Are SF's economic policies that "crazy"

rockofcashel

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 23, 2005
Messages
7,998
Website
www.sinnfein.ie
On a different thread about the way the Sindo dealt with "the spectre of a Lab/SF Government" today, many of the anti SF posters responded with the usual, SF have crazy economic policies.. which on closer inspection, made clear the fact that very few of them had any idea whatsoever about SF's economic policies at all.

Very few seemed to realise, that SF actually published an alternative budget over 3 weeks ago, which was costed and framed using the figures given to them by the Department of Finance, and which outlined cuts of 6 billion which could be made if SF were delivering a budget this year.

I responded in that thread with a post outlining some.. not all by any means of ... of SF's economic policies which I will repost here... maybe people could actually read it, and digest it, and outline what exactly is crazy about these policies..

"Just a couple of things to say after reading some of the posts on this thread...

For those of you who think SF members and supporters are some kind of horn headed devils, who eat babies and drink blood, can I just say, as a former member, you couldn't be futher from the truth. Sinn Fein members are all around you. They are in every town and village in the country, and are simply ordinary Irish people who think there is a better way of resolving political problems than the ways employed by the "main political parties" up to now.

In the past decade or so, north and south, about 350,000 people have given SF candidates their first preference vote in elections. A vote that has been increasing at every election. To call people ignorant for voting SF, is to call a hell of a lot of people ignorant don't you think.

As regards SF's "crazy economic policies"...

Which of those policies would you regard as crazy ?

The Health policy.. which calls for Universal Health Care.. the same as FG and Labour do ?

What SF wants to do in health, is to create a system similar to the British system, and one which is also very similar to many of the European systems.. where doctors are free to under 18's, and where where visiting a GP is not prohibitive. Also, a system where there is a set perscription cost, I believe it's a maximum of £7.10 to those who have to pay it. A system based on need over ability to pay.

Is that a crazy policy ?

Why can other countries implement such "crazy" policies, but Ireland cannot.. and are FG and Labour guilty of producing "crazy economic policies" also


On banking.. SF called for a "Nationalised banking system"... well thanks to FF, we already got that, without SF ever having to implement it.. except that the FF Nationalised banking system is probably the most expensive banking system in the world

And what is that scary about a properly run national bank... emphasising "properly run", such a banking system would serve to benefit and facilitate its customers, not shareholders, who don't care how profit is made, so long as it is made. A system which is behind the current financial crisis worldwide.

A nationalised banking system, properly run is exactly what we need.. where credit is fed into the productive economy, not into the speculative economy to be wasted on non productive uses such as land accumulation etc

Regarding SF's past stance on the Euro.. they said that Ireland shouldn't have joined the Euro because it didn't suit a small exporting economy to be restricted monetarily by being in an ill fitting "one size fits all currency"...

Current events have proven SF to be completely spot on in that position. Regardless of what Europhiles will say, our membership of the Euro has been the financial ruin of this country. If we had remained outside, as Denmark and Sweden did for example, our banks would not have been able to access the huge amounts of money that they did, which created the current problems. Our interest rates would have been higher than they were, dampening the housing bubble. We would be able to devalue our currency giving us some chance of using monetary policy to re-calibrate the economy and give us a competitive advantage over other countries stuck with ill fitting euro dominated policies.

Regarding taxation, SF were always calling for "those who earn the most" to pay the most. What is wrong with that policy? That is the very essence of "progressive taxation". In their budget proposal on Friday, the Labour Party called for a 48% marginal rate for earners over 100,000 euro. Sinn Fein were called economic illiterates for calling for the same in 2007. And do people here understand what a 48% marginal rate actually means? To those who don't, it means that there would be no change whatsoever from the current tax rate for people earning under 100,000 euro. They would still pay a certain portion at 20%, and the rest at 41%. But, for those earning over 100,000, that portion of their income would be taxed not at 41% as it is now, but at 48%. For example, someone earning 150,000 would pay an extra 7% on the 50,000 over the 100,000. This equates to 3,500 euro extra, or about 65 euro per week. Or, taken in the round, if you earn approximately 3,000 per week, you would have to pay an extra 60 euro per week. Or 1/50th of your earnings.. i.e. 2% extra overall. Is that so wrong ?

Sinn Fein also have good policies on creating a national housing strategy, bringing the provision of housing back under the control of either a National Housing Commission or back under the control of local or regional authorities, whereby again, housing need and proper community planning is the most important deciding factor regarding how housing is provided rather than profit making by developers.

Before going on about SF's crazy economic policies any further.. would anyone like to challenge the craziness of these policies first ?"


Anyone like to have a go then ?
 


iggy

Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2008
Messages
24
I think we allknow alot now about crazy economic policies, and they were not Sinn Fein Policies.

The usual anti-SF mob will probably avoid feedingthis thread in the hope it fades away.
 

Tedkins

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 4, 2010
Messages
6,648
All for universal health care but this kind of seems like it might be the wrong time to it. I know in NI anyway it chews up something like 48% of the entire block grant from Westminster, its bloody expensive. I'd focus on getting out of the current situation first.
 

Boy M5

Well-known member
Joined
May 20, 2010
Messages
21,420
Strange that SF were berated for their utopian economic policies by FF & the PDs* - "don't destroy our prosperity".



* also by FG which was unaware the economy had become a ponzi scheme & were similarly blissfully ignorant that there was an unsustainable property bubble & the banks were levereaged to the oxsters so they could make crazy loans. Mind you SF hadn't copped this either.
 

Boy M5

Well-known member
Joined
May 20, 2010
Messages
21,420
Not all their policies are crazy but a few give cause for concern:

They claim a 10% betting tax will raise 310m which is crazy as it assumes exactly same level of business when we all know people will just stick to online betting leading to bookies closing.
Good point - still it will make that economic illiterate Charlie McCreevy & his chums sweat a bit so not all bad.
 

Goban Saor

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 5, 2010
Messages
925
* also by FG which was unaware the economy had become a ponzi scheme & were similarly blissfully ignorant that there was an unsustainable property bubble & the banks were levereaged to the oxsters so they could make crazy loans. Mind you SF hadn't copped this either.
Was on Brutons leaflets.
 

Congalltee

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 10, 2009
Messages
6,124
Good point - still it will make that economic illiterate Charlie McCreevy & his chums sweat a bit so not all bad.
Was Charlie not the only minister for finance who have had a Commerce qualification?

I havd read the SF economic document. If appeared to add up. Even if some of the details are less than ideal.
 

Tim Johnston

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 22, 2010
Messages
5,075
And what is that scary about a properly run national bank... emphasising "properly run", such a banking system would serve to benefit and facilitate its customers, not shareholders, who don't care how profit is made, so long as it is made. A system which is behind the current financial crisis worldwide.

Does that mean a bank that gives loans to anyone who "needs" them? I think cheap'n'easy credit may have been what caused the bubble...

Regarding taxation, SF were always calling for "those who earn the most" to pay the most. What is wrong with that policy?
Nothing, except it ignores that they already do. Even with a flat tax, the richest would still pay the most.

PS I don't think SF's ideas are "crazy", I just think a few of them are unsustainable, as well as being Statist.
 

Boy M5

Well-known member
Joined
May 20, 2010
Messages
21,420
Was on Brutons leaflets.
Wow Richard Bruton was campaigning on there being a bubble in Meath, yet FG didn't hold Bertie & Biffo to account on it nationally?

When did he cop onto it?

Have you a scan of one of his leaflets?
 

Skin

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 25, 2005
Messages
1,079
1-Figures from independent economists say that a tax on "the rich" wont bring in enough money.

2-I dont see any detail from SF how they want to implement their health system.

3-Just because FF did it, doesnt make it right.

On the Euro and defaulting they are right.
Can you name the 'independent' economists please? Also, I dont think SF have stated that a tax on the rich would "bring in enough money"
 

A Belgian

Active member
Joined
Aug 29, 2009
Messages
175
On a different thread about the way the Sindo dealt with "the spectre of a Lab/SF Government" today, many of the anti SF posters responded with the usual, SF have crazy economic policies.. which on closer inspection, made clear the fact that very few of them had any idea whatsoever about SF's economic policies at all.

Very few seemed to realise, that SF actually published an alternative budget over 3 weeks ago, which was costed and framed using the figures given to them by the Department of Finance, and which outlined cuts of 6 billion which could be made if SF were delivering a budget this year.

I responded in that thread with a post outlining some.. not all by any means of ... of SF's economic policies which I will repost here... maybe people could actually read it, and digest it, and outline what exactly is crazy about these policies..

"Just a couple of things to say after reading some of the posts on this thread...

For those of you who think SF members and supporters are some kind of horn headed devils, who eat babies and drink blood, can I just say, as a former member, you couldn't be futher from the truth. Sinn Fein members are all around you. They are in every town and village in the country, and are simply ordinary Irish people who think there is a better way of resolving political problems than the ways employed by the "main political parties" up to now.

In the past decade or so, north and south, about 350,000 people have given SF candidates their first preference vote in elections. A vote that has been increasing at every election. To call people ignorant for voting SF, is to call a hell of a lot of people ignorant don't you think.

As regards SF's "crazy economic policies"...

Which of those policies would you regard as crazy ?

The Health policy.. which calls for Universal Health Care.. the same as FG and Labour do ?

What SF wants to do in health, is to create a system similar to the British system, and one which is also very similar to many of the European systems.. where doctors are free to under 18's, and where where visiting a GP is not prohibitive. Also, a system where there is a set perscription cost, I believe it's a maximum of £7.10 to those who have to pay it. A system based on need over ability to pay.

Is that a crazy policy ?

Why can other countries implement such "crazy" policies, but Ireland cannot.. and are FG and Labour guilty of producing "crazy economic policies" also


On banking.. SF called for a "Nationalised banking system"... well thanks to FF, we already got that, without SF ever having to implement it.. except that the FF Nationalised banking system is probably the most expensive banking system in the world

And what is that scary about a properly run national bank... emphasising "properly run", such a banking system would serve to benefit and facilitate its customers, not shareholders, who don't care how profit is made, so long as it is made. A system which is behind the current financial crisis worldwide.

A nationalised banking system, properly run is exactly what we need.. where credit is fed into the productive economy, not into the speculative economy to be wasted on non productive uses such as land accumulation etc

Regarding SF's past stance on the Euro.. they said that Ireland shouldn't have joined the Euro because it didn't suit a small exporting economy to be restricted monetarily by being in an ill fitting "one size fits all currency"...

Current events have proven SF to be completely spot on in that position. Regardless of what Europhiles will say, our membership of the Euro has been the financial ruin of this country. If we had remained outside, as Denmark and Sweden did for example, our banks would not have been able to access the huge amounts of money that they did, which created the current problems. Our interest rates would have been higher than they were, dampening the housing bubble. We would be able to devalue our currency giving us some chance of using monetary policy to re-calibrate the economy and give us a competitive advantage over other countries stuck with ill fitting euro dominated policies.

Regarding taxation, SF were always calling for "those who earn the most" to pay the most. What is wrong with that policy? That is the very essence of "progressive taxation". In their budget proposal on Friday, the Labour Party called for a 48% marginal rate for earners over 100,000 euro. Sinn Fein were called economic illiterates for calling for the same in 2007. And do people here understand what a 48% marginal rate actually means? To those who don't, it means that there would be no change whatsoever from the current tax rate for people earning under 100,000 euro. They would still pay a certain portion at 20%, and the rest at 41%. But, for those earning over 100,000, that portion of their income would be taxed not at 41% as it is now, but at 48%. For example, someone earning 150,000 would pay an extra 7% on the 50,000 over the 100,000. This equates to 3,500 euro extra, or about 65 euro per week. Or, taken in the round, if you earn approximately 3,000 per week, you would have to pay an extra 60 euro per week. Or 1/50th of your earnings.. i.e. 2% extra overall. Is that so wrong ?

Sinn Fein also have good policies on creating a national housing strategy, bringing the provision of housing back under the control of either a National Housing Commission or back under the control of local or regional authorities, whereby again, housing need and proper community planning is the most important deciding factor regarding how housing is provided rather than profit making by developers.

Before going on about SF's crazy economic policies any further.. would anyone like to challenge the craziness of these policies first ?"


Anyone like to have a go then ?
I certainly agree on most points. But I think SF is mistaken in blaming euro(pe).

My country is a small exporting economy as well and its exports have even risen since the introduction of the euro.

True, there are three differences between Belgium and Ireland.

1. Belgium is very closely linked with the German economy. Since years, before the euro, our interest rates were following Germany's, for instance.

2. We have a different kind of social model. In Belgium, we have since 1946 the tax model you describe in your post. And the public service that goes with it (although of course everybody complains).

3. The Belgian State had sound enough resources to save those bloody private banks. I'm afraid the Irish State had to nearly drown itself to save your banks from drowning and drowning the whole country as well. Your capitalist model of the tiger years (the casino economy) is definitely a total failure. A poor State and reckless banks is bad omen...

I strongly support the idea of a public bank in all European Member States.
 

chriskavo

Well-known member
Joined
May 28, 2010
Messages
2,641
If SF bring this bail out to court for being unconstitutional and succeed, they will
get huge votes. They will still do great at the election anyway and those points you make seem sensible enough to me. I am veering towards SF now more than any other party.
 

Insole

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 3, 2010
Messages
516
ROC, I have come to admit that SF have been proven right about some policies. But they have been proven wrong about others. The lack of clammering for a United Ireland at present shows how shallow a desire that really was.
The policy of supporting terrorists, bank robbers, Garda killers and child abusers just sticks in my craw every time.
SF is a dirty party and until they and FF both come clean on their criminal policies they will be unacceptable to a large majority.
Leading the protests is a different matter. I'd support you in that all the way, but I'll never buy an Easter Lilly or vote for one of your candidates.
 

rockofcashel

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 23, 2005
Messages
7,998
Website
www.sinnfein.ie
1-Figures from independent economists say that a tax on "the rich" wont bring in enough money.
I don't think SF are saying that "taxing the rich" is the only way we are going to get out of this mess either.. but, for example, using Labour's figures on introducing a 48% marginal rate of tax over 100,000 euro, another 400 million can be taken in in income tax. I think an extra 2% drop in income for people earning around 2,000 euro per week wouldn't be too much to burden, don't you ?


2-I dont see any detail from SF how they want to implement their health system.
Have you ever honestly looked ? Here you go.

http://www.sinnfein.ie/files/HealthDocument2006.pdf

3-Just because FF did it, doesnt make it right.
I have no idea what you are talking about here, maybe you could elaborate
 

Donaill

Active member
Joined
Nov 22, 2009
Messages
114
Not all their policies are crazy but a few give cause for concern:

They claim a 10% betting tax will raise 310m which is crazy as it assumes exactly same level of business when we all know people will just stick to online betting leading to bookies closing.
this not at all crazy as Ireland in fact has the lowest betting tax rate in the world!!!
Horse racing : Bookmakers Call For Investigation Into HRI Activities | SportsNewsIreland
i would also presume the betting tax would include online betting??? (correct me if i'm wrong)
 

rockofcashel

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 23, 2005
Messages
7,998
Website
www.sinnfein.ie
ROC, I have come to admit that SF have been proven right about some policies. But they have been proven wrong about others. The lack of clammering for a United Ireland at present shows how shallow a desire that really was.
a. All parties can say the same.. no party has ever arisen yet, who've been proved right on every single policy matter.. and no party ever will

The policy of supporting terrorists, bank robbers, Garda killers and child abusers just sticks in my craw every time.
This thread is to discuss SF's economic policies.. there's more than enough places to discuss those things

SF is a dirty party and until they and FF both come clean on their criminal policies they will be unacceptable to a large majority.
That's your opinion. You will accept others are entitled to a different view. The largest party in this State since its inception however, made a police killer its leader and Taoiseach


Leading the protests is a different matter. I'd support you in that all the way, but I'll never buy an Easter Lilly or vote for one of your candidates.
Thanks for your opinion. But can we get back to discussing the economics now ?
 

myhonorisloyalty666

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 19, 2010
Messages
304
For those of you who think SF members and supporters are some kind of horn headed devils, who eat babies and drink blood, can I just say, as a former member, you couldn't be futher from the truth. Sinn Fein members are all around you. They are in every town and village in the country, and are simply ordinary Irish people who think there is a better way of resolving political problems than the ways employed by the "main political parties" up to now.
Sinn Fein didn't drink blood but they bathed in it. The IRA murdered innocent men women and children with car bombs. They shot dead Jean McConville, they blew up Tim Parry and Jonathon Ball and they murdered Jerry McCabe - Martin Ferris was helpful enough to give his killers a lift at the gates of the prison - , they blew up 8 Protestant workmen and blew up a helpless elderly man, a helpless elderly woman and two young boys on a fishing trip. A small sample of what these scumbags did over 40 years of conspiracy to overthrow democracy on this island using terror. Denis Donaldson was hunted down like an animal and murdered.

In the past decade or so, north and south, about 350,000 people have given SF candidates their first preference vote in elections. A vote that has been increasing at every election. To call people ignorant for voting SF, is to call a hell of a lot of people ignorant don't you think.
Hitler and the Nazis were voted into power.
Lots of Serbs supported Milosevic.
Hundreds of thousands of Rwandans were murdered by hundreds of thousands of their fellow countrymen.

What SF wants to do in health, is to create a system similar to the British system, and one which is also very similar to many of the European systems.. where doctors are free to under 18's, and where where visiting a GP is not prohibitive. Also, a system where there is a set perscription cost, I believe it's a maximum of £7.10 to those who have to pay it. A system based on need over ability to pay.
Absolutely lunatic. What incentive is there for a doctor to become a GP? I suppose you want people to pay the doctor with eggs or live piglets when they money runs out?

On banking.. SF called for a "Nationalised banking system"... well thanks to FF, we already got that, without SF ever having to implement it.. except that the FF Nationalised banking system is probably the most expensive banking system in the world
Governments have no business owning banks into perpetuity.
Getting a loan for to start a business or buy a house shouldn't be decided by a tyrannical government bureaucrat.

And what is that scary about a properly run national bank... emphasising "properly run", such a banking system would serve to benefit and facilitate its customers, not shareholders, who don't care how profit is made, so long as it is made. A system which is behind the current financial crisis worldwide.
If there is no profit to be made, why the hell would shareholders invest their money?
That's the entire reason why banks and any type of business exist - profit.
Profit is why republicans extort, sell drugs, traffic foreign girls who are forced into prostitution, rob banks, sell smuggled cigarettes and black market diesel.
The reason their is bank crisis in the first place is because banks were loss making enterprises.
Anyways why should SF be trusted with the running of banks since they made a career out of robbing them decades?
How many billions would be salted away in Adam's or Slab Murphy's Swiss bank accounts?

A nationalised banking system, properly run is exactly what we need.. where credit is fed into the productive economy, not into the speculative economy to be wasted on non productive uses such as land accumulation etc
A state controlled centrally planned economy is your answer? And you wonder why it isn't taken seriously?

Regarding taxation, SF were always calling for "those who earn the most" to pay the most. What is wrong with that policy? That is the very essence of "progressive taxation". In their budget proposal on Friday, the Labour Party called for a 48% marginal rate for earners over 100,000 euro. Sinn Fein were called economic illiterates for calling for the same in 2007. And do people here understand what a 48% marginal rate actually means? To those who don't, it means that there would be no change whatsoever from the current tax rate for people earning under 100,000 euro. They would still pay a certain portion at 20%, and the rest at 41%. But, for those earning over 100,000, that portion of their income would be taxed not at 41% as it is now, but at 48%. For example, someone earning 150,000 would pay an extra 7% on the 50,000 over the 100,000. This equates to 3,500 euro extra, or about 65 euro per week. Or, taken in the round, if you earn approximately 3,000 per week, you would have to pay an extra 60 euro per week. Or 1/50th of your earnings.. i.e. 2% extra overall. Is that so wrong ?
High taxes kill incentives and kill growth.
Why would anybody pay 48% taxes only for their hard earned money to be squandered on propping up state run banks, in-efficient state companies and to keep public sector workers cocooned in jobs for life?

Sinn Fein also have good policies on creating a national housing strategy, bringing the provision of housing back under the control of either a National Housing Commission or back under the control of local or regional authorities, whereby again, housing need and proper community planning is the most important deciding factor regarding how housing is provided rather than profit making by developers.
Nobody is going to build houses if it is not profitable. That's why we have a collapse in the housing market. Have you visited planet Earth since '08?

Anyone like to have a go then ?
Am I going to be shot in both knees or beaten with hurleys and baseball bats with nails for having a go?

How about iron bars like the poor chap Paul Quinn who was beaten to death in a hayshed by the IRA?

Is that the future Ireland can face?

A criminal mafia run island like Sicily but without the sunshine?
 
Last edited:

Insole

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 3, 2010
Messages
516
ROC, I have come to admit that SF have been proven right about some policies. But they have been proven wrong about others. The lack of clammering for a United Ireland at present shows how shallow a desire that really was.
a. All parties can say the same.. no party has ever arisen yet, who've been proved right on every single policy matter.. and no party ever will



This thread is to discuss SF's economic policies.. there's more than enough places to discuss those things

SF is a dirty party and until they and FF both come clean on their criminal policies they will be unacceptable to a large majority.
That's your opinion. You will accept others are entitled to a different view. The largest party in this State since its inception however, made a police killer its leader and Taoiseach




Thanks for your opinion. But can we get back to discussing the economics now ?
Some valid stuff there, but don't fool yourself into thinking that people will blindly vote for and support a party in this country again with a sordid past/present that managed to get a few economic policies correct even if they were drafted for completely different reasons.

If FF came up with a brilliant UTurn on economic policy for the next GE it still wouldn't absolve them from being cheating, thieving, treasonous scoundrels would it?

:)
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top