Real agenda - return of the one party state we had during the pre-2010 celtic tiger era?

freewillie

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 3, 2013
Messages
7,295
That is the kind of stuff the London media came out with during the famine.

You should not be repeating it now.
Why not?
 


shiel

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2011
Messages
19,435
When a million Irish people died of hunger and disease during the famine the London media were scoffing at them the way you are doing.

You should not need me to explain how offensive and unacceptable that is.
 

shiel

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2011
Messages
19,435
I posted the following on another thread.

It is just as relevant here.

The facts are that one political group was elected in three successive elections and was in power too long during the celtic tiger period having their arses licked by the Irish media.

Being human they thought themselves indispensible and made reckless decisions which bankrupt the country.

If another political group was in power in similar circumstances it could have been better or worse. We do not know.

We do know that both government expenditure and bank lending trebled in the pre-2009 period.

We also know that, as a consequence, the country went broke, had a 30% government deficit and needed a 85bn euro bailout in 2010.

Also as a consequence of the country going broke major cuts in public expenditure including charging for water were introduced by the then government in the budget of 2009, the national plan of 2010 and the bailout agreement of 2010.

These were continued under the 2011 government.

None of this would have been necessary if the country was not bankrupted by the decisions of its own most powerful citizens during the pre-2009 celtic tiger era.

None of this would have been necessary if the Irish media and academia had challenged the reckless decisions of the government and financial institutions during the celtic tiger period and told the rest of us ordinary plebs of the risks that were being taken during the 2000-2009 period with all our futures.
 

McDave

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 10, 2008
Messages
13,520
When I came to live in Dublin in 1988 the place was a very run down but 20 years later it was massively regenerated. Huge numbers of new houses and apartments, hotels, shopping centres everything newly built. That is reality.
Also it was about time ordinary Irish people got access to cheap credit after generations of having no chance to get their hands on a few quid. Sure many people ended up going overboard and going bust but better to at least have some taste of money than never.
As for the economic disaster the vast majority are still a lot better off despite it all and we have maintained our position right at the top in terms of Human Development Index.
Sure there was a bust after such a mighty boom but that's to be expected.
Sure some people lost jobs but the vast majority did not.
Sure the country owes a lot of money but we still spend more than we earn and the Europeans actually still give us the extra money we need so in effect we will never pay back the money we owe and it will dwindle to insignificance over time thanks to growth.
Perhaps the disaster isn't as bad as you think and the media are cheering that on as well?
ECB credit wasn't that cheap.

There were problems, but they were self-induced 100% loans on excessive multiples of earnings, tracker mortgages and really poor financial governance.

Also, there was no boom, there was a bubble. Which burst spectacularly. And a massive misallocation of resources which came at huge human cost.
 

galteeman

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 6, 2010
Messages
3,532
ECB credit wasn't that cheap.

There were problems, but they were self-induced 100% loans on excessive multiples of earnings, tracker mortgages and really poor financial governance.

Also, there was no boom, there was a bubble. Which burst spectacularly. And a massive misallocation of resources which came at huge human cost.
Number of houses built at 35-year low - Independent.ie
Some 93,419 houses were built in 2006; 78,027 in 2007; 51,724 in 2008; and 26,420 in 2009.
It shows that just 14,602 houses were built last year.

Now imagine what our 'housing crisis' would be like today if we never had that 'bubble' as you call it?
If the nay sayers had succeeded in shutting down all the action and prevented the money from flowing where would everyone be living now? in their parents attics?
What would you have preferred? stop 100,000,s people from getting their own homes? and the vast majority of those folks are still living in those modern homes today. Do you really think Bertie was going to rain on people's parade and announce sorry folks but we are pulling up the ladder and there will be no more access to credit etc. and we are going to put an end to all this crazy construction.

As far as the human cost goes public spending went crazy around 2005 and had to be cut back around 2009 however it only got cut back to the 2005 level, a fair chunk of that was capital expenditure and the govt. to this day still spends a lot more than it takes in and we are still one of the richest countries in Europe and the world.
 

shiel

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2011
Messages
19,435
Number of houses built at 35-year low - Independent.ie
Some 93,419 houses were built in 2006; 78,027 in 2007; 51,724 in 2008; and 26,420 in 2009.
It shows that just 14,602 houses were built last year.

Now imagine what our 'housing crisis' would be like today if we never had that 'bubble' as you call it?
If the nay sayers had succeeded in shutting down all the action and prevented the money from flowing where would everyone be living now? in their parents attics?
What would you have preferred? stop 100,000,s people from getting their own homes? and the vast majority of those folks are still living in those modern homes today. Do you really think Bertie was going to rain on people's parade and announce sorry folks but we are pulling up the ladder and there will be no more access to credit etc. and we are going to put an end to all this crazy construction.

As far as the human cost goes public spending went crazy around 2005 and had to be cut back around 2009 however it only got cut back to the 2005 level, a fair chunk of that was capital expenditure and the govt. to this day still spends a lot more than it takes in and we are still one of the richest countries in Europe and the world.
The article you quote was written in 2011. It refers to 'ghost estates' built in the wrong place.

The ESRI say that 26,000 houses per year is the required figure.

That means that 9 years houses were built in the three years 2006 to 2008. That helps to explain the trebling of bank lending over much the same period.

If the thing was managed in a more sensible manner the same number of houses would have built more gradually and in the right places.

The collapse which bankrupted the country would not have happened.

After all the decision makers in most countries in the EU managed not to bankrupt their countries.
 

galteeman

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 6, 2010
Messages
3,532
The article you quote was written in 2011. It refers to 'ghost estates' built in the wrong place.

The ESRI say that 26,000 houses per year is the required figure.

That means that 9 years houses were built in the three years 2006 to 2008. That helps to explain the trebling of bank lending over much the same period.

If the thing was managed in a more sensible manner the same number of houses would have built more gradually and in the right places.

The collapse which bankrupted the country would not have happened.

After all the decision makers in most countries in the EU managed not to bankrupt their countries.
I see what you mean but still if they hadn't built such a massive number of houses during the boom then the required figure of 26,000 would be way way higher now right? Anyway our stock of all types of infrastructure was so pathetic that we really did need to let rip.
 

Cato

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 21, 2005
Messages
20,390
The article you quote was written in 2011. It refers to 'ghost estates' built in the wrong place.

The ESRI say that 26,000 houses per year is the required figure.

That means that 9 years houses were built in the three years 2006 to 2008. That helps to explain the trebling of bank lending over much the same period.

If the thing was managed in a more sensible manner the same number of houses would have built more gradually and in the right places.

The collapse which bankrupted the country would not have happened.

After all the decision makers in most countries in the EU managed not to bankrupt their countries.
The individual counsellors and the parties in our local government structures that decided to zone too much land and who granted permission for all of those houses have never been held properly to account. The blame was targeted on national government for nearly all aspects of what led to the crash, yet much of the blame should have been applied at local level.

As you've been told before, the state was never bankrupted. I know you're fond of the word, and it is a useful rhetorical shorthand, but it's incorrect.
 

shiel

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2011
Messages
19,435
I see what you mean but still if they hadn't built such a massive number of houses during the boom then the required figure of 26,000 would be way way higher now right? Anyway our stock of all types of infrastructure was so pathetic that we really did need to let rip.
Letting it rip meant a trebling of bank lending and a trebling of government expenditure in less than a decade.

Letting it rip meant a one party state in which one group of people were re-elected at successive elections with the acclaim of an arse licking media.

Letting it rip meant people in power being acclaimed in media for 'walking on water' and being 'most responsible' when some government departments increased spending by 125% in less than half a decade.

Letting it rip meant media declaring the opposition to be 'as appetising as contracting the Ebola virus'.

Letting it rip meant media headlines rejoicing in the fact that it was '20 years since an opposition party was elected to government'.

Letting it rip meant declaring the opposition to be 'wandering in the wilderness of perpetual opposition'.

If the collapse had not happened the last election would have seen one group re-elected for the seventh time.

So letting it rip meant a one party state.

I am not making a party political point here.

Human beings are corrupted by power.

The letting it rip one party state that happened in the celtic tiger era was not in anyones' interest.

My problem is that I worry that our media are cheer leading the return of the one party state at the moment.
 

galteeman

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 6, 2010
Messages
3,532
Letting it rip meant a trebling of bank lending and a trebling of government expenditure in less than a decade.

Letting it rip meant a one party state in which one group of people were re-elected at successive elections with the acclaim of an arse licking media.

Letting it rip meant people in power being acclaimed in media for 'walking on water' and being 'most responsible' when some government departments increased spending by 125% in less than half a decade.

Letting it rip meant media declaring the opposition to be 'as appetising as contracting the Ebola virus'.

Letting it rip meant media headlines rejoicing in the fact that it was '20 years since an opposition party was elected to government'.

Letting it rip meant declaring the opposition to be 'wandering in the wilderness of perpetual opposition'.

If the collapse had not happened the last election would have seen one group re-elected for the seventh time.

So letting it rip meant a one party state.

I am not making a party political point here.

Human beings are corrupted by power.

The letting it rip one party state that happened in the celtic tiger era was not in anyones' interest.

My problem is that I worry that our media are cheer leading the return of the one party state at the moment.
All I can vouch for are the media I interact with myself.
Independent Newspapers are very pro FF so you are right there.
Irish Times don't seem to be too biased from the bits that I read.
Sunday Times is probably pro FG as far as I can tell.
I listen to the following Newstalk shows and as far as I can tell Pat Kenny is pro FG, Hook is pro FG, Yates is pro FG, Chris Donoghue and Shane Colman are pro FF, Moncreif is a lefty but none of those guys are over the top biased.
I don't really bother with RTE

I assume you mean FF as the 1 party state that are being promoted?
Which news media do you think are arse licking FF then?
 

McDave

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 10, 2008
Messages
13,520
Number of houses built at 35-year low - Independent.ie
Some 93,419 houses were built in 2006; 78,027 in 2007; 51,724 in 2008; and 26,420 in 2009.
It shows that just 14,602 houses were built last year.

Now imagine what our 'housing crisis' would be like today if we never had that 'bubble' as you call it?
If the nay sayers had succeeded in shutting down all the action and prevented the money from flowing where would everyone be living now? in their parents attics?
What would you have preferred? stop 100,000,s people from getting their own homes? and the vast majority of those folks are still living in those modern homes today. Do you really think Bertie was going to rain on people's parade and announce sorry folks but we are pulling up the ladder and there will be no more access to credit etc. and we are going to put an end to all this crazy construction.

As far as the human cost goes public spending went crazy around 2005 and had to be cut back around 2009 however it only got cut back to the 2005 level, a fair chunk of that was capital expenditure and the govt. to this day still spends a lot more than it takes in and we are still one of the richest countries in Europe and the world.
Many built in the wrong place - ghost estates anyone?

Many of them built to low standards - Longboat Quay anyone?

Most of them at too high a price - €400,000 to €500,000 for a two-bed, single aspect shoe box apartment anyone?

The housing crisis is precisely down to the misallocation of resources to poorly built and/or located builds. When the bubble burst, we were left with an entirely inadequate, overpriced housing stock. But don't worry. Keep on shilling for FF/CIF.
 

RoscommonFF

Active member
Joined
Jun 7, 2016
Messages
179
FF are the natural party of Government on the island of Ireland.
Roll on the next GE, Kenny will get his spineless arse handed to him.
 

GDPR

1
Joined
Jul 5, 2008
Messages
217,741
The individual counsellors and the parties in our local government structures that decided to zone too much land and who granted permission for all of those houses have never been held properly to account. The blame was targeted on national government for nearly all aspects of what led to the crash, yet much of the blame should have been applied at local level.

As you've been told before, the state was never bankrupted. I know you're fond of the word, and it is a useful rhetorical shorthand, but it's incorrect.
There was both local and national political pressure applied. It is fair to say that local authorities have failed spectacularly this century so far in their housing and planning functions. How more heads at County manager and director of service level have not rolled is beyond me. Instead the same failures are largely in place today.
 

shiel

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2011
Messages
19,435
FF are the natural party of Government on the island of Ireland.
Roll on the next GE, Kenny will get his spineless arse handed to him.
You make my point for me much better than I can make it myself.

What you are essentially saying is that one party should be in power 'till hell freezes over'.

I say in the OP that the agenda now is to use the anti-austerity shtuff such as the water charges etc issues to get rid of Kenny and his gang and replace them permanently with Martin and his gang.

But you put it so much more forcefully and effectively when you say 'FF are the natural party of Government. Roll on the next GE, Kenny will get his spineless arse handed to him'.

That, however, will be going back to pre-2009 situation when one political grouping was elected with media acclaim, continuously, in successive elections during the celtic tiger era.

The point I am trying to make is that it was not a healthy democracy when any political grouping were having their arses licked by media for more than a decade in what was practically a one party state.

And so it proved. The insiders got arrogant and complacent. They thought they could walk on water as one commentator mentioned at the time.

Eventually the country and the financial institutions were bankrupted by their recklessness.

The symptoms of a return to the one party state, celtic tiger media mentality are there again now.

That is declared with admirable clarity in your post.

The question the media should be asking is it in the interests of the citizens of this democratic republic to return to the equivalent of the celtic tiger, one party state situation which bankrupted the country?

Should we not learn something from the fact that all of the citizens of this democratic republic have paid a high price for the calamity that was caused by the one party state?
 

galteeman

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 6, 2010
Messages
3,532
All I can say is that every country has planning issues and **** ups. The vast majority of the homes built are not like Longboat Quay or in ghost estates and we increased our stock of modern homes dramatically because we let rip and we urgently needed to do that at the time.
By the way Shiel you haven't answered my last post and you haven't provided much evidence of the media arse licking you speak of.
 

Man or Mouse

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 17, 2010
Messages
7,005
The debate is wandering off the subject as is probably inevitable.

The debate has also been reduced to the usual partisan party political ************************e fest.

The basic facts, however, cannot be denied.

One political grouping was elected with media acclaim, continuously, in successive elections during the celtic tiger era.

If the alternative political grouping was elected continuously for the same length of time things could have been better or worse. But that is not the point.

The point is it was not a healthy democracy when any political grouping were having their arses licked by media for more than a decade in what was practically a one party state.

And so it proved. The insiders got arrogant and complacent. They thought they could walk on water as one commentator mentioned at the time.

Eventually the country and the financial institutions were bankrupt by their recklessness.

The symptoms of a return to the one party state, celtic tiger media mentality are there again now.

Irrespective of what the political grouping that is involved my opinion is that it is just as unwise and just as contrary to the interests of the ordinary citizen of this democratic republic now as it proved to be during the celtic tiger.

Reducing the debate to the usual partisan party political ************************e fest is also just as contrary to the interests of the ordinary citizen of this democratic republic.
On reading the rest of the page, it seems your hopes and aspirations are dashed.

You are right though. In one little example recently when Kenny appeared at Springsteen in Croker he was lambasted on here and ridiculed in the media. Had it been Bamboozalem Bertie he'd have been eulogised.
 

Man or Mouse

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 17, 2010
Messages
7,005
FF are the natural party of Government on the island of Ireland.
Roll on the next GE, Kenny will get his spineless arse handed to him.
That is just SO Roscomon.
 

Fractional Reserve

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2011
Messages
8,158
The electorate get to decide on who runs the state.

I don't see any agenda.

I'd say that the reality is that we're an oligarchic democracy. Whoever does get into power is beholden to plutocrats.
The electorate get a vote , after that the politicians do what they like , its pretend democracy and people fall for it .
 

shiel

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2011
Messages
19,435
All I can say is that every country has planning issues and **** ups. The vast majority of the homes built are not like Longboat Quay or in ghost estates and we increased our stock of modern homes dramatically because we let rip and we urgently needed to do that at the time.
By the way Shiel you haven't answered my last post and you haven't provided much evidence of the media arse licking you speak of.
Quotes from the celtic tiger media.

Pre 2002 election budget coverage.

'Every day and in every way things are getting better and better'

'Spending has risen 79%'

'Best and most responsible of budgets. Minister passed test with flying colours'.

When the country went broke as a result of the above message being promugated for over a decade we had the all day every day anti-austerity campaign.

The most prominent people who were involved in making the decisions which bankrupted the country in celtic tiger times and the people in media who supported them in their reckless decisions were - post-2010 85bn euro bailout - now the most prominent in the anti-austerity campaign.

Hypocrisy or what?

The media coverage of the recent election campaign did not see that in contrast to Greece this country had made some recovery.

It blamed the 2011 government for the austerity.

Media failed to challenge the people who bankrupt the country in their pre-2009 decade long recklessness.

Media failed to challenge them when they were complaining about the problems they themselves caused.

Media are now cheer leading a return to the celtic tiger one party state.

Surely we should have learned from the bankrupting of the country that that is not in anyone's interest?
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top Bottom