can't afford the current public sector costs.



What they don't understand is why there is no fairness in the cuts that have been applied to date. Why have there been no cuts to property tax reliefs, and Minister's pensions, and EU Commissioner's 'transition allowances'. Fairness should be an important feature of all Govt policy, and this Govt will pay the price for not remembering this.


----------



## Howitzer (5 May 2010)

Just FYI.



> Three people have been killed in a fire bomb attack on a bank in central Athens during a protest march against government austerity measures.
> Police said two women and one man were known to be dead in the burning bank, while firefighters said some 20 had been inside when it was attacked.


 
http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0505/greece.html


----------



## z107 (5 May 2010)

> What they don't understand is why there is no fairness in the cuts that have been applied to date. Why have there been no cuts to property tax reliefs, and Minister's pensions, and EU Commissioner's 'transition allowances'. Fairness should be an important feature of all Govt policy, and this Govt will pay the price for not remembering this.


I understand this perfectly.
The government will only cut stuff that won't see them ousted from power. This is yet another symptom of the flawed Irish election process.

The government's priorities are very much different to the citizens' priorities.


----------



## colin79ie (5 May 2010)

> In greece if you are a forrester you get paid an allownace for working outdoors.


 
In Ireland, if you are in the NAVY, you get an allowance for GOING TO SEA ON A SHIP!!!


----------



## Purple (5 May 2010)

colin79ie said:


> In Ireland, if you are in the NAVY, you get an allowance for GOING TO SEA ON A SHIP!!!



Lol 
I wish that was a joke!


----------



## Sunny (5 May 2010)

colin79ie said:


> In Ireland, if you are in the NAVY, you get an allowance for GOING TO SEA ON A SHIP!!!


 
So? People in the army get paid allowances for going to serve overseas. I get allowances when I have to work abroad and I work in the private sector.


----------



## Firefly (5 May 2010)

Complainer said:


> What they don't understand is why there is no fairness in the cuts that have been applied to date. Why have there been no cuts to property tax reliefs, and Minister's pensions, and EU Commissioner's 'transition allowances'. Fairness should be an important feature of all Govt policy, and this Govt will pay the price for not remembering this.


 
I understand your point, but the work invloved to change ministers pensions / trabsitions allowances will "only" save a few million here and there. Given the state of the property market and falling rents, I doubt that the gov is losing much in the way of the property tax releifs. 
On the otherhand, given the rise in PS numbers and the increases in the pay rates up until last year, this is the low-hanging fruit that can save potentially billions...


----------



## Purple (5 May 2010)

Sunny said:


> So? People in the army get paid allowances for going to serve overseas. I get allowances when I have to work abroad and I work in the private sector.


 OK, pay the Navy an allowance for going overseas, but not for going on the seas!


----------



## Complainer (5 May 2010)

Firefly said:


> Given the state of the property market and falling rents, I doubt that the gov is losing much in the way of the property tax releifs.


€750m per annum on mortgage interest relief for property investors at the last count. That would make a substantial difference to our current deficit.

I take your point about low hanging fruit, but fairness is important too. There is no reason why these issues could not be addressed in parallel. We're coming up to two years of crisis now, so they've had plenty of time to address fairness.


----------



## Mpsox (5 May 2010)

Complainer said:


> What they don't understand is why there is no fairness in the cuts that have been applied to date. Why have there been no cuts to property tax reliefs, and Minister's pensions, and EU Commissioner's 'transition allowances'. Fairness should be an important feature of all Govt policy, and this Govt will pay the price for not remembering this.


 
I couldn't agree more with the principles behind what you are saying, I remain to be convinved that if the Govt were to do this and make all those cuts that the unions would say, "grand so, we're fine with the levies and the Croke Park deal"


----------



## Complainer (5 May 2010)

Mpsox said:


> I couldn't agree more with the principles behind what you are saying, I remain to be convinved that if the Govt were to do this and make all those cuts that the unions would say, "grand so, we're fine with the levies and the Croke Park deal"


Some unions have already said 'grand so, we're fine' for the Croker deal, without any sense of fairness around.


----------



## Howitzer (5 May 2010)

Complainer said:


> €750m per annum on mortgage interest relief for property investors at the last count. That would make a substantial difference to our current deficit.
> 
> I take your point about low hanging fruit, but fairness is important too. There is no reason why these issues could not be addressed in parallel. We're coming up to two years of crisis now, so they've had plenty of time to address fairness.


In fairness, mortage interest is arguably a legitimate expense. If you want to talk about fairness in this regard here are some low hanging fruit which for the life of me I can't see why they aren't addressed.

Landlords with tenants in receipt of Rent Allowance don't need to supply their PPSN. Currently only 20% supply this.
Properties rented to the HSE or RAS schemes don't attract the NPPR tax.
Councils are still buying properties for the Affordable Housing scheme when they can't sell their existing ones, even on the open market (DDDA, Dun Laoighre).
To me these anomolies facilitate tax evasion and/or favor those in the know. There's plenty of corrupt practices that could addressed before we start (continue) slashing and burning.


----------



## Caveat (5 May 2010)

Ok, so first you say:



Complainer said:


> Strangely enough, most union members aren't foolish or childish, and have the same level of understanding of our economic position as most other people.
> 
> But I guess it is easier just to attack the person instead of trying to understand their POV.


 


Complainer said:


> What they don't understand is why there is no fairness in the cuts that have been applied to date. Why have there been no cuts to property tax reliefs, and Minister's pensions, and EU Commissioner's 'transition allowances'. Fairness should be an important feature of all Govt policy, and this Govt will pay the price for not remembering this.


 
But



Complainer said:


> Some unions have already said 'grand so, we're fine' for the Croker deal, without any sense of fairness around.


----------



## Sunny (5 May 2010)

One slightly off topic question. Does anyone notice how much the Government is hiding behind advice from the AG these days? The AG does not decide what is constitutional or what isn't. He can only give an opinion. Why don't we let the Court's actually decide. For example on the ministerial pensions, the EU/IMF are making Greece cut public sector pensions. If they were to come in and say we had to do the same, would we turn around and say 'sorry, it's unconsitutional.
If things like cutting TD's and Ministerial Pensions for sitting and retired policitians is unconstitutional, lets have a referendum. Lets do up a list of things that the politicians are refusing to implement because of 'constitutional' issues and let the people decide.


----------



## Purple (5 May 2010)

If we are bringing fairness into it then why not spread the income tax more fairly? The top 6% pay half the income tax and the bottom 50% don't pay any. Where's the fairness in that?
A single person, earning €100k a year pays 39% their income in tax. Someone earning €50k pays less than 24%. So the guy who earns twice as much takes home 50% more. Where's the fairness in that?


----------



## csirl (5 May 2010)

Purple said:


> If we are bringing fairness into it then why not spread the income tax more fairly? The top 6% pay half the income tax and the bottom 50% don't pay any. Where's the fairness in that?
> A single person, earning €100k a year pays 39% their income in tax. Someone earning €50k pays less than 24%. So the guy who earns twice as much takes home 50% more. Where's the fairness in that?


 
+1 We must have the most unequal, disincentive to better yourself tax system.


----------



## csirl (5 May 2010)

Sunny said:


> One slightly off topic question. Does anyone notice how much the Government is hiding behind advice from the AG these days? The AG does not decide what is constitutional or what isn't. He can only give an opinion. Why don't we let the Court's actually decide. For example on the ministerial pensions, the EU/IMF are making Greece cut public sector pensions. If they were to come in and say we had to do the same, would we turn around and say 'sorry, it's unconsitutional.
> If things like cutting TD's and Ministerial Pensions for sitting and retired policitians is unconstitutional, lets have a referendum. Lets do up a list of things that the politicians are refusing to implement because of 'constitutional' issues and let the people decide.


 
Arent we due a Constitutional Referendum in the Autumn. And we've a Presidential election in 2011. If the AG is correct, we can vote to change the Constitution?


----------



## Purple (5 May 2010)

Complainer said:


> €750m per annum on mortgage interest relief for property investors at the last count. That would make a substantial difference to our current deficit.


  Interest on loans is a legitimate business expense, it's not "mortgage interest relief" in the same way that PPR mortgage holders get it. If interest on investment loans are no longer counted as an expense then neither should other expenses such as refurbishment, depreciation, management fees etc.


----------



## Complainer (5 May 2010)

Howitzer said:


> In fairness, mortage interest is arguably a legitimate expense.


Not when it is combined with interest-only mortgages to ensure that the state subsidises the interest payment for the landlord.



Howitzer said:


> If you want to talk about fairness in this regard here are some low hanging fruit which for the life of me I can't see why they aren't addressed.
> 
> Landlords with tenants in receipt of Rent Allowance don't need to supply their PPSN. Currently only 20% supply this.
> Properties rented to the HSE or RAS schemes don't attract the NPPR tax.


Fully agree.



Howitzer said:


> Councils are still buying properties for the Affordable Housing scheme when they can't sell their existing ones, even on the open market (DDDA, Dun Laoighre).


 Are you sure they are actively buying (i.e. spending council money)? Or is it the case that these properties are being handed over to the councils arising from the 20% requirement.


----------



## Howitzer (5 May 2010)

Complainer said:


> Are you sure they are actively buying (i.e. spending council money)? Or is it the case that these properties are being handed over to the councils arising from the 20% requirement.


Depends which way you look at it.


> A letter seen by the Sunday Independent shows that Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council alone is facing a total bill of more than €60m for social and affordable homes. In one development, on the former Dun Laoghaire Golf Course, the council entered into a deal with developers Cosgrave Brothers to buy 63 "affordable" units valued in 2007 at €16,173,490 and 80 "social" units at €19,480,028.
> *Cosgraves have forged ahead with the social and affordable element of their proposed massive residential and office development on the 67-acre site, though no development of the private element has begun.*


----------



## Purple (5 May 2010)

Complainer said:


> Not when it is combined with interest-only mortgages to ensure that the state subsidises the interest payment for the landlord.



Why is it not OK and, since it is an expense, how is the state subsidises the interest payment for the landlord? The landlord is choosing not to repay the capital on a loan so the repayments drop but the interest charged stays the same.


----------



## z104 (5 May 2010)

If allowances for business expenses such as interest relief are removed then landlords will sell up and get out of the business altogether. Assuming this happens. Where will people who rent live.
The alternative is to increase the rent charged. The landlord is not running a charity.

Landlords provide a valuable service and more often than not a good product.


----------



## Complainer (5 May 2010)

Howitzer said:


> Depends which way you look at it.


So it looks like the councils are committed to deals struck at boom prices, just like many individual purchasers.

Don't know what the solution is there - certainly, they shouldn't leave themselves open to the kind of abuse suggested by the DLR golf club case, whereby only the social element gets built.



Niallers said:


> If allowances for business expenses such as interest relief are removed then landlords will sell up and get out of the business altogether. Assuming this happens. Where will people who rent live.


The properties don't dissapear if the landlord sells up. So presumably, those people will live in the same or similar properties, either as owners or as tenants, but at reduced costs.



Niallers said:


> Landlords provide a valuable service and more often than not a good product.


 Indeed they do - but there is no reason for the state to subsidise their interest-only mortgages.


----------



## Howitzer (5 May 2010)

Purple said:


> Why is it not OK and, since it is an expense, how is the state subsidises the interest payment for the landlord? The landlord is choosing not to repay the capital on a loan so the repayments drop but the interest charged stays the same.


Done to death.
http://www.askaboutmoney.com/showthread.php?t=127744&page=7


----------



## Purple (5 May 2010)

Howitzer said:


> Done to death.
> http://www.askaboutmoney.com/showthread.php?t=127744&page=7



I know but when a poster keeps repeating something that is untrue it is reasonable to keep correcting them.

What the government should do is cut rent relief since the state is not dictating what the floor is in the rental market.


----------



## Yorrick (5 May 2010)

*"Why aren't people rioting in the streets?" *

*Three people were killed in Athens today when Anarchists attacked a Bank.*

*Does this really progress their economic survival ?*

*What good would it do if the same thing happened here ?*

*We have had thirty years of civil disorder up North and it achieved nothing that wasnt on the table at Sunningdale in 1973*


----------



## z107 (5 May 2010)

Yorrick, violence is still one of the most effective ways to solve problems. If this wasn't the case, Governments wouldn't spend billions on armies and fighting wars. The second world war was ended because of violence.
Violence also caused Irish independence. For the Northern Ireland example, the IRA bombing Bishopsgate certainly would have hastened the peace process.

The Greek riots show that the Greek government have lost a certain amount of control.


----------



## Deas (5 May 2010)

How is rioting on the streets going to solve any problems pray tell?  And what problems do you propose to solve by murdering people in their work places?  Has Greece miraculously solved its debt crisis as a result of the riots?  Don't give us any stupid examples such as your last post in response.


----------



## z107 (5 May 2010)

The riots probably won't solve anything on their own. They may change the course of events, like what how the Greek Government are going to handle their crises, or even if the current Government stays in power. Their austerity measures may now concentrate on different areas.

Death and injury in any conflict is terrible, and I don't condone violence. I'm just pointing out the harsh realities of life and war.


----------



## WaterWater (6 May 2010)

The squeaking wheel gets the oil.


----------



## ivuernis (6 May 2010)

Purple said:


> A single person, earning €100k a year pays 39% their income in tax. Someone earning €50k pays less than 24%. So the guy who earns twice as much takes home 50% more. Where's the fairness in that?



Using any online tax calculator you'll find a single PAYE earner on 50k actually pays 27.86% in tax and the single PAYE earner on 100k pays 39.25%. So in this example the guy earning twice as much takes home 68.44% more. Maybe still not fair in your book but at least it doesn't look as unfair.


----------



## Yorrick (6 May 2010)

A general reading of the economic situation in Greece indicates that there was massive tax evasion, pay and conditions that could only be justified in a oil rich state, government corruption ( we are in the half penny place compared to the Greeks) no accountability of government agencies.
The EU can't continue to support a broken down economic system as there is in Greece or it will bring the whole Euro system down


----------



## Purple (6 May 2010)

Which bank was it that helped them cook the books to lie their way into the Euro?


----------



## Purple (6 May 2010)

ivuernis said:


> Using any online tax calculator you'll find a single PAYE earner on 50k actually pays 27.86% in tax and the single PAYE earner on 100k pays 39.25%. So in this example the guy earning twice as much takes home 68.44% more. Maybe still not fair in your book but at least it doesn't look as unfair.



I stand corrected but with marginal tax rates over 50% there is no incentive to work hard.


----------



## ivuernis (6 May 2010)

Purple said:


> I stand corrected but with marginal tax rates over 50% there is no incentive to work hard.



I agree, I don't think the marginal tax rate should be above 50%. Most peoples incentive to work hard at the moment is probably motivated to keep their job or avoid a pay cut.


----------



## VOR (6 May 2010)

umop3p!sdn said:


> Their austerity measures may now concentrate on different areas.



No all it does is make the Greeks look even more stupid. Every aspect of expenditure needs to be reined in so burning innocent people in their place of work won't help one little bit. If they are killing people now imagine what the Greeks will be like when they actually have to pay tax!!!


----------



## shnaek (6 May 2010)

ivuernis said:


> Using any online tax calculator you'll find a single PAYE earner on 50k actually pays 27.86% in tax and the single PAYE earner on 100k pays 39.25%. So in this example the guy earning twice as much takes home 68.44% more. Maybe still not fair in your book but at least it doesn't look as unfair.



Too right it's unfair. It shouldn't matter how much you earn, there should only be one tax rate. Proportionately you still end up paying more anyway, as 20% of 100k is more than 20% of 50k. Just remove all the ways the rich can avoid paying the 20% and then you have an equitable system. But I know lots of people will disagree with me there. These days there are more incentives to not working than there are incentives to working hard. But c'est la vie.


----------



## The_Banker (12 May 2010)

People tried to storm the Dail last night.... I guess this may be what the OP was alluding to in his original post....

I wonder what they would have done if they succeeded in getting in. Torn down the curtins? Raided the dail shop and bar?


----------



## Sunny (12 May 2010)

The_Banker said:


> People tried to storm the Dail last night.... I guess this may be what the OP was alluding to in his original post....
> 
> I wonder what they would have done if they succeeded in getting in. Torn down the curtins? Raided the dail shop and bar?


 
Not much else they could do. Chances of finding a politician to abuse working in the Dail these days is pretty slim. Are they not still on their Easter holidays or something!


----------



## UptheDeise (12 May 2010)

Why didn't the garda just close the gates?


----------



## lightswitch (12 May 2010)

shnaek said:


> Too right it's unfair. It shouldn't matter how much you earn, there should only be one tax rate. Proportionately you still end up paying more anyway, as 20% of 100k is more than 20% of 50k. Just remove all the ways the rich can avoid paying the 20% and then you have an equitable system. But I know lots of people will disagree with me there.* These days there are more incentives to not working than there are incentives to working hard. But* c'est la vie.


 

With respect that is pure rubbish. I work in a job I quite like but if it were true that I would get paid more for not working that is what I would do. I am on the higher tax band and have no problem with that. I think the lower paid should pay less tax than I do. After all they pay the same for everything in the shops + the vat.

If you really do believe what you say then leave your job. There would be a whole lot of applicants for it.


----------



## lightswitch (12 May 2010)

UptheDeise said:


> Why didn't the garda just close the gates?


 

The whole thing looked just a tad staged to me................


----------



## IsleOfMan (12 May 2010)

Who organised the protest march anyway or was this some kind of flashmob?


----------



## TarfHead (12 May 2010)

The_Banker said:


> People tried to storm the Dail last night


 
I heard Richard Boyd Barrett on Morning Ireland suggesting a crowd of at least 1000 people and possibly up to 2000. The Gardai estimate was 500.

Only a few are reported as having tried to get past the Gardai at the gates of Leinster House.

So if they had got through, then NAMA would have been abolished and the PS paycuts and levies reversed ? Is that how it works  ?


----------



## z107 (12 May 2010)

> The whole thing looked just a tad staged to me...


The blood looked realistic.


----------



## redbhoy (12 May 2010)

It looked like Éirigí and the SWP were the ones trying to get in past the Gardaí. Judging by the flags in their hands anyway.


----------



## The_Banker (12 May 2010)

redbhoy said:


> It looked like Éirigí and the SWP were the ones trying to get in past the Gardaí. Judging by the flags in their hands anyway.


 
Heaven help us if that shower got there hands on power.


----------



## redbhoy (12 May 2010)

The_Banker said:


> Heaven help us if that shower got there hands on power.


 
Agreed but what alternative have we really? FG and Lab are standing by for their shot at sitting back and fcuking up the country. People wont back SF because of their links. Who else will stand up and march through the Dáil?
What options are there?


----------



## Mpsox (12 May 2010)

Marching and protesting is easy, but where are the alternative proposals that actually make sense and might work. Does anyone know a way out of the mess that would actually work and  that won't cost billions???


----------



## z107 (12 May 2010)

> Does anyone know a way out of the mess that would actually work and that won't cost billions???


Unfortunately the damage has been done. The best we can hope for now is some degree of damage limitation. Try to stop the government making things worse.

Overheating the property bubble with cheap credit, land rezoning and tax breaks. 
Then when the bubble pops, the bank guarantee, followed by Nama and bank bailouts. One bad thing after the next. All to try to save a certain 'elite'.


----------



## DerKaiser (12 May 2010)

This rhetoric about fat cats and the elite just does not stack up for me.

There is no exploitation of the working classes on the scale that existed in the lock-outs of 1913, etc.

If anything, the years of cheap credit were a great leveller giving everyone the chance to better themselves, where previously only the rich had access to such opportunity.

We have a decent minimum wage and relatively generous social welfare system.

70% of us vote FG or FF who would handle things in exactly the same manner. A further 20% of us would vote labour who are also too mainstream to deviate from the establishment.

If you want some kind of violent revolution to overthrow the mainstream polictical parties you'll just have to do it without the popular support of the people - I don't know if that's something you really seem to care about....


----------



## Complainer (12 May 2010)

DerKaiser said:


> There is no exploitation of the working classes on the scale that existed in the lock-outs of 1913, etc.


Funnily enough, I'm reading a book on the 1913 lockout at present. Whilst obviously the social situation has moved on immensly in terms of housing and employment rights, there are many parallels with the current situation. In particular, the control of the media by employers and the concerted anti-union agenda in the media (complete with Shane Ross-style expose of union leader salaries) are remarkably similar.


----------



## z107 (12 May 2010)

> 70% of us vote FG or FF who would handle things in exactly the same manner. A further 20% of us would vote labour who are also too mainstream to deviate from the establishment.
> 
> If you want some kind of violent revolution to overthrow the mainstream polictical parties you'll just have to do it without the popular support of the people - I don't know if that's something you really seem to care about....


90% of the people voted in the last general election then did they?

Many people don't vote because there is no one worth voting for.


----------



## Purple (12 May 2010)

DerKaiser said:


> This rhetoric about fat cats and the elite just does not stack up for me.
> 
> There is no exploitation of the working classes on the scale that existed in the lock-outs of 1913, etc.
> 
> ...



If you were a real socialist you would think differently. Bring on the revolution!


----------



## Purple (12 May 2010)

Complainer said:


> Funnily enough, I'm reading a book on the 1913 lockout at present. Whilst obviously the social situation has moved on immensly in terms of housing and employment rights, there are many parallels with the current situation. In particular, the control of the media by employers and the concerted anti-union agenda in the media (complete with Shane Ross-style expose of union leader salaries) are remarkably similar.



I've read quite a bit about that time as well since family members were very actively involved in the foundation of the trade union movement in Ireland and I see very few parallels. Then again there are very few parallels between the trade unions founded then and the self-serving protectionist middle-class unions that leech off their members now. Yes, it’s quite a while since the unions betrayed the ideal they were founded upon. The fact that the public sector, sorry; public service broadcaster is blatantly pro-union does serve to let them off the hook though I can see why some union fat-cats are sore about the (still leftwing) Irish Times moving a little more to the centre now that it is no longer willing to be their mouth-piece.


----------



## DerKaiser (12 May 2010)

umop3p!sdn said:


> Many people don't vote because there is no one worth voting for.



Until I see 2 million people storm leinster house (as opposed to 100), I'll choose to believe that the people in this country prefer democracy to anarchy


----------



## z107 (12 May 2010)

> Until I see 2 million people storm leinster house (as opposed to 100), I'll choose to believe that the people in this country prefer democracy to anarchy


You seem to be very quick to generalise.


----------



## Mpsox (13 May 2010)

Complainer said:


> Funnily enough, I'm reading a book on the 1913 lockout at present. Whilst obviously the social situation has moved on immensly in terms of housing and employment rights, there are many parallels with the current situation. In particular, the control of the media by employers and the concerted anti-union agenda in the media (complete with Shane Ross-style expose of union leader salaries) are remarkably similar.


 
Researching family history at the minute and what I find interesting is the reaction to evictions back in the 1900s and the reaction to banks seizing houses nowadays. My own ancestors lived in an area where when the landlord went to evict tennant farmers for non-payment of rent, the locals fought pitched battles with the police as a result. It wasn't a question of not being able to pay, more a belief that the landlord was exploiting the situation. 

Whilst I wouldn't agree with your analysis of the media in Ireland and see no reason why union leaders salaries shouldn't be exposed, there are indeed parallels with what is happening now and what happened historically in Ireland.


----------



## Latrade (13 May 2010)

Complainer said:


> Funnily enough, I'm reading a book on the 1913 lockout at present. Whilst obviously the social situation has moved on immensly in terms of housing and employment rights, there are many parallels with the current situation. In particular, the control of the media by employers and the concerted anti-union agenda in the media (complete with Shane Ross-style expose of union leader salaries) are remarkably similar.


 
I'm sorry this just takes the absolute biscuit. The only parallel is that there was strike and dispute, that's it. You can add in "the social situation has moved on immensely" to attempt to temper what you've said, but this is one piece of hyperbole too much. 

There is no parallel with the slums and absolute poverty then or the reactions of the employers, police, church, etc to some negative equity and an average Public Sector wage of 49K. There's been no lock out, there's been negative and positive press. There's not even the mass support for the dispute outside your own unions that there was in 1913 (which even spread to the TUC in Britain). 

Every single one of those involved in 1913 would be turning in their graves to even think there was an attempt to draw a comparison between their plight and an average salary of 49K and a few with negative equity.


----------



## redbhoy (13 May 2010)

Latrade said:


> There is no parallel with the slums and absolute poverty then or the reactions of the employers, police, church, etc to some negative equity and an average Public Sector wage of 49K. There's been no lock out, there's been negative and positive press. There's not even the mass support for the dispute outside your own unions that there was in 1913 (which even spread to the TUC in Britain).


 
Maybe in 100 years time people will look back and think to themselves, 'aren't we lucky we didnt live in those times when bankers held a noose around the necks of the world and got away with it, and to think they drove around using oil instead of water which is found everywhere, one would wonder what kind of idiots were in charge back then. Surely no-one could have been so evil to adopt a system where the majority of people struggled just to keep a tiny minority Elite in their comforts zone'.

Maybe.


----------



## DerKaiser (13 May 2010)

umop3p!sdn said:


> You seem to be very quick to generalise.


 
Nothing wrong with a well founded generalisation as opposed to paranoid conspiracy theories


----------



## DerKaiser (13 May 2010)

redbhoy said:


> Surely no-one could have been so evil to adopt a system where the majority of people struggled just to keep a tiny minority Elite in their comforts zone'


 
You just have to have perspective on who the people struggling and who the elite are.

I would argue the poorest people in this country are in the elite compared to the majority of people on the planet. All these moral crusaders focussed a transfer of wealth within Ireland should maybe broaden their horizons. Go out and march for a better deal for Africa or the kids in the sweat shops in Asia if you want to make a difference to social injustice.

If we do insist on focussing just on our country, we also need to see that the public sector trade unions represent people who are doing relatively well on average and it would be naive to think that any concessions they get will be (or even could be) at the expense of the so called fat cats as opposed to the budgets for health, education and social welfare (which hurt the more vulnerable in this country at least).


----------

