• It has come to our attention that some users may have been "banned" when they tried to change their passwords after the site was hacked due to a glitch in the old vBulletin software. This would have occurred around the end of February and does not apply after the site was converted to Xenforo. If you believe you were affected by this, please contact a staff member or use the Contact us link at the bottom of any forum page.

Utter hypocrisy of politicians exposed


Disillusioned democrat

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 16, 2010
Messages
15,646
I kid you not - you could not make this up.

Last night the government and many opposition TDs out gunned a motion proposed by the Technical Group to cap public sector pensions and golden-handshakes, discretionary lump sum top ups etc.

Then, last night and this morning Shorthaul tells us that it's the private sector pensions are the real problem:

Risn Shortall calls for 'root and branch' reform of pension tax relief system - RT News and that she wants measures taken so people can't provide for themselves in the future.

There's none so blind as will not see.....
 

Spanner Island

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
24,203
The majority of those who make up our body politic are insincere, two faced, self serving hypocrites...

Most of them make me want to puke with their fake empathy and general bullsh!t...

It's every man and woman for themselves in the rotten Irish 'establishment'.

Parasites the lot of them.
 

Sync

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
28,845
Which part of what she said do you believe is inaccurate? Do you think pensions over 50k should be subsidised? What was Shortalls position on public pension reform that you feel contradicts her belief that private subsidies need to be addressed?

Do you think for instance that the money being spent to subsidise pensions over 50k would not be better spent encouraging lower earners to start pensions? Is she saying no public reform is required or is she saying this is required as well?

I'm sure you've thought about all this.
 

Disillusioned democrat

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 16, 2010
Messages
15,646
I forgot to mention in OP - Gavin Jennings really tore into HoChi Quinn on Morning Ireland this morning on this, who conveniently wasn't "in the country" last night to vote on the motion.

He (Quinn) certainly wasn't prepared to be questioned on this and made a complete balls of it - hiding, as always, behind nurses and Gardai to justify his €3.5m pot at the end of the road to Pensionville. He twisted and turned and promised that this needed to be looked at in the future, but that now wan't the time...blah, blah....FFS - if NOW, when an 89 year old is loosing her 1 hour care a week isn't the time, when do our pols think WILL be the time.
 

NewDawn1

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 10, 2012
Messages
4,258
The majority of those who make up our body politic are insincere, two faced, self serving hypocrites...

Most of them make me want to puke with their fake empathy and general bullsh!t...

It's every man and woman for themselves in the rotten Irish 'establishment'.

Parasites the lot of them.
'One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors.'

Plato
 

Disillusioned democrat

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 16, 2010
Messages
15,646
Which part of what she said do you believe is inaccurate? Do you think pensions over 50k should be subsidised? What was Shortalls position on public pension reform that you feel contradicts her belief that private subsidies need to be addressed?

Do you think for instance that the money being spent to subsidise pensions over 50k would not be better spent encouraging lower earners to start pensions? Is she saying no public reform is required or is she saying this is required as well?

I'm sure you've thought about all this.
I think you're purposefully missing the juxtaposition between our politicians attitude to pensions - they slapped down the technical group's motion to try to put manners on their own pensions and the same day she's out of the populist trans telling is that somehow the "poor" are subsidizing paying the pension funds of the wealthy private sector fat-cats.

It would give you the impression that these fat cats are somehow accessing public money for their pensions as opposed to the reality, that what is really happening is that people are availing of existing rules that say you can avoid paying tax on money you put into a pension fund - it's kind of different rweall, but highlights politicians attitude that "your" money is really only there for the politicians to redistribute according to populist whims.
 

Spanner Island

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
24,203
Which part of what she said do you believe is inaccurate? Do you think pensions over 50k should be subsidised? What was Shortalls position on public pension reform that you feel contradicts her belief that private subsidies need to be addressed?

Do you think for instance that the money being spent to subsidise pensions over 50k would not be better spent encouraging lower earners to start pensions? Is she saying no public reform is required or is she saying this is required as well?

I'm sure you've thought about all this.
They're all spoofing for Ireland... as per bleedin' usual... procrastinating, deflecting, waffling, baffling themselves with bullsh!t etc.

And all the time the status quo remains largely in tact and they do nothing...

If our politicians were as good at running the country as they are at talking endless crap Ireland would be the envy of the world...
 

Disillusioned democrat

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 16, 2010
Messages
15,646
'One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors.'

Plato
In Ireland it's not a case of refusing to participate, it's just that the barrier to entry is too great for many people.

Voting for people with the right policies is participating in politics, but when these people routinely tear up their election promises as soon as they get feet under minister's desk is becomes a farce.

The typical Irish TD profile says a lot about the only route into politics - many were low level public servants - teachers being one of the biggest contributors - lots of time on their hands and a fall back plan that ensured some poor substitute teacher never got onto the gravy train, or career breaks, etc. that ensured you could always go back.

For the kind of people I'd like to see running the country this is never going to be an option.
 

Sync

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
28,845
I think you're purposefully missing the juxtaposition between our politicians attitude to pensions - they slapped down the technical group's motion to try to put manners on their own pensions and the same day she's out of the populist trans telling is that somehow the "poor" are subsidizing paying the pension funds of the wealthy private sector fat-cats.
When was the last time you saw a govt in any country adopt a financial bill proposed by the opposition? Seriously? Where have you seen such politics operate in a western democracy in the past?

It would give you the impression that these fat cats are somehow accessing public money for their pensions as opposed to the reality, that what is really happening is that people are availing of existing rules that say you can avoid paying tax on money you put into a pension fund - it's kind of different rweall, but highlights politicians attitude that "your" money is really only there for the politicians to redistribute according to populist whims.
Populist whims? So you DO think there's something wrong with shortall's proposal. What is it? Do you think the idea of cutting subsidies of pensions over 50k is a bad one? If so, why?
 

controller

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 25, 2009
Messages
3,176
When was the last time you saw a govt in any country adopt a financial bill proposed by the opposition? Seriously? Where have you seen such politics operate in a western democracy in the past?Populist whims? So you DO think there's something wrong with shortall's proposal. What is it? Do you think the idea of cutting subsidies of pensions over 50k is a bad one? If so, why?
Are you deliberately missing the point of the OP??
 

ger12

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 25, 2011
Messages
48,255
hmmm, Olivia Mitchell on Pat Kenny this morning talking 'bout pensions to bankers etc. Out early to protect her seat? Government really starting to crack? Will the budget put the last nail into the coffin? Or is ger12 paranoid?
 

Sync

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
28,845
Are you deliberately missing the point of the OP??
The point of the OP seems to be inaccurately thinking that there's something unusual about a govt not adopting a financial bill raised by the opposition, accurately saying that the govt's dragging's its feet on public sector reform, then trying to con people by linking Shortall's very reasonable proposal to the first 2 items in an attempt to hide the fact that he just doesn't want the subsidy on >50k pensions to go away.
 

Disillusioned democrat

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 16, 2010
Messages
15,646
The point of the OP seems to be inaccurately thinking that there's something unusual about a govt not adopting a financial bill raised by the opposition, accurately saying that the govt's dragging's its feet on public sector reform, then trying to con people by linking Shortall's very reasonable proposal to the first 2 items in an attempt to hide the fact that he just doesn't want the subsidy on >50k pensions to go away.
Eh - no.

The point of the OP is to point out that our politicians are two faced scumbags who have done nothing to reduce the ridiculous cost of their own pensions while preaching (in a very populist way, it has to be said) that they want to tax wealthy people more so the private sector can't hope to emulate pubic sector level pensions.

Where the real irony comes in is that it highlights the real inequity - the private sector are paying their own pensions out of their earnings (so can be taxed more) while the senior civil servants and politicians aren't making similar contributions.

Seemingly, however, the government is far too busy to worry about that.
 

NewDawn1

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 10, 2012
Messages
4,258
In Ireland it's not a case of refusing to participate, it's just that the barrier to entry is too great for many people.

Voting for people with the right policies is participating in politics, but when these people routinely tear up their election promises as soon as they get feet under minister's desk is becomes a farce.

The typical Irish TD profile says a lot about the only route into politics - many were low level public servants - teachers being one of the biggest contributors - lots of time on their hands and a fall back plan that ensured some poor substitute teacher never got onto the gravy train, or career breaks, etc. that ensured you could always go back.

For the kind of people I'd like to see running the country this is never going to be an option.
I think I agree with you for the most part.
I think our almost complete lack of monetary control is the biggest problem.
"Give me control of a nation's money and I
care not who makes it's laws" — Mayer Amschel Bauer Rothschild
 

Disillusioned democrat

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 16, 2010
Messages
15,646
The point of the OP seems to be inaccurately thinking that there's something unusual about a govt not adopting a financial bill raised by the opposition, accurately saying that the govt's dragging's its feet on public sector reform, then trying to con people by linking Shortall's very reasonable proposal to the first 2 items in an attempt to hide the fact that he just doesn't want the subsidy on >50k pensions to go away.
Subsidy on pensions....explain that to me again? Private sector guy avails of tax avoidance on investments in his pension and somehow he/she is being subsidized?
 

Lain2016

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 1, 2011
Messages
7,713
Ah Heyor.... Leave it out Shorthall....
The good thing about all this is that several posters here are willing to vote against their parties when they see their gross inability to act on the banksters, politicians wages/allowances etc

Makes me think there may be room for optimism...
 

Howya

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 29, 2012
Messages
1,690
The point of the OP seems to be inaccurately thinking that there's something unusual about a govt not adopting a financial bill raised by the opposition, accurately saying that the govt's dragging's its feet on public sector reform, then trying to con people by linking Shortall's very reasonable proposal to the first 2 items in an attempt to hide the fact that he just doesn't want the subsidy on >50k pensions to go away.
Given that recent budgets have restricted the size of private pension schemes and that the marginal tax rate on pension contributions is being steadily reduced over a number of years then private sector pensions are already being reduced (which on balance is probably ok) but the hypocrisy of the government not to address their own pension schemes is breathtaking.
 

Ryan Tubbs

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 20, 2012
Messages
3,660
I forgot to mention in OP - Gavin Jennings really tore into HoChi Quinn on Morning Ireland this morning on this, who conveniently wasn't "in the country" last night to vote on the motion.
Do you think Quinn have ignored Government business in Brussels to come home and speak on a motion put forward by Mattie McGrath?
 

beazlebottom

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 10, 2011
Messages
2,835
Eh - no.

The point of the OP is to point out that our politicians are two faced scumbags who have done nothing to reduce the ridiculous cost of their own pensions while preaching (in a very populist way, it has to be said) that they want to tax wealthy people more so the private sector can't hope to emulate pubic sector level pensions.

Where the real irony comes in is that it highlights the real inequity - the private sector are paying their own pensions out of their earnings (so can be taxed more) while the senior civil servants and politicians aren't making similar contributions.

Seemingly, however, the government is far too busy to worry about that.
We now live in what can only be described as a Kleptocracy. The Private sector is fair game for this self serving grasping elite - largely drawn from the lower/middle levels of the Public Sector/ or the loud mouthed cabals in the PS UNions. Private Pension funds, already destroyed , partly due to the State's failure to do its job, are still being raided in the name of 'job creation'. It is nothing short of State approved theft while the exponents of the theft continue to feather their nests. Where is Monsieur le Guillotine when you need him?
 

kryton101

Active member
Joined
Sep 21, 2012
Messages
108
I think I agree with you for the most part.
I think our almost complete lack of monetary control is the biggest problem.
"Give me control of a nation's money and I
care not who makes it's laws" — Mayer Amschel Bauer Rothschild
Whatever monetary control you put in place it will lead to an unfair system with huge gaps between rich and poor!

Money itself is the primary cause of the vast majority of all our problems. The false believe that we can use money to solve these problems is leading us in a direction counter productive to humanities well being and social development.

Changing to a resource based economy is the only viable solution for a technologically emergent society that wants to survive and prosper into the future.
 
Top