The “We Wont” was for the actual vote. The “We May” is for the ratification. Both are different.

Apologies Kevin, I just read it again.

From what I am being told, this article is incorrect. Apparently there will be a clarification to address the confusion and the point quoted in the article. I await with interest the latest communications cockup clarification attempt.

Who has told you Kevin? The head of young fine geal? And you believe it all! Tell us your and link your source.

The only thing ‘stable’ in this economy is the surety that the Government has not got a clue what its doing…
Vote No for stability and an end to this farcical effort.

Or this man is continuing to talk through his B.S. Have we ever seen such circles This government Are definitely doing circles and round-abouts

A fellow Facebooker Ryan, and with no disrespect I don’t intend to add you to Facebook so you can validate whether or not someone told me that. “Apparently” is the key word in my post. I don’t even know the head of Young Fine Gael, so I cant check with him/her about it. Sorry to break your little heart, kid!

Can anyone with legal knowledge answer me this? If subsequent to treaty being ratified here (big IF) there are significant changes made, does this not leave the govt open to a constitutional challenge which would lead to a second referendum? Would it not make sense to wait until the ground was more solid to hold referendum, as this would increase the likelihood of a yes vote and would be more stable in law? I cannot understand why Europe doesn’t use the treaty as a testing ground first for two years before committing it to the constitution.

Ahhh I see someone told you on Facebook! Must be true so! Back to you kid.

Awkward silence?! My source, however he got the information, was indeed correct. The article has been amended to prove such. Now Ryan, was there really such a need to get so uptight?

KEVIN – it was your buddy Keith Hoare who told you, and Keith Hoare is a friend of Phil the black sacks Hogan!!

So vote No because it *may* change? Adding packs etc. to it do not require a full vote. A growth pack is what is being sought, not amendments to the actual text which would require a re-run.

People will vote based on facts, not fiction or speculation.

Vote Yes. Its the only way for a stable Ireland! :D

Incorrect Kevin. If we vote to ratify the treaty, no amendment or addendum can be made without another vote. Any changes made after ratification would also require the approval of the Irish people.

We don’t have the resources right now to run a new referendum, so delaying the vote until the dust settles with regards to changes to the treaty is common sense.

Kevin voting yes will not lead to any stability. Taking power from people and states leads to wars. You will be making a huge mistake and removing any hope of Economic stability during your lifetime no no no

Too Trueleft; Look right! We’ve had protocols on taxation and abortion attached to the Lisbon treaty but that did not mean countries that had already ratified it had to do so again. So yes, it is possible.

Clearly, we do have the resources seeing as the campaign is in full swing without much hardship. The only proposed “change” is from France – and all he wanted was a growth pack to be added and not a change to the actual treaty contents. :)

Kevin just on the protocol(s) being attached to the Lisbon treaty. We were told they would be attached when Croatia signed their accession treaty. They haven’t been attached. Problem with this referendum is we are being ‘told’ a lot of stuff will happen but the question is will they if Ireland votes yes?

Kevin, other countries did not have to amend their constitutions and were therefore not required to rerun their referenda. We do. Thats the difference. Now I know fine gael take issue with giving the unwashed masses a say in the future direction of our nation, and are willing to allow us to be blackmailed so you can coerce the result you demand, but the law is the law. Inconvenient for your mentors, but hard cheese.

Kerry; The Protocols on the Irish Guarantees were never going to be included in the Croation Accession Treaty – they were always going to be added to the main EU Treaties at the time of Croation accession, not in the Croatian Accession Treaty. Declan Ganly posed a related question to Lucinda Creighton who confirmed that it is included in Irish Protocol.

Too Trueleft; But the local parliament must ratify the treaty in those cases. They already had it ratified. These were added. They didn’t need to re-consider and re-vote.

“They didn’t need to re-consider and re-vote.”

They didn’t have to kevin, there is no requirement in those countries.

In Ireland (the country where you live and where our vote is taking place) any change or amendment to the constitution requires a referendum. Any treaty ratified on foot of that referendum cannot later be modified or added to. Even without the constitutional changes, ratifying a treaty thats probably going to be changed is farsical, and as its being done at the whim of a foreign entity, treasonous.

This is fairly basic stuff kevin.

No Vote NO because it is the only right thing to do . Vote No .

Obviously if it was changed we’d be voting again

Lol

Look at the timing. Last night its stated that the vote cannot be delayed. This morning the narrative is ‘sure we have to have the vote on the 31st, but don’t have to rastify it straight away.’

We’re being played.

That’s exactly what their doing Liam.! Hit the nail on the head. Good man, im glad everyone can see through their lies and spin.

Well no that’s not what is happening, you need to stop listening to SF and the ULA. With just inflation and nominal growth we can meet those targets. Even our growth figures from the 1980’s are enough to do this.
http://economic-incentives.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/whats-on-table.html
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=78456715&postcount=101

I can post more links to this but the Journal will auto remove the post.

A blog and somebody on boards.ie?

Come on gary, you can do better than that…..

A respected economist and a guy with accurate figures. I’ll tell you what why don’t you email other economists and ask them if the figures are correct. Though I’m pretty sure they are.

“Accurate figures” from now till 2038?

Are his balls crystal??

Too funny gary.

Guys, have a look at the table on that boards.ie link. In garys world, inflation, nominal and real GDP remain a constant, not even deviating by .01% for the next 25 years, despite the fact we’re undergoing economic turmoil in the medium term.

This is his ‘proof’. Gary, instead of using people who are telling you what you want to hear to back up your agenda, have a good look at their figures first.

These figures use low inflation and even with the terrible growth figures from the 1980’s they still work. So with any higher inflation and growth the targets are even easier to meet.
I have given you figures, you can stand there stomping your feet refusing to accept them all you want. What I would do is have other people check them, rather than choose to ignore them as they don’t fit into what I already want to believe.

Well, the link is there. We’ll let people judge for themselves by looking at that table whether it uses proper economic modelling or is just somebody dragging and duplicating cells on an excel spreadsheet.

Trueleft. I don’t know what more to say to you. The first link is from one of our most respected economists. I’m telling you to go check the figures, I want you to check the figures but instead of engaging you are simply trying to dismiss them. Surely you actually want the facts to come out here and not some spin from whatever side.

This whole treaty is an attempt to close the stable door after the horse has bolted.

Why are we even talking about this stuff, when the immediate challenge is how we do solve the financial crisis?

Facts? You link to a table that was obviously copbbled together on an excel spreadsheet in 2 minutes and claim the figures accurately predict the next 25 YEARS, where the inflation, nominal and real GDP remain a constant, not even deviating by .01%

Wow, guess we’re just one click and drag away from having accurate figures for the next 25 years after that as well…..

Trueleft. I’m running out of ways to get this across to you. Using inflation and growth over the last 25 years is a good indication of what will happen in the next 25 years. I appreciate these are just averages but even with the real figures from the 1980’s they still work.
So on that note here are the actual figures from the 1980’s http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=78501895&postcount=110
and guess what it still works.

Again gary, we’ll let people use your link over to the excel spreadsheet from the guy on boards.ie and let them decide for themselves.

Happy with that?

I’m going to guess here Trueleft that you don’t want to check those figures as you suspect they are actually correct. Anyway gotta go.

Here’s my list of yes side tactics
1. Cannot state your feelings on the direction the country is taking.
2. Will not have any impact on sovereignty.
3. Claim the person is SF, ULA ,an idiot or whatever other name they fancy.
4. Scaremongering. But we will *all* possibly starve to death.
5. Blame everyone in THIS country for all the woes.
6. All we need is a small amount of growth and happy days. Sure, nothing else could happen to throw that off track.
7. Conspiracy theorists, eh?!
Anyone feel free to use this when Gary posts,
and feel free to add to the list. Thanks.

Oh, i left two out.

8. Its not a ponzi scheme ya silly nutter, it’s perfectly normal banking practice.
9. Private banking debt turned into socialised debt is a done deal….and we did borrow it after all….

“In fact, we’ve only fallen below 1.25% in 6 years of the last 40, 4 of which are in the current crisis”

This is a quote from the boards.ie page that Gary is posting here.

Maybe there is a reason why 4/6 of the times we fell below 1.25% were during the current crisis….

And Gary, I would love to believe that there is such an easy way out.

But this reeks of those pathetic business plans that say “it’s a $1bn market, we only need 1%”.

The question is: why are you going to get anything at all?

The same question here – how do we get ANY growth, nominal or otherwise? And remember, “Inflation is Bad”, The mission of the ECB/Bundesbank is to stamp it out.

Gary – “I have given you figures, you can stand there stomping your feet refusing to accept”. Just like you did when I posted artical 35 of the ESM Treaty. You continue to blindly follow and beilieve what you are being told by a party of poverty stricken racists, with a penchant for lying. For every economist that says yes, there are 2 that say no, it is a very bad deal.

Lads I see a lot of scrambling to ignore the figures I posted but not much to produce your own or even verify the figures I posted. Seriously lads do you need to follow your agenda that much that you’ll ignore reality.

Gary, number 3 and 6 on my list….. well done son

Joseph I’ve read this three times now and I don’t see it.

“3. Claim the person is SF, ULA ,an idiot or whatever other name they fancy.
6. All we need is a small amount of growth and happy days. Sure, nothing else could happen to throw that off track.”

We must have a different understanding of the English language. At the top, for example, I said that people should stop *listening* to SF an the ULA. I didn’t say anything about anyone being in those parties nor did I call anyone an idiot. Also you’re still confusing growth with nominal growth.

Do you do anything else but trail journal.ie??? Is that your fulltime job?

@cotter do you ever do anything else but trail trueleft !!!

Dry your eyes Deco.

Have to laugh at declan, he throws out the nastiness to others on here (i.e. the post above aimed at ‘on the dole’) but somebody says boo to him and he’s hitting the ‘report this comment’ button quicker than you can say ‘hypocracy’

Deco ‘Your addy and pic tells me what you do’… Care to explain this?

That’s what this vote will mean, leaving aside the total lunacy of the current path the Eurozone is taking, if a yes vote passes then that’s essentially telling the government they’re doing a good job, it re-enforces their ‘mandate’.

Caroline
I red thumbed you in error . indeed he is back pedalling , so much so last years tour de France is on the cards to win ……… :)

Must have different poll results in front of him so. Fecking teachers reading the wrong memos!

I don’t believe them! I’m voting no

we all know how you are voting Ryan…so say it 10 times a day on here.

No NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NOP NO NO and finally NO. Merkel cant even manage to get enough support for it in the German parliment. Feckin joke!!!!!!!!

Oooh and one again – NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

You can bet that it was a reverse charge call too :P

Yes. This treaty does nothing to solve the crisis, and greater instability has been triggered just by proposing it. The “Stability” treaty. What a joke!

Mario Draghi, Barcelona on May 3rd: “If we want to have a fiscal union, we have to accept the delegation of fiscal sovereignty from the national governments to some form of central body, but how do we get there?”

Danish MEP, Morten Messerschmidt: Irelands corporate tax rate will come under severe pressure once fiscal union treaty is ratified. Ireland will lose at least one third of corporate tax revenues.
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2012/0516/1224316194527.html

Sean as I think you know there is no way for anybody to make us change our corporation tax rate. And the calls for it have dried up, I seem to recall it was Sarkosy in the main and he’s gone.
You lads want to make this fiscal compact about anything but what it is about.

The commision are going to circumvent Irelands veto!
“The commission wants companies to pay one-third of the corporation tax they owe in the country where their goods are finally sold, (ie sales destination).These rules would mean that companies with headquarters in Ireland must hand over one-third of their corporate tax, not to Ireland but to “enhanced co-operation” countries where the goods are sold, thus leading to a sharp fall in Ireland’s corporate tax take.

What is the advantage of being headquartered in Ireland if you have to pay a portion of corporate tax at a higher rate elsewhere? A multinational’s sales volume would be a factor in apportioning tax, which would not favour export-focused economies like Ireland.

So Ireland (while still retaining a veto on its corporate tax rate), would then freely choose whether to live with a smaller corporate tax take or to voluntarily increase its corporate tax rate to bring in the same money.”
Irish Times article
Either way Ireland will see tax revenues & FDI collapse if we ratify the fiscal union treaty.

There is *nothing* in this treaty about corporation tax as you well know. And even if I accept (which I don’t) that our corp tax would change there is still *absolutely nothing* in this treaty that would cause it.
I’m pretty sure you know this so I can only assume this is just mud slinging to get your no vote at any cost.

“We have run our economy, very successfully over a long number of years, until very recently on the basis that a low tax rate brought in more money, but it is clear that this is not acceptable to both Germany and France.”

“The belief that we have a competitive Europe is very important and I believe that others do not understand that.”

Senator Fergal Quinn

French wealth in full flight following Hollande’s pledge to unilaterally raise French corporation tax rates.

http://wire.inc.com/2012/05/11/french-entrepreneurs-looking-to-flee-france/

So let’s see Sean… your first quote is from before Sarkosy went and has nothing in it about loss of corporation tax in the fiscal compact. Your second quote shows that raising corporation tax is a very bad idea.

So to conclude there is *nothing* in the fiscal compact that effects our corporate tax rate whatsoever. Sorry Sean you do know this so I really have to assume your scaremongering intentionally.

The treaty is not being written into the Constitution. The referendum simply gives the Government the power to ratify it.

See http://www.referendum2012.ie/what-you-are-being-asked-in-the-referendum/

“The State may ratify the Treaty on Stability, Co-ordination and Governance in the Economic and Monetary Union done at Brussels on the 2nd day of March 2012. No provision of this Constitution invalidates laws enacted, acts done or measures adopted by the State that are necessitated by the obligations of the State under that Treaty or prevents laws enacted, acts done or measures adopted by bodies competent under that Treaty from having the force of law in the State.”

Afaik, technically speaking a referendum is supposed to be held entirely independently of the Government and they are also not supposed to use public funds to influence the outcome of same.

A Constitution is supposed to limit the power of Government and establish its role in a country, and IMO the Government disrespecting this system of checks and balances is akin to allowing prisoners to change the prisons rules.

Long story short, in this case, the idea of more limited Government spending and a balanced budget is surely a good idea, but this Treaty is a joke and would hurt Ireland.

We’re repaying our debts and reducing our deficit…why should we vote to restrict ourselves and impose penalties when we’re doing the work anyways, and more to the point, the markets are starting to notice our seriousness regarding sorting out our “financial house” already without this Treaty?

Vote NO on 31st of May.

Simon,

” more to the point, the markets are starting to notice our seriousness regarding sorting out our “financial house” already without this Treaty?”

Unfortunately no. They’re afraid we’ll vote no so our borrowing costs have gone up sharply in the last couple of days.

Apologies Darren but our borrowing costs have risen sharply the past couple of days due to Greece and her political woe’s and as a result the Greek bank run(700m) that began. Rising costs were not isolated to Ireland and has nothing to do with market reaction to the referendum. Every EU country had the same problem(Germany included) as investors are running from the Euro to the Dollar and hence the Euro has fallen by 0.02c against the USD.

And our borrowing costs from the ESM have not changed one bit. Just as well we have access to it and will still have if vote Yes.

So you are happy for your country to be the slave of the market and democracy to become limited.

ahmed barstow. I’m not ‘happy’ at all about our current situation. However if we don’t have access to the ESM we will be the markets bitch, until we sort ourselves out. And your definition of limited democracy is obviously very different to mind.

Gary clowry I was directing that question to Danny gibney but as you asked how can a government lead its people if it is in constant fear of market reaction to democratic decisions? Democracy therefore is limited by fear of markets. Iceland played the markets at their own game and are now in full recovery. Of course we are not as in control of our own destiny as Iceland as they have their own currency but we have to make comparisons and take a lead out of their book, put the people back in charge.

Our borrowing costs have gone haywire over the last couple of days on fears we’ll vote no. As it is, we’ll need a bailout but a yes vote should reverse that.

Darren,

You seem to be arguing that if the vote is no then Ireland will need a bailout but if it’s yes it’ll have access to something it doesn’t need along with a series of strictures that will reduce fiscal autonomy. You seem to be arguing this on the basis of rising borrowing costs.

However, borrowing costs have risen not on fears of a no vote as on fears of Greece crashing out. That looks all but inevitable now. Once Greece goes Italy will and then Spain, at that point the Fiscal Compact will be in ruins.

So what then?

And that’ll be no. 4 on the list there darren…

Damocles,

Irish borrowing costs are rising more rapidly than those of Italy, Spain, Portugal or even Greece. Hey, don’t take my word for it.

“The Irish curve bear flattened (50 to 30 bps higher) and the 9-yr yield spiked above 7%. The combination of the possibility of a looming Grexit and the upcoming Irish referendum on the fiscal pact (May 31) might have been the trigger. If the fiscal compact is rejected by the referendum, Ireland has no right to use ESM funds should the first bailout package not be sufficient.”

http://www.fxstreet.com/fundamental/analysis-reports/sunrise-market-commentary/2012/05/16/

S&P warns No vote could hit rating

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2012/0428/1224315295778.html

And this:

“The moves [in Irish bonds] are down to the increase in perceived risk for the Irish referendum,” said Ryan McGrath, a senior bond trader at Dolmen Securities in Dublin.

http://blogs.wsj.com/eurocrisis/2012/05/09/irish-government-bond-yields-climb/?mod=google_news_blog

Operative word being “might”.

Still in the event of more money being required and the govt in its imperious wisdom deciding to borrow itself further into, sorry, out of debt are there not other sources from which money might be borrowed? Is the IMF bust?

Also I note you haven’t addressed my other point:

“Once Greece goes Italy will and then Spain, at that point the Fiscal Compact will be in ruins.

So what then?”

My operative word “might” is a lot more certain that yours. You make it sound as if Spain and Italy will definitely go if Greece goes. That’s still highly unlikely.

And there was no “might” in this comment, was there, Damo? :-)

“The moves [in Irish bonds] are down to the increase in perceived risk for the Irish referendum,” said Ryan McGrath, a senior bond trader at Dolmen Securities in Dublin.

We could apply to the IMF but those in the know say that we wouldn’t get anything like the level of support we got before – not without EU backstopping.

“if Greece goes. That’s still highly unlikely”, That’s not what I’m hearing. Inevitable is what I’m hearing. Investors seem pretty certain if the capital flight is any indication (and it is).

As for Italy and Spain well, I’ll admit my speculation as I’m sure Rory McGrath will admit that his comments last week don’t reflect the behaviour of the markets in the last two days. You noticed that? The comments you quoted and attributed to an explanation on what has been going on the last two days were made a week ago. Maybe Mr McGrath is a psychic.

Your S&P rating quote is from almost 3 weeks ago. How would S&P change the rating of a country that rejects a treaty when it’s as good as dead in the water? Who knows?

“those in the know say that we wouldn’t get anything like the level of support we got before”, Perhaps they’re psychics too.

Sure we all went a little bit mad Kenny in Davos.

“1. Cannot state your feelings on the direction the country is taking.”
We’re taking the best direction that is available to us. Not perfect but reality is reality. Perhaps in the future we should be more careful about electing the likes of Fianna Fail.

“2. Will not have any impact on sovereignty.”
Ah the ole sovereignty chestnut. Sinn Fein have said the exact same things about this on every agreement with Europe. Yet in an ironic twist we used the ‘sovereignty’ they said we lost to mess the place up with a huge property bubble.

“3. Claim the person is SF, ULA ,an idiot or whatever other name they fancy.”
80% of name calling is from the no camp, and I for one try to never call anyone a name. And many of the people in here are supporters of the ULA or Sinn Fein.

“4. Scaremongering. But we will *all* possibly starve to death.”
It happens all right, though as with Lisbon and Nice it’s far worse from the no camp. (I can post the list again if you like)

“5. Blame everyone in THIS country for all the woes.”
Who should we blame? the fairies? We repeatedly elected a corrupt and inept government. We choose to do that, with all the sovereignty that we’d seemingly lost repeatedly.

“6. All we need is a small amount of growth and happy days. Sure, nothing else could happen to throw that off track.”
No idea who said that. Growth will help but paying for growth and also borrowing one third of all government spending is tricky to say the least. Though I think you may be talking about nominal growth.

“7. Conspiracy theorists, eh?!”
Yup some of the no voters are. Though if you like you can put a different label on someone who makes up crazy scenarios in their head and states them as fact.

Some of the things on my list are said to me every day and all of the things have been said to me repeatedly. How many of your list are on this page now? None?

GARY

““accept the delegation of fiscal sovereignty to a central authority”. – Mario Draghi 3/5/12.

The best scaremongering comment I have read on the Journal was from a lady who said that if we vote No it will lead to war. So if we dont want a war we should vote yes!!!! Now you cant possibly say that that is not scaremongering of the highest order.

Gary, you hit no’s 1, 2 ,3 ,4 , 5, 7 & 10

You did manage to not fall into 8 and 9. Congrats.

Number 10 on my list.
10. Only the yes side have full claims to ‘reality’

11 – the yes side have FF supporting them 100%.

(that alone should have alarm bells ringing)

12 – the majority of the yes camp are EU loyalists.

(again with the alarm bells)

Joseph. I replied directly to your points, how the hell could I reply directly and not talk about them.

Ann. Interestingly that exact quote appears twice on the internet, both posted by you. And of course I don’t care if he thinks up is down I’ve read the treaty and other agreements myself.

Dermot. Who cares what FF think. And if you want to compare the no side has the UK Independence party and Declan Ganley supporting them. Let’s just say they are all bad news.

Yes Gary, it is annoying when some tosser throws up a list
and when you take the time to make a post, the same tosser
refers to his list in an attempt to dismiss ur point.

Joseph I believe that was a 3 from my list. I don’t think you guys can help yourselves.

I believe the American military have a plan drawn up for the invasion of Ireland. From your logic that means we are going to be invaded.

Gary try and follow the News instead of childish put down comments.How did you go from Mervin King to US military i’m curious.

Gary, i dont get u. Again you want to put limits on what others wish to post.
Fair enuf, u don’t think its relevant.
I happen to agree somewhat with Normans point.
The Eurozone is tethering yet again on a precipice,
that is undeniable.
If it does fall off the edge,
then I think its fair to say that this BS treaty becomes void, no?

Your analogy of the US invading us, sorry Gary, but, God,
do I have to tell you what I think of ur comparison?

I’m simply saying that planning for the worst is not the same as expecting the worst.

Gary as i stated follow the news look what happening on the markets.There is a run of sorts on Greek banks,bond rates for Italy,Spain and even Germany are climbing this is what i base my logic on.At this stage i don’t care who wins this pi**ing contest.I will vote but as i said it looks to me that the treaty is a pointless excerise.But if winning the vote is that important to you well good luck.All i hope is the right outcome happens for Ireland.

Is the US military making public announcements about their plans to invade Ireland Gary?

LOL

Don’t believe them Alan. They want this thing pushed through so badly that they are allowing europe to blackmail us into a ‘yes’ vote. All talk and soundbites aside, in the event of a ‘yes’ vote the governemtn can and will ratify it whenever it sees fit, and given germanys ability to influence our flaccid taoiseach, it will be sooner rather than later.

Incidentally, in the event of a ‘yes’ vote it WILL be ratified before the end of the year, it has to be under the terms of the treaty. It will be just a matter of how soon.

You must really hate your country and future.Very misguided. Very sad.

Here’s my list of no side tactics
1. Pull on the heart strings.
2. Try to drum up nationalistic fervour.
3. Claim the person is a sheep, an idiot or whatever other name they fancy.
4. Scaremongering. But they *are* stealing our babies.
5. Blame anyone else, especially the Germans. (Often included with xenophobic mentions of Nazis, Fascists etc).
6. Claim the person is being paid for their opinions.

I believe that was a 1 and a 2.

YOUR list gary?

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=78572810

Plagarising, links to blogs of people who you happen to agree with, and cut and paste jobs prove nothing, gary.

Can you not argue your own position?

Here’s my list of yes side tactics.

1 – Government colludes with foreign bureaucrats by insisting on blackmail clause be entered solely to subvert the national vote in case the people of Ireland contemplate saying NO.

2 – Use this blackmail clause as the sole argument for a yes vote.

Gosh Trueleft I suggest (yet again) you check your facts, both of these people are me. My name is on my boards,ie account details, it’s not difficult. I don’t hide my identity, unlike some.

Dermot I think that is a 4.

So, instead of coming on here and stating your case, you, as usual, attack the ‘no’ side. You’re even posting lists on multiple forums about it.

Wheres your multi-forum posts about why a ‘yes’ vote would be good for our nation?

Do you not think spending your time on multiple forums posting about how the ‘no’ campaign are big doo doo heads is a bit childish gary?

Gary,
did you see my list last week or week before?
Like yours it was listed 1 to 5.

Would you like me to follow every post you make
and put the list up, telling you where on the list your post falls into?

I will if you want Gary.

I have come in and stated my case. My list is response to the replies I have received.

What do you want me to say about my Yes vote. That we’re in between a rock and a hard place of our own making and of the shítty options we have this is the best shítty option. Not very sexy is it, not very easy to sell is it. All I’m hoping to do it make sure people get accurate information and then decode to vote based on that information.

Well Joseph you can post your list but since my post above is entirely factual it would seem pointless. And I don’t believe I have ever done anything on my no side tactics list, but on the other hand they have all been done in reply to me.

Gary *I* do not want u to say anything,
other than what u wish to say.
But trying to limit people to what u believe and what is ur interpretation
of this treaty is not on IMO,
and i will not let u get away with it.
If this treaty is ratified, it may prove to be a good thing,
and it may prove to be a bad thing.
This YOU or ANYONE can quantity, not unless u can see into the future.
So, please try to refrain from limiting how others interpret the possible ramifications
of this treaty.

Joseph this treaty is all written down, there is even a guide that goes with it. There is very little interpretation needed, it’s all there to see. Though I’m sure not everyone will understand it, I certainly had to ask people a lot smarter than me to explain some parts. I may like the EU generally but it doesn’t mean I’d vote Yes to anything, I read it and I decided.

Actually I think the whole “Try to drum up nationalistic fervour.” has been done by the Labour party and their despicable use of our flag on their posters…come to think of it, FG strayed away from their normal poxy EU friendly blue and opted for 1 of the 40 shades of green associated with Ireland….

The scaremongering is the sole preserve of the yes side…”vote yes or the EU will f**k you up in ways you can’t imagine”…..even our incompetent minister of finance warned that if we didn’t continue the charade of good Europeans and vote yes he will hit us with a severe budget.

Very little interpretation needed, eh Gary?
Why then would you have had to seek advice from some of ur learned friends?
Simple my bollix!

To fully understand this BS treaty Gary, you would have to fully understand the ESM, the 6 Pack,
and probably other agreements,
so Gary, don’t give me the aul ‘very little to interpret’ bullshit.

As for this BS treaty, you are basing a successful outcome on
certain economic data. Again, Gary, got a crystal ball?
How are the markets reacting to whats going on in greece? Spain?

Not open to interpretation…… Thanks for the laugh Gazza!

Joseph, arguing the finer points of this BS treaty is scaremongering, sure isn’t this treaty only about a bit of housekeeping, opening the wallet for inspection the odd time to show how much we have before we do up a shopping list….ah sure it’s the grandest treaty yet….nothing untoward about it.

As I said Joseph I ‘asked* people about what I didn’t understand. I *asked* them about the Six pack and the ESM. They explained to me that the limits set in the Fiscal compact already exist in other agreements. They explained to me (with figures) that the limits can be reached with just inflation and nominal growth. *Then* I decided to vote Yes.
Why don’t you ask Gavan from the Journal, I hope he doesn’t mind me quoting the email the sent me…
“As regards your second suggestion – which is a great one, considering how the input of yourself and Joe probably managed to change my own vote!”

“Nominal” growth is not the same as “guaranteed” growth Gary.

The important comment in the boards.ie discussion that you linked to is this:

“In fact, we’ve only fallen below 1.25% in 6 years of the last 40, 4 of which are in the current crisis”

As you are well aware, this treaty is more than just a technical vote. It is a vote of confidence in Merkel and Sarkozy’s failed “austerity” policies. If we continue down this path, not only will there be no growth, there is considerable risk to the Euro and even to the EU as well.

This has been explained by numerous independent and highly respected economists. There has been zero discussion of any of the topics raised.

My conclusion is that FG/Labor want us to vote yes just because we’re sitting at the “bold boys table”, in the words of Nick Leeson. Very revealing choice of works.

Gary, I won’t dispute your figures as Im not an economist.
as I said earlier it may be possible depending on this nominal growth and inflation you talk about,
or if greece goes down the swannie we can expect to go into full on recession or even depression europe wide,
posswibly globally.

The economics of it are iffy to say the least IMO.
Its giving up more control to people I don’t trust, THATS the nub of it for me.
*You* may trust them and thats ur choice, *I* don’t, not even slightly.
And it annoys me that you want to exclude any discussion re. the impact on whats
left of democracy. You know my thoughts on it, so don’t make me type it all out again.

Dermot I think that is a 2 and a 4

You seem to be an open and pragmatic fellow Gary, surely you see the folly in voting yes to a treaty that the more reputable and listened to European leaders are suggesting changing to dispense with the German appeasement of 100% austerity and include something that might actually save your beloved EU and it’s currency from failure.
Is voting NO not the right move giving current circumstances, vote No, see what the proper leaders in Europe can achieve and then put it back to the people once something promising *jobs and growth is included?

* denotes actual jobs, not the mythical FG electioneering ones.

4. And if the Irish people decide to vote no to accessing the ESM (I hope they vote yes), there are many people here who think we should ignore that and tap the ESM for cash anyway.

Great democrats in this place altogether.

(Don’t even bother arguing this point, folks. It’s in the treaty preamble and ye know it. I can post the link and text so why waste both our times.)

Can you explain why your government asked for the blackmail clause which will inhibit our access to the ESM?
Why did they do this and why didn’t they seek to have some of the EU/ECB imposed banking debt scaled down or at least not drafted into the overall figures of our sovereign debt?

Maybe you like being labeled as a whipping boy, Ireland – the country that always says yes…pathetic.

Wow…..Dermot! Is this so hard to understand? If we end up lending to the likes of Greece or Portugal (more likely in the future than others lending to us), we want to make sure that they’ve signed up to some basic guarantees.

But hey! If you think that’s wrong, we’ll have to disagree. Can you lend me a couple of thousand? I’ll pay you back sometime….honest.

I see you have directed your reply to me but failed to answer so i’ll ask again.

Why did your government insist on a blackmail clause when it looked like their dastardly plan to sneak this in the back door without referendum looked doomed, and why did your government conspire against it’s own people just to have some threat to put into their leaflets, posters and entire argument where they can use it to try dissuade people from voting NO..?

Oh…looks like I answered for you..

Really Darren? Is that actually the full unvarnished truth?

Poor aul Gibney thinks we’re all fools.

Thats number 3 on my list i believe…

Ah, heres darren with his untruth du jour.

Monday, He was claiming the ‘no’ campaign were advocating that a ‘no’ vote would end austerity, but couldn’t provide a single quotation that supported this

Yesterday, he misrepresented Declan Ganley with regards to the lisbon treaty and corporation tax.

Today, he wheels out the old chestnut about sinn fein voting for the bank guarantee which as been completely debunked and explained in plain english many times over. Sinn Fein initially supported the banking guarantee and voted in favour of it based on false information, but once the supporting legislation was published 2 weeks later and it became apparent that the government and banks had lied to them about the nature and extent of the problem, they withdrew their support.

But off you go darren. A falsehood a day keeps the ‘no’ vote away, right? I wonder what tomorrows one will be…..