jump to navigation

What you want to say – 5th October 2016 October 5, 2016

Posted by WorldbyStorm in Uncategorized.
trackback

 

As always, following on Dr. X’s suggestion, it’s all yours, “announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose”, feel free.

Advertisements

Comments»

1. ivorthorne - October 5, 2016

How’s about those Gardai and their trip to see the confidential recipient? I suspect that Norin has not got another year left in her.

Like

Joe - October 5, 2016

An Garda Síochána needs to be disbanded and an acceptable policing force installed in its place. The RUC to PSNI process is there as a template.

Like

Gewerkschaftler - October 5, 2016

Whistleblowing about what? Is any of that in the public domain? Linkable?

As the sign has it: “Careful now.”

Like

Alibaba - October 5, 2016
Gewerkschaftler - October 5, 2016

Which doesn’t tell me much about the content of the allegations. Never mind Waterford Whispers has cleared it up for me. Just a bit of harmless slagging so.

Like

Alibaba - October 5, 2016

I hope my indignation doesn’t warp my powers of understanding, but here goes … it is hard to escape the conclusion than this is more than a satirical farce.

Is it not the case that, all things considered, there are important indicators here that I think will resonate with all of us?

Is it not the case that something ugly is happening which should not go unchallenged?

Is it not the case that the establishment media will express their concerns and then scurry away to bury this story?

Is it not the case that now is the time for the Dáil Left to rub salt into the wounds already inflicted, to advance its criticisms and its alternative proposals in a united fashion?

If passivity goes on, excluding the Daly and Wallace efforts and the rhetorical flourishes of McDonald and SF, this controversy will die out, with the connivance of Labour, selt-styled leftish deputies and so on.

This is a critical opportunity and responsibility to take steps to dissolve the off-putting divisions that blight us. Given all the known and proven claims of police misconduct in the past and now there are new ones up for consideration and being long balled. To put it bluntly, this situation is outrageous.

Liked by 2 people

Joe - October 5, 2016

I agree.

Like

ivorthorne - October 5, 2016

Yes.

Like

2. Tomboktu - October 5, 2016

There is very little research on italics.

As in, there is research on typefaces and accessibility for readers with impaired vision (with one of the key 1950s studies on serif versus sans serif typefaces now believed by many to be a fraud), and on the size of type, but damn all on italics.

Like

3. CL - October 5, 2016

-In his new book, The Populist Explosion: How The Great Recession Transformed American and European Politics, John Judis sets out to explain the political and economic forces roiling Western societies. The rise of Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump, not to mention the recent vote in the United Kingdom to leave the European Union, have called into question the stability of the neoliberal order. Judis, the editor at large of Talking Points Memo, examines the ideological underpinnings of populist movements and places figures such as Sanders and Trump in their proper historical context.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/interrogation/2016/10/did_racism_fuel_the_rise_of_donald_trump_john_judis_is_skeptical.html

Like

4. ar scáth a chéile - October 6, 2016

has anyone read Denis O Hearn’s biography of Bobby Sands. Picked it up for for a tenner yesterday. Wondering where to put it in my unread books filing system: “must read before the year is out” or “hope to get to before I die”

Like

5. ar scáth a chéile - October 6, 2016

anyways it looks good – and could be good one for the Book Club

Like

6. Tomboktu - October 6, 2016

Did you see who is ‘Associate Researcher’ at the School of Social Work, Social Policy and Social Justice at UCD?
http://www.ucd.ie/socialpolicyworkjustice/about/staffprofiles/

Like

7. Gewerkschaftler - October 7, 2016

Nature is wierd dept:

Tick bite causes red meat allergy.

Pure chancey evolution? Or some secret vegan militant genetic engineering programme? We have a right to know!

Like

Niel the Hippy - October 7, 2016

No, man, that’s, like, Gaia protecting herself from harmful dietary practices.

Like

8. Liberius - October 7, 2016

Uptake rates for the HPV vaccine that protects from cervical cancer have further decreased, according to the Health Service Executive.

Since 2010, all girls in first year of secondary school are offered the vaccine free of charge.

The HSE says preliminary figures show that 70% of girls used the service during the 2015/2016 school year, down from 87% in 2014.

I’m slightly curious if presented with clear numbers showing a decline in public confidence, such as the numbers quoted above, whether anyone is willing to admit that giving oxygen to these people really isn’t an effective strategy for allaying their unproven, and actively untrue, allegations about the HPV vaccine?

I don’t hold much hope on this topic.

https://www.rte.ie/news/2016/1007/822102-pupils-receiving-hpv-vaccine-drops-in-last-school/

Like

WorldbyStorm - October 7, 2016

I loath anti vaccination stuff and tend to agree as far as possible they shouldn’t be treated by media etc as simply the flip sidevof an argument in debates (i’d much prefer to see two or three pro voices on panels against one anti rep) but in practice beyond that what do you suggest?

Like

Liberius - October 7, 2016

I don’t think it’s exactly too much to ask that they should be denied airtime (and political support) if they can’t produce clear and scientifically relevant evidence to back up their assertions. The last time we debated this my point of view was that engaging with them in a public environment wouldn’t change their opinions but instead would erode public confidence by introducing doubt into the minds of parents, these figures add weight to those concerns. Assuming that you can allay fears by having a majority for vaccination on a panel is foolish as that line of logic works on the basis that you won’t have a minority of substantial size listening, or watching, whose fears for their daughters won’t outweigh the clinical evidence presented to them. For many the fear of nebulous illnesses in the immediate future will outweigh the risk of cervical cancer in the longer-term even though we know that those fears are irrational.

I know denial of airtime and political support sounds draconian, but with these figures I’m absolutely convinced even more than I was back in February that it is the only viable option to counter the public health threat that anti-vaccination groups like REGRET pose.

Like

Liberius - October 7, 2016

Just to make something clear, that’s how I think public health can be safeguarded in the context of a system of parent consent for vaccination. I’m personally of the view that parents are given far too much power over their children’s lives and would prefer a system of mandatory vaccination irrespective of parental views.

Like

WorldbyStorm - October 7, 2016

Ah yes, I’d agree too there

Like

Joe - October 7, 2016

Yeah but then there’s this.
http://www.google.ie/url?url=http://www.thejournal.ie/pandemrix-narcolepsy-link-study-1447040-May2014/&rct=j&frm=1&q=&esrc=s&sa=U&ved=0ahUKEwi2hIeh68jPAhWROsAKHe86A6AQFggTMAA&usg=AFQjCNHeocvkB0GBUzjNQpZpwlwOW0USHQ

I’ve no time for anti-vaxers or chemtrailers or any other non-evidence-based loopiness. But they can use examples like the above one (which I think is valid, maybe I’m wrong…) to convince themselves they’re right.
Mandatory vaccination? Nah I don’t think so. We just have to accept that there’s nowt as queer as folk.

Like

CMK - October 7, 2016

One thing is for sure: there are now a number of school age girls who have not been vaccinated, as result of these groups activities and agitation, who will go on to develop cervical cancer and die as a result. The anti-vax headbangers won’t be around when that happens and they’re too pig ignorant to acknowledge the fact that they are leading some people to their deaths. That’s not too dramatic.

I’m not crazy about the journal.ie but this article was comprehensive and could allay fears about gardasil:

http://www.thejournal.ie/hpv-vaccine-ireland-regret-gardasil-facts-2970847-Sep2016/

Like

Liberius - October 7, 2016

Yeah but then there’s this.

It’s a non-sequitur though, as support for manditory vaccination doesn’t imply that adequet testing should be circumvented. In many ways pharamcutical companies are given too much latitude from a testing perspective, that should be rectified itself, however where the bulk of evidence favours the safety of an individual vaccine then making it manditory to avoid obstruction from anti-vaccination types is essential for pubic health.

Like

WorldbyStorm - October 7, 2016

I suspect that is impossible as an aspiration in our situation. I would put money on their being a constitutional right to speech on these matters. So its not just draconian it’s ‘foolish’ as a proposal because it is politically unimplemtable and nowhere near viable. I’ve no problem trying to look for solutions but they have to be achievable.

Like

Liberius - October 7, 2016

As I understand it the European Commission of Human Rights and the Irish Supreme Court have upheld the validity of Section 31, that would suggest to me that there is substantial latitude for governments to take action to prevent the dissemination of information, albeit there is the difference that this is a public health matter rather than a paramilitary one, though I’d argue that public health is an equally important responsibility of the state. Politically that might be tough to swallow for some, however without clear evidence to contrary I don’t see how it is unachievable.

Like

WorldbyStorm - October 7, 2016

Even putting aside that Section 32 was a matter of national security and the ECHR ruling was not unanimous (and precedent in the UK for it not being as stringent as it was) remind me again how that panned out?

I’m for mandatory vaccination but Section 31 for anti-vaxxers. And why stop there? Imprisonment for blogs about it? Or printing leaflets? You’re the one who introduced the point re Draconian. Don’t stop now at half-measures.

And, there’s a broader point which is that some scepticism, as Joe notes, about pharma is no harm, that the science isn’t static, etc.

Frankly I think that’s counterproductive in the extreme. Beyond mandatory vaccination and fines for those who refuse to accede to that I think there are softer more effective ways than what you propose, even were, and again it’s a huge if, it were politically feasible or tolerated by the public.

Like

Liberius - October 7, 2016

I’m perfectly willing to concede that section 31 for anti-vaxxers is fairly extreme, however I only raised it as an answer to the idea that it would be against their human rights; at this point that looks to be to be an unproven assertion. In practice the denial of airtime for these people would very likely be enough to blunt their growth as content delivered with the solemnity of professional television and radio will inherently have more pull than their online activities which are often to be found cohabiting with ‘new world order are sterilising the population’ paranoiac stuff.

I did say above in the reply to Joe that I think it’s something of a non-sequitur to directly link mandatory vaccination with drugs that haven’t be adequately tested and their impact. Mandatory vaccination and a much more stringent testing regime are not mutually exclusive.

As a last thought, I’m not convinced that, assuming parental consent is kept, that it is counter-productive to deny airtime to people with demonstrably wrong points of view, remember pharmacology is an evidential arena, without that evidence you’ve got no legitimacy, and without legitimacy why should you have airtime? I can’t see why.

Like

WorldbyStorm - October 7, 2016

I think you over-reify television, and Irish television at that, as a disseminator of information, when it is more likely that it is FB and social media where that particular harm is done.

I’ve don’t agree with the REGRET people, what is described seems to have non-organic roots – though as a parent I understand (though not share) how this sort of attitude can develop, it’s all too easy to exaggerate risks when faced with vaccinations or to feel threatened by those risks however minimal. I’ve got a daughter myself and when faced with the prospect of any side-effects that does give pause for thought. I can well imagine how for some the concrete aspect of the vaccination as against the (seemingly) more nebulous prospect of developing cervical cancer is almost impossible to get across.

It is that sentiment that makes me suspect that none of what you propose is politically acceptable (and I’d wonder if mandatory vaccination for HPV would be either). Is any party of left or right going to get behind this idea of banning people from the airwaves? I can’t see it myself, not for quite some time to come.

So again all this is essentially abstract, even set against the worrying dip in vaccinations. I think other routes have to be explored in terms of counter campaigns in social and other media, high profile adopters of the vaccine etc, etc. And perhaps the voices of those who have had it and have been perfectly well subsequently. That overwhelming weight of hard data in human form is difficult to dispute.

Just in relation to your last point, I wonder though at that approach. If evidential is the yardstick we could see a lot of people we feel a lot more sympathetic banned from the airwaves.

Like

Joe - October 8, 2016

I didn’t realize anti-vax voodoo was this mainstream.
http://www.irishtimes.com/culture/curious-george-hook-and-the-hpv-jab-1.2819266

Like

Liberius - October 8, 2016

I’m not convinced that social media has the pull with people that it is widely assumed to have, it might influence some, but how many are going to even find these FB pages of their own accord (personal bubbles and all that) even without the added scepticism of seeing their crazy opinions side-by-side with anti-HPV vaccine content? Irish media may not be high quality, or honest, but that doesn’t stop it being the primary source of information for the bulk of the population, and thus more dangerous than random FB pages and blogs. In many ways I think you’re over egging the restrictiveness of what I suggested; the fact is that the drop in vaccination here came after the mainstream media picked up the baton for these people, not before, and every broadcast I’ve seen does contain rebuttals of their views, but with no success. Also, as much as the public may be obsessed with celebrities, I’m not convinced that high-profile figures are likely to outweigh the fear created by anti-vaccination scaremongering, I’m sceptical that anything can.

I fully accept that my suggestion is never going to be implemented, but then many of the opinions we express here on CLR are unlikely to be implemented in the foreseeable future, doesn’t invalidate them however. I also accept that evidence as a yardstick is problematic, but I’d also suggest that there is a difference between political ideals and the more concrete world of science, evidence is much less tangible with things like economics, evidence in that case might even be baulked at by our primary adversaries, for obvious reasons.

Like

9. CL - October 8, 2016

Karl Marx…He is not wrong yet…

The subtitle of “Capital” is “Critique of Political Economy.” The uncompleted book was intended to be a criticism of the economic concepts that make social relations in a free-market economy seem natural and inevitable,..
How useful is Marx for understanding this bubble of ferment in the advanced economies? …
in the political confusion, we may feel that we are seeing something that has not been seen in countries like Britain and the United States since before 1945: people debating what Marx would call the real nature of social relations..
The political earth is being somewhat scorched. And, as politics continues to shed its traditional restraints, ugly as it is to watch, we may get a clearer understanding of what those relations are.
For Marx and Engels, the working-class movement was international. But today we seem to be seeing, among the voters for Brexit, for example, a reversion to nationalism and, in the United States, what looks like a surge of nativism…
We invented our social arrangements; we can alter them when they are working against us.-Louis Menand.
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/10/10/karl-marx-yesterday-and-today

Like

10. sonofstan - October 8, 2016

Theresa May in her conference speech last week attacked ‘rootless cosmopolitans’ as ‘citizens of nowhere’ and as ‘an absurdity’. It’s interesting – to me at any rate – because, in a way, she is echoing, in another key, the first man to describe himself as ‘kosmopolitikos’, a citizen of the world, Diogenes of Sinope, or Diogenes the Cynic. He described himself thus, not to claim world citzenship, but to deny any responsibility towards Athens – it was a patent oxymoron to him and those who heard him because one could obviously only be a politikos of a polis, of a particular place.

The Stoics though, took it seriously and were the first – probably – to develop the idea of humanity as a universal condition with rights and duties that transcended the local and particular. And Stoicism fed almost seamlessly into Pauline Christianity, inclusive of both Jew and Greek – i.e. everyone.

The ‘catholicism’ of the church is rooted in that, and it’s curious to me that a scion of the Anglican Church, a vicar’s daughter, could make a plea for particularity and against universalism; if you think about it, a church that claims access to revealed, and universal truth, but is also the ‘Church of England’ is the real absurdity. But that church and the rarely interrogated complicity between it, the state and the armed forces, is one of the occult pillars of English exceptionalism.

(although I’ve just checked, and curiously perhaps, TM went to an RC school for a while….)

Like

WorldbyStorm - October 8, 2016

It’s reaction dressed up in a sort of faux-politeness.

That’s very true re the complicity point.

Like

Joe - October 8, 2016

I’ve read that comment twice now SoS and I’ll need to read it a few more times. I think it deserves a post in itself WBS.

Like

WorldbyStorm - October 8, 2016

If that’s okay SOS I will post it up under your SOS name. It’s spot on.

Like

sonofstan - October 8, 2016

OK, although it was all a bit off the top of the head. Not even sure if the Greek is right but I won’t change it now. One thing though – she didn’t actually say ‘rootless cosmopolitans’ – I was quoting something else that got it wrong, and given the loadedness of the term, can you just put ‘cosmopolitans’?

Like

Daniel Rayner O'Connor Lysaght - October 9, 2016

‘Rootless cosmopolitans’: a phrase used by Stalin in his last years.

Like

WorldbyStorm - October 9, 2016

Yep, a vile term.

Like

CL - October 8, 2016

Universalism includes free market capitalism, including free mobility of the labour force. May, as a ‘one-nation’ conservative, appears to be making a bid for working class support,-a working class which in parts of the U.K has suffered considerably from neoliberal universalism. It remains to be seen how much opposed to free market ideology she is, but she does appear to be trying to steal some of Labour’s clothes.

Like

sonofstan - October 8, 2016

Thing is, the reference to ‘rootless cosmopolitans’ are the instruments of capital has very nasty resonances.

Like

sonofstan - October 8, 2016

‘as’ not ‘are’

Like

CL - October 8, 2016

Yes, the far right is part of the upsurge against globalization.

Like

WorldbyStorm - October 8, 2016

CL, isn’t that a case of free market capitalism having elements of universalism rather than universalism per definition being free market capitalism. After all internationalism is universalism of a sort too.

Like

CL - October 8, 2016

Internationalism, cosmopolitanism, global capitalism, free trade,…all go together, call it ‘liberalism.’
This utopian project collapsed in the 1930s. Post WW2 it was revived, but 2008 again marks its collapse. So far what will replace remains unclear. One-nation Toryism under May is one such response. Trumpism is another. So far political responses from the Left are weak.

Like

WorldbyStorm - October 8, 2016

But internationalism is a bedrock of socialism and social democracy in its traditional form rather than liberalism. Isn’t it?

Like

Gewerkschaftler - October 8, 2016

Free market capitalism may imply universalism, if you ignore class, but the reverse isn’t true. Capitalism is as a would-be totalising system tends necessarily to the ‘universal’.

‘Universalism’ is something invented probably by Greek philosophers, as pointed out by SoS, then taken up by the world religions of the books (well at least Christianity and Islam – Judaism isn’t universalist), then was laicised during the European enlightenment.

Universalism doesn’t imply capitalism. It could equally imply global communism.

“Internationalism, cosmopolitanism” are necessary attributes of socialism and communism, as well as liberalism, I would maintain.

Like

CL - October 8, 2016

‘It could equally imply global communism.’ It could, but there is no global communism; there is global capitalism

Like

CL - October 8, 2016

‘But internationalism is a bedrock of socialism and social democracy in its traditional form rather than liberalism. Isn’t it?’- WBS

Socialist internationalism collapsed in WW1. Post WW1 social democracy and socialism, proved inadequate to the breakdown of the liberal European order. Their failure led to the emergence of fascism.
Today market liberalism and capitalism are global. And in crisis. International socialism does not exist. The populist reaction to the crisis is nativist and nationalist, that is, particularist, and cosmopolitan (universalist?) elites are coming under attack from the Right, and to a lesser extent from what remains of the Left.

Like

WorldbyStorm - October 8, 2016

Thing is what elite precisely is that now in terms of travel etc? My daughter is in the local school in north inner city Dublin. Pretty much all her classmates have been abroad regularly inEurope on holiday. Easily 10-15% are from other EU states, one or two from Africa. Cosmopolitanism and internationalism aren’t ‘elite’ in the sense May etc use the term any longer. I went Malaga earlier this year and have been astounded by the number of people who have been through it, though didn’t stay there a few nights, in the last year or two.

Like

CL - October 9, 2016

‘Cosmopolitan elite’ to me means the international ruling class,-the ‘one percent.’Those enriched by globalization, free trade, the digital revolution, and the financialization of capital.
Some make the case that globalization has lifted millions out of dire poverty. But those slaving in a factory in China making Apple products are not an elite.
That portion of the working class, in the U.K and the U.S who see themselves left behind in this process are the base for the nativist, nationalistic reaction against it.
Rhetorically, Theresa May has expressed concern for the working class. As her regime’s practice unfolds it will be interesting to see how much she departs from free market ideology.

Like

WorldbyStorm - October 9, 2016

Yes, but you’re eliding two things then. May is using the rhetoric of cosmopolitanism essentially as a shorthand for things she disagrees with. And you’re sort of following that by suggesting that, for example cosmopolitan is bad when the actual lived experience of many ‘ordinary’ people who are not part of the elite you’re defining is that it is a good thing (which it is). And that’s why it’s so deceptive. Cosmopolitanism and universalism aren’t = the one percent (which is itself such a massive simplification of the way contemporary capitalism works as to be near enough useless).

Like

11. Joe - October 8, 2016

Hey WBS, there’s an ad for Debenhams’s shoes and dresses on the top of this thread. I object – those shoes would do nothing for me.

Like

12. roddy - October 8, 2016

With regard to May going “to a catholic school for a while”, I have never known anyone called Theresa who was’nt a “fenian” .And then out of the blue two true blue COE Tories (Villiers and May) pop up with a name practically every female relative of mine has as their 1st ,2nd or 3rd forename!

Like

sonofstan - October 8, 2016

My boss here for a while was similarly named. And equally Tory. Wonder where they got it from?

Like

13. CL - October 8, 2016

Rats and Sinking Ship:

“Top Republicans are distancing themselves from Donald Trump following the release of a damaging 2005 audio tape where the GOP nominee can be heard making lewd comments about women…
Some Republicans are going as far as to call for Trump to end his White House bid.”
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/10/08/republicans-distance-selves-from-trump-call-for-him-to-quit-after-damaging-video.html

Like

CL - October 8, 2016

Meltdown:

“The fallout on Saturday revealed a party in chaos as a series of Republicans — especially those in close close races — said Trump should abandon the campaign while the nominee himself firmly rejected such notions and floated the potential of holding an event later in the day to rally his supporters. His own running mate, Mike Pence, criticized Trump and pulled out of a scheduled appearance in Wisconsin on behalf of the campaign later Saturday.”
http://www.wcvb.com/politics/trump-throws-gop-into-chaos/42023900

Like

sonofstan - October 8, 2016

thing is, i bet some of the pondlife who form Trump’s core support are exactly the kind of guys who would think that among the pluses of being rich would be the ability to treat women like shit with impunity.

Like

14. FergusD - October 8, 2016

Doesn’t all the above show that somehow the left needs to pose socialist internationalism against capitalist globalism and reactionary nationalism?

True extraordinary how the Tories are going, really going for the nationalistic and xenophobic vibe. I would have thought big capital would be alarmed, unless they see it as a necessary distraction from the the real issues and it won’t really affect them, foreign workers in the City and Polish agricultural labourers will still be welcome somehow. For the Tories is it recognised as just a diversion to keep/increase popular support as the economic problems of Brexit bite, but they don’t actual believe it and it is smoke and mirrors?

Liked by 1 person

sonofstan - October 8, 2016

Unfortunately, given the attacks against foreign nationals, it might actually be a case of, in Bertie’s immortal phrase, smoke and daggers.

Like

RosencrantzisDead - October 8, 2016

Theresa May wants a UK and an economy that is for workers, but only for workers born and bred in the UK.

So nationalism with a social element.

Hmm…

Like

Gewerkschaftler - October 8, 2016

Big capital is, I think, alarmed.

May, is, I think, offering ‘British’ capital the repeal through rewriting by executive order of basic labour and human rights law in Little Britain, as an incentive. Only nativist elements of capital would find sufficient compensation in this, but then it is they who are likely to continue ploughing the cash into the Tory party, and providing revolving-door and directorship/consultancy incentives to Tory politicians.

Like

CL - October 8, 2016

‘free-market ideas are in retreat… Theresa May’s speech..as emphatic a repudiation of the Thatcher-Reagan economic world-view as it was possible to get…..she said that government was the solution, not the problem….the subtext was that collectivist, paternalistic Christian Democrats, not individualistic classical liberals, are back in charge of the party….She slammed business…The Tories have been stealing policies from the Left since the 2000s…Many of her arguments were implicit attacks on Hayek…’
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/10/05/no-prime-minister-the-government-doesnt-always-know-whats-best/

Like

WorldbyStorm - October 9, 2016

Except that simultaneously those driving this process seem indifferent to the Christian Democrat protections side of things – i.e. pro-business but also pro-welfare, regulations (to a point) etc. Moreover they’re not anti-free markets, just due to in a way cultural.nationalistic attitudes an EU free market (though allied to that is again that anti-regulatory attitude etc, which was one of their main bugbears with the EU). I also think it is a huge mistake to take May’s rhetoric too seriously.

Like

CL - October 9, 2016

I agree. I think i said somewhere else that May may be, opportunistically, rhetorically pro workers, but as her policies unfold we will see how much she departs from free market ideology.

Like

15. Starkadder - October 9, 2016

You may have seen several long opinion pieces by anti-abortion activist Ann McElhinney in the Irish media, (most recently in yesterday’s “Irish Times” ).

Turns out Ann and her partner Phelim McAleer have a long record of shilling for reactionary causes-they have produced several bellicose pro-fracking, anti-environmental films:

https://thinkprogress.org/exposed-phelim-mcaleers-fracknation-deploys-tobacco-playbook-in-response-to-josh-fox-s-gasland-2-78a53b301480#.vi4atgt7f

Like

16. CL - October 9, 2016

Ireland… offers low corporate tax rates and legal tax avoidance to foreign investors…
but with the UK out of the EU it will lose an ally in the fight against EU-imposed tax harmonisation. Ireland has done well from its tax haven status. But this model is unsustainable.- W. Munchau
https://www.ft.com/content/4c24cb44-8bca-11e6-8cb7-e7ada1d123b1

Like

17. sonofstan - October 10, 2016

Who could resist this stirring call to arms from Momentum?

“Help us organise and mobilise by filling out the form”

Truly victory is within sight, comrades! (once the forms are in)

Like

RosencrantzisDead - October 10, 2016

If this post gets 100,000 likes, we’ll start a revolution to overthrow the bourgeoisie

Like

Ed - October 10, 2016

What was the form, though?

Like

sonofstan - October 10, 2016

To let Momentum members know where and when the local LP was meeting/ doing anything else. Unaccountably, some constituency parties are ‘alegedly’ not communicating with newbies.

Like

18. Tomboktu - October 11, 2016

Liked by 1 person

Joe - October 12, 2016

What does the A in LGBTA stand for?

Like

Michael Carley - October 12, 2016

Allies.

Like

Joe - October 12, 2016

Ta. I googled it and the consensus is allies. But something called the Urban Dictionary says it’s not allies, it’s something called aces. However, I’m going with the consensus cos life’s too short.

Like

RosencrantzisDead - October 12, 2016

I thought the ‘A’ stood for asexual, myself.

Like

19. Joe - October 12, 2016

According to the commie Indo’s website, this report shows that all children in Ireland are not equal.
http://www.esri.ie/publications/cherishing-all-the-children-equally-children-in-ireland-100-years-on-from-the-easter-rising/

Like


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: