Now we have our masters coming in to "check" our budget - shouldn't Enda just go around full time in his gimp costume.
I think the clue in that was when we signed up to the IMF/EC/ECB Programme! A lot of commentators seemed to have missed the bit about FF/ Greens signing away our economic sovereignty the last couple of days, so now we have this mock outrage about a measure that was in the feckin memorandum of understanding!Originally Posted by Spudulika
If you attack me with stupidity, I'll be forced to defend myself with sarcasm.
Macy I think it's more about the BS and outright lies FG and told to win the election, and now they're been shown to have no new clothes. I believe if they'd told the truth during the election they'd still have won - but now they're caught. Lovely to see the blame being laid on "eurocrats", as you point out, this is part of a wider plan to make sure the government do what they're told - unless the gimp Kenny behaves we'll have another hand picked person (as in Greece and Italy) placed to rule. Regime change by a different process.
Niether FG or Labour went in saying they'd pull out of the Programme. The only thing they said was they'd improve the terms, which they've done and they're continuing to work on. Maybe not to the methods Labour (in particular) indicated, but renegogiating with some success nonetheless.
Personally, I think they're using the right tactics at the moment. No one saying we should be playing hard ball has adequately explained the consequences if our bluff is called, if we went that approach.
If you attack me with stupidity, I'll be forced to defend myself with sarcasm.
They've checked the last few.
54,321 sold - wws will never die - ***
---
New blog if anyone's interested - http://loihistory.wordpress.com/
LOI section on balls.ie - http://balls.ie/league-of-ireland/
Labour said - Frankfurt's way or Labours way (kinda know who won that "showdown"). FG stated they'd get a better deal AND pay no more to the banks - they did neither.
This leak is simply a bodyblow to knock the wind out of the public body so that come budget day the head shot will knock everyone out. It's classic soften up approach and also puts the blame elsewhere.
I don't agree about those who advised playing hardball not looking at consequences, plenty did - I'd just use David McWilliams as an example. However this isn't what the government and their backers want, too many are making too much off the back of the whole debacle that it has to continue.
Dodge, our budget is always checked (under EU law) though playing the b!tch is not engendering great hope for the country. We needed a proper representative for Ireland, instead we got another DNA political dodo and his grasping backers.
Both said they'd stay in the programme though. And they've got changes to the interest rates and terms of the programme. The electorate had options of parties that said they'd tear it up totally - they didn't get the votes to form the Government.
I don't believe this is a way of kite flying by the Government, as there was no need. The VAT increases are in the published Memo of Understanding. People seriously weren't paying attention if they didn't know this was coming, and weren't really paying attention beyond the soundbites if they thought that FG or Labour were going to tear up the programme. Gilmore had rowed back from that comment within hours iirc. Nobody was conned or lied to on this issue, and there were political options that outright didn't support the programme that the electorate could've voted for.
It'd be extremely surprised if you voted for Labour, and I'd be surprised if you even voted FG. Most of the people that make out they were lied to tend to be people who didn't actually vote for the current Government Parties anyway in my experience.
There's then and now. In the past the options were discussed. I don't believe many who are still saying it (eg Ganley), are explaining the consequences of doing it now.
Last edited by Macy; 18/11/2011 at 10:24 AM.
If you attack me with stupidity, I'll be forced to defend myself with sarcasm.
I didn't vote Labour or FG or FF, because I had Moan Burton (overrated and over the top), Leo Verucca (codologist of the highest degree and as trustworthy as an LOI boss) and the late Brian Lenihan (egotist, idiot and all round saint). I was doorstepped and listened to what they had to say, asked serious questions and each one -Joan in the Blanch centre, Leo in Leinster House and Brian at a local GAA club each claimed that their party were going to "stand up to Europe". I refused to vote for any of them and (even on here) questioned Labour getting into bed with FG. Now they're showing their true socialist colours by hammering their core constituency and acting in the same manner as New Labour.
Wait Macy, you said No one saying we should be playing hard ball has adequately explained the consequences if our bluff is called, if we went that approach. I pointed out just one person who has a clear record of breaking down the situation and rationally explaining it and the options available - with consequences of each choice - don't then just dismiss this and use Ganley as an example. There are other courses available, but nothing that will damage the status quo of the moneymakers and their puppets in government will be done. As per usual money wins out.
Can you link to an article from the last month, for example, from McWilliams where he's outlined what happens if we play hard ball and our bluff is called? He's had a few where he's said we should be going for the same deal as Greece on debt write down, but nothing about what would be the consequences if we didn't get them (just an assumption that we would and the benefits of that).
If you attack me with stupidity, I'll be forced to defend myself with sarcasm.
Macy, he's spoken often enough about our options, far more so than the clowns in Leinster House. Don't just rely on what he churns out for the SBP or Indo, he's far more elaborate at his presentations or workshops. However he will never be listened to as he gets slagged off for being ginger and a media luvvy.
Could you point out one serious commentator who has slagged him off 'for being ginger'?
So that's a "no" on the links then.
I did check out his own website for articles, where presumably he isn't nobbled (if that's what your suggesting INM and SBP do), and I couldn't find any within the last month or so. Several saying "we should do this" and basically assuming the EU would say yes. None saying what would happen if they said "go ahead, but we'll stop supplying low rate funds to your banks".
And for what it's worth I do have time for McWilliams. He's being scapegoated for the guarantee imo. Agenda was a great TV programme. Not a fan of his recent books, but more the style than the substance.
If you attack me with stupidity, I'll be forced to defend myself with sarcasm.
Hungary off to the IMF now; that came a bit out of the blue.
House prices suffer the biggest one-month percentage fall in two years; random person predicts prices to rise in 2013. Exactly the reason I like having a shifty through the quotes thread on propertypin. Though you do have to wonder why we continue to bother getting quotes off people like this.
And a little graph from the Beeb on how much we all owe each other. Britain owes us more than we owe them! And we each owe E400k per person in foreign debt, presumably due to the bank guarantee. Nice manageable figure...
Last edited by pineapple stu; 22/11/2011 at 11:01 AM.
Germany only able to borrow 2/3rds of what it was looking to borrow.
Have we a popcorn smiley?
That wasn't unexpected. They wanted to borrow at 2% (lowest level ever).
54,321 sold - wws will never die - ***
---
New blog if anyone's interested - http://loihistory.wordpress.com/
LOI section on balls.ie - http://balls.ie/league-of-ireland/
Yeah, but quite what they were thinking trying to pull that of now, I'm not sure. Surely they must have known the headlines would be they failed to sell, leaving off the bit about why they failed to sell.
When are the German elections, so we can stop this arsing about?
If you attack me with stupidity, I'll be forced to defend myself with sarcasm.
The change to the interest rate was an effect of the negotiations with Greece, rather than any negotiations by the Irish government. The interest reduction deal was simply offered to ireland and other countries after the negotiations with Greece.
http://www.euinside.eu/en/news/infor...-for-ms-merkel
In fact, the coalition government has not achieved anything on that level that Fianna Fail couldn't do, assuming Fianna Fail could resist the weak calls from Europe to raise corporation taxes.
The 2011 election promises, manifesto promises and election rhetoric, were less than worthless.
I'm not sure about McWilliams plan of what we could try to do at this time, considering all that has been done and decided since 2008. He like many others are supporters of capatalism and free market dogmas but he shudders at this form of capitalism. He thinks this is not capitalism, that the rules of the game are being twisted and perverted, but this is capitalism, the reality is that rules are always changed to preserve the economic status quo.
Basically all the core ideological values were slanted by politicians firmly towards preserving status quo, right from the earliest signs of a collapse, with appropriate crocodile tears of course. The Labour Party in Ireland is no different from the extreme free market, pro EU, social democrat parties around europe.
We can only speculate whether going in with a hard line would've got the same or different (either better or worse) than the more behind the scenes diplomacy the Government are persuing. We got the reduction without much fuss. We got changes to the programme. Achieving that was better than FF managed - they managed to negotiate us a higher interest rate than Greece had already got ffs.
Some of the pre election promises weren't realistic, and Labour were paniced into them. FG did the same trying to get an overall majority. Whether it's legitimate or not, without an overall majority parties always have the cover of coalition Government compromise. The next election will tell how the people feel.
Personally, I think Labour should've stayed out and let FG cobble together a coalition, but can see why they went in. If they hadn't, they'd still be getting attacked from all sides - from the left wing parties saying they should be in protecting people, and from the right who just hate the idea of a Labour Party.
I don't think Labour is extreme free market. It's clearly pro EU, and there's different wings of the party (The more you go to the centre, the more social democrat).
If you attack me with stupidity, I'll be forced to defend myself with sarcasm.
We don't have to speculate that the cut in interest rate was achieved without any effort from the coalition government's part.
We have no evidence that the Fine Gael approach to the Euro zone is any different than Fianna Fail.
We can speculate about a lot of things.
but behind the scenes efforts?
Yes, negotiations are obviously behind some door, but there is a public record of a meeting taking place, papers/minutes being signed and some form of an announcement/spin afterwards. Behind the scenes efforts can take place in the context of an intent to formally negotiate a position or/and actual formal negotiations taking place.
But decisions are taken at a formal meeting and documents signed according to the EU protocol.
What could possibly be legitimate about deliberate lies and deceit done in the form of election promises, in order to get into power?Some of the pre election promises weren't realistic, and Labour were paniced into them. FG did the same trying to get an overall majority. Whether it's legitimate or not, without an overall majority parties always have the cover of coalition Government compromise. The next election will tell how the people feel.
We have evidence that the coalition are just as duplicitous as Fianna Fail were in government.
Lets take the recent payment of Anglo related subordinated debt €730m, assuming Labour for their part in the coalition would not vehemently object to this part of
Fine Gael 2011 election manifesto
Agreed Procedures for Restructuring the Debts of Troubled Banks: Fine Gael in Government will forcecertain classes of bond-holders to share in the cost of recapitalising troubled financial institutions. This willbe done unilaterally for the most junior bondholders (owners of preference shares, sub-ordinated debtand similar instruments), but could be extended – as part of a European-wide framework – for senior debt,focusing on insolvent institutions like Anglo Irish and Irish Nationwide that have no systemic importance.
and we have a quote from Noonan RTE 2011
http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0615/noonan2-business.html
“Look, it’s no longer a bank. Anglo is now merged with Irish Nationwide. It’s a warehouse for impaired assets. Its deposit base has been moved out into the pillar banks. And it doesn’t work as a bank anymore. You can’t put your money on deposit in Anglo Irish. You can’t get a loan from Anglo Irish. So the only thing that gives it the name of a bank is because it has a banking license. It needs the banking license to access the monies from the Central Bank. So I said that as far as I am concerned, this is not a real bank. This is a warehouse, and we need your assistance in dealing with the senior bond holders because we don’t think the Irish taxpayer should have to redeem what has become speculative investment.”
We have 2 choices here to judge the merits of Fine Gael, knowingly lying through their teeth when they made that election promise after 18 months of scrutiny of the overall state of affairs or just plain old ineptitude or gross ignorance, even to that June 2011 interview.
In fact this debt had to be paid, not just in accordance with the written/unwritten understanding with the Euro zone/ECB, but according to the laws as they stand.
http://namawinelake.wordpress.com/2011/10/21/what-would-happen-if-anglo-didn’t-repay-the-1bn-bond-maturing-on-2nd-november-2011-part-1-of-2/
(1) bondholders ranking equally with depositors so if we want to imposes losses on bondholders then we need do the same with depositors and (2) since Anglo has minimal deposits remaining and presumably these are associated with lending accounts, following the sale of Anglo’s deposits and accompanying assets to AIB in February 2011, that Anglo has deliberately disposed of assets which might have been used to repay bondholders which might expose the bank to actions under a fraudulent conveyancing heading and (3) since Anglo has received €29.3bn of state funding, it is a solvent bank and normally it would be the shareholder (that is the government on our behalf as citizens) that absorbs the first loss.
I understand and appreciate that there are different wings inside Labour.I don't think Labour is extreme free market. It's clearly pro EU, and there's different wings of the party (The more you go to the centre, the more social democrat)
In my mind there is no difference between clearly pro EU and clearly pro EU free market. The EU are fanatically pro free market, whether it be economic trade or finance.
All eurozone countries put at risk of downgrade. Apparently there's a 50% chance that any of the six AAA countries - Germany, France, Austria, the Netherlands, Finland and Luxembourg - will be downgraded in the next 90 days. We're on the list too. Really does seem to be lurching from chaos to chaos. Wonder if we're at the end of the beginning or the beginning of the end?
Posting Permissions
Quote
Bookmarks