Do we have a low-tax economy?

AckwelFoley

CerebralCortex wrote: »

And the reason your so die hard FF? As far as it being not that bad well it could be a lot better. Talking to my Polish work mate how it was puzzuling to him and his contemporaries how for a country so rich neglects is social responsibiltie for exmple the proliforation of cheap public transport or at least will to proliforate chep public transport.

Do you not see the Irony in that Polish mans statment? If Ireland is such a socially inept nation why is he here? If poland was better socially shouldnt they be able to "share the wealth?"

Im not die hard FF at all.

Just Fine Gael wont get rid og that asshat Enda... i dont like the PD's.. bit too far right for my taste..

I just detest hardcore socialism, because of my beliefs, i dont have a red cent to my name.. im not poor either, but any work i do i benefit from.. i pay fair share in tax.

To fund socialism, it requires to tax the incentive out of people that want to "do better"


Why would i work 18 hours a day to get taxed 80 -90 %? Thats the taxation you would require to fund socialist ideals

CerebralCortex

snyper wrote: »

Do you not see the Irony in that Polish mans statment? If Ireland is such a socially inept nation why is he here? If poland was better socially shouldnt they be able to "share the wealth?"

Im not die hard FF at all.

Just Fine Gael wont get rid og that asshat Enda... i dont like the PD's.. bit too far right for my taste..

I just detest hardcore socialism, because of my beliefs, i dont have a red cent to my name.. im not poor either, but any work i do i benefit from.. i pay fair share in tax.

What? No.

murphaph

snyper wrote: »

Do you not see the Irony in that Polish mans statment? If Ireland is such a socially inept nation why is he here? If poland was better socially shouldnt they be able to "share the wealth?"

Poland was subject to a planned economy for nigh on half a century. Ireland has been 'free' a lot longer. Poland is arguably better today than Ireland was in 1985.

snyper wrote: »

Im not die hard FF at all.

In all fairness snyper, you could have fooled me.

snyper wrote: »

Just Fine Gael wont get rid og that asshat Enda... i dont like the PD's.. bit too far right for my taste..

The irony is that FF are as right wing as they come, without the balls to back it up. If they weren't right wing we wouldn't have so many PPP schemes on the cards. FF love giving contracts to the private sector. They just pretend to be socialists, they aren't. They're made up of far too many businessmen to be considered socialist.

snyper wrote: »

I just detest hardcore socialism, because of my beliefs, i dont have a red cent to my name.. im not poor either, but any work i do i benefit from.. i pay fair share in tax.

To fund socialism, it requires to tax the incentive out of people that want to "do better"

Why would i work 18 hours a day to get taxed 80 -90 %? Thats the taxation you would require to fund socialist ideals

Get real snyper. Even modest increases in taxation could fund huge improvements in social services. However, the problem isn't so much a lack of funds, rather a total mismanagement of our wealth (primarily by FF) which has seen vast sums squandered with a disimprovement in some public services.

In 1978 cystic fibrosis sufferers could turn up at Vincent's and gain immediate entry to a reserved bed in a reserved ward. Nowadays they must wait in A&E for up to a week to get into a ward. That is an appaling disimprovement in service level and is just one example.

How many years were FF in charge as the driving test queue spiralled to over a year?

etc. etc.

The publicans and estate agents who make up the ranks of FF must really be laughing that people like your good self still eat their sh!t and think they care about the common good.

AckwelFoley

Get real snyper. Even modest increases in taxation could fund huge improvements in social services

No, not the type of Ideals that socialism want to acheive

I disagree. I believe that even if you don't think the opposition will be any better, you ought to vote them in if you are dissatisfied with the incumbents. This is the only way to make the incumbents work for you and change their ways. If they believe they will be re-elected no matter how poorly they behave then they will behave as poorly as they can get away with.

This i fully agree with.

Bduffman

snyper wrote: »

Do you not see the Irony in that Polish mans statment? If Ireland is such a socially inept nation why is he here? If poland was better socially shouldnt they be able to "share the wealth?"

Im not die hard FF at all.

Just Fine Gael wont get rid og that asshat Enda... i dont like the PD's.. bit too far right for my taste..

I just detest hardcore socialism, because of my beliefs, i dont have a red cent to my name.. im not poor either, but any work i do i benefit from.. i pay fair share in tax.

To fund socialism, it requires to tax the incentive out of people that want to "do better"


Why would i work 18 hours a day to get taxed 80 -90 %? Thats the taxation you would require to fund socialist ideals

You must read the sun or the mail yeah? Sounds like their kind of drivel.

Firstly there is no major socialist party in Ireland - SF are not & never will be a major party thankfully. Labour are at most very slightly left of centre.

Secondly where does this myth of Ireland being a low tax economy come from? We are a low income tax economy - a very different thing. We still pay as much tax (if not more) than we ever did in the form of indirect tax. Nearly everyting we buy is taxed which means than the poorer you are the greater proportion of tax you pay. I'll bet if you add up the income tax you pay and add the indirect tax you pay on everything else you will find you are closer to that 80 - 90% that you talk about. But no - as long as you get an extra penny in your pay packet you're happy - try looking at the bigger picture & stop falling for FF & PD tax cuts as if you are benefiting from them.

Tommy T

Bduffman wrote: »

You must read the sun or the mail yeah? Sounds like their kind of drivel.

Firstly there is no major socialist party in Ireland - SF are not & never will be a major party thankfully. Labour are at most very slightly left of centre.

Secondly where does this myth of Ireland being a low tax economy come from? We are a low income tax economy - a very different thing. We still pay as much tax (if not more) than we ever did in the form of indirect tax. Nearly everyting we buy is taxed which means than the poorer you are the greater proportion of tax you pay. I'll bet if you add up the income tax you pay and add the indirect tax you pay on everything else you will find you are closer to that 80 - 90% that you talk about. But no - as long as you get an extra penny in your pay packet you're happy - try looking at the bigger picture & stop falling for FF & PD tax cuts as if you are benefiting from them.

Can you find us a country that doesn't charge a version of our VAT on goods and services? the difference is our Income Tax Rates are among the lowest in the EU. this benefits twofold. It's cheaper to employ someone here and employees have more control over the income they've earned.. Win/Win...

Bduffman

Tommy T wrote: »

Can you find us a country that doesn't charge a version of our VAT on goods and services? the difference is our Income Tax Rates are among the lowest in the EU. this benefits twofold. It's cheaper to employ someone here and employees have more control over the income they've earned.. Win/Win...

Our income tax may be lower but our level of indirect tax is amongst the highest in the OECD.
"Indirect taxes in Ireland, sometimes termed stealth taxes, are amongst the highest in the 30-member country OECD, and the total Irish taxation burden has changed little since 1995." By Finfacts Team Feb 28, 2007, 10:59

So again can we dispel this myth about low taxes? It is no use to "have control over the income they've earned" if you have to use your disposable income to buy essentials such as food, clothing, houses etc where you pay a second tax.

Tommy T

Bduffman wrote: »

Our income tax may be lower but our level of indirect tax is amongst the highest in the OECD.
"Indirect taxes in Ireland, sometimes termed stealth taxes, are amongst the highest in the 30-member country OECD, and the total Irish taxation burden has changed little since 1995." By Finfacts Team Feb 28, 2007, 10:59

So again can we dispel this myth about low taxes? It is no use to "have control over the income they've earned" if you have to use your disposable income to buy essentials such as food, clothing, houses etc where you pay a second tax.

Of the 25 countries in the EU 4 of them have a higher VAT rats and 2 with the same as ourselves. While our rate is 21% the average rate is 19.4%.

So rather than ranting about how we're so excessively taxed indirectly the facts are in the link below. Combine this with out 2nd lowest Income(direct) Tax rates I think that we're doing very well indeed...

http://www.expatax.nl/vatrates

markpb

I think you're missing the point. Income tax is just one tax. It doesn't matter how many other countries you compare income tax too, there are other, indirect taxes and yes, we have to pay them too. If they rise as income tax falls, the only benefit is for employers. I'm not a screaming socialist, I recognise the benefits of making it cheaper to employ people but you can't claim employees are better off if their overall levels of tax remains the same. Change the tune

Tommy T

markpb wrote: »

I think you're missing the point. Income tax is just one tax. It doesn't matter how many other countries you compare income tax too, there are other, indirect taxes and yes, we have to pay them too. If they rise as income tax falls, the only benefit is for employers. I'm not a screaming socialist, I recognise the benefits of making it cheaper to employ people but you can't claim employees are better off if their overall levels of tax remains the same. Change the tune

I respectfully disagree...

Bduffman

Tommy T wrote: »

Of the 25 countries in the EU 4 of them have a higher VAT rats and 2 with the same as ourselves. While our rate is 21% the average rate is 19.4%.

So rather than ranting about how we're so excessively taxed indirectly the facts are in the link below. Combine this with out 2nd lowest Income(direct) Tax rates I think that we're doing very well indeed...

http://www.expatax.nl/vatrates

I think you've just backed up my point. I've stated that our indirect tax is amongst the highest. As you've stated so clearly above, we are in the top 6 out of 25 countries in terms of VAT. Which reinforces my point that we have amongst the highest level of indirect tax. Thanks for that.

But my main point is that indirect tax is inherently less fair than income tax. If you are rich & taxed at 41% you are still going to be rich. If you are on minimum wage you pay a far higher proportion of your income on tax in the form of VAT. As I said - inherently unfair.

AckwelFoley

There are different methods of taxation. No matter how is done the governments need the same amount of revenue to run a country, some taxes are more noticible, and therefore make ppl think we may have a higher or lower level than other nations.. ie if houses arent taxed somthing else will.

I lived in New Hampshire, where there motto is live free or die... they pay minimal income tax and no VAT, so it seems they dont pay taxes? Wrong.. the property taxes alone on their homes are enormous and there are other taxes too we dont pay..

is_that_so

Tommy T wrote: »

Of the 25 countries in the EU 4 of them have a higher VAT rats and 2 with the same as ourselves. While our rate is 21% the average rate is 19.4%.

So rather than ranting about how we're so excessively taxed indirectly the facts are in the link below. Combine this with out 2nd lowest Income(direct) Tax rates I think that we're doing very well indeed...

http://www.expatax.nl/vatrates

If all we can do is cheer when we top tables for low taxes then we deserve what we've got.
I personally think it is a poor reflection on who we think we are.

I expect much more of government than "aren't we good, here's another tax cut".
Low tax rates are just one measure and one that, you are also aware, not wholly the preserve of FF, however much you blank out the contributions of non-FF parties over the last 20 years. I see Sweden is the highest. Sweden also has very high income tax and more importantly services that work. If paying more meant less "control over my money" but services that worked I would gladly do so. But would I give that money to the current government, absolutely not?

markpb

Tommy T wrote: »

I respectfully disagree...

It would be fantastic if you could expand on your opinion?

snyper wrote: »

There are different methods of taxation. No matter how you do it the governments need the same amount of taxation.. ie if houses arent taxed somthing else will

That's true but totally irrelevant. Tommy said we are a low tax economy, I countered that we're not because of the high level of indirect taxes.

Tommy T

Bduffman wrote: »

I think you've just backed up my point. I've stated that our indirect tax is amongst the highest. As you've stated so clearly above, we are in the top 6 out of 25 countries in terms of VAT. Which reinforces my point that we have amongst the highest level of indirect tax. Thanks for that.

But my main point is that indirect tax is inherently less fair than income tax. If you are rich & taxed at 41% you are still going to be rich. If you are on minimum wage you pay a far higher proportion of your income on tax in the form of VAT. As I said - inherently unfair.

If you're on the minimum wage you pay no Income Tax at all.. But don't let the facts get in the way of an anti_FF rant..;)

My point is having the lowest Income taxes in the EU combined with a VAT rate of onyl 1.5% above the EU evarage is far more preferrable to having the same VAT Rate and Incomwe Tax rates through the roof as they were prior to the McCreevy years...

IRLConor

Well from here (if you look at the table about a 1/4 of the way down) you can see the tax take for the EU expressed as a percentage of GDP. The figures include all taxes.

This is a summary of the 2003 data:

28.5% Lithuania
28.9% Latvia
29.9% Ireland
30.6% Slovakia
33.3% Cyprus
33.4% Estonia
33.6% Malta
35.6% Spain
35.7% United Kingdom
35.8% Poland
36.2% Czech Republic
36.2% Greece
37.0% Portugal
39.1% Hungary
39.3% The Netherlands
40.1% Slovenia
41.3% Luxembourg
42.9% Italy
43.0% Austria
43.2% Norway
43.8% France
44.8% Finland
45.7% Belgium
48.8% Denmark
50.8% Sweden

As far as I know, Ireland is a low tax country.

AckwelFoley

May i respectfully suggest splitting the thread and starting a new taxation thread

Bduffman

Tommy T wrote: »

If you're on the minimum wage you pay no Income Tax at all.. But don't let the facts get in the way of an anti_FF rant..;)

And I state yet again - income tax is not the point - indirect tax is inherently less fair because if you are on the minimum wage, while you don't pay income tax, you do pay a far higher proportion in the form of indirect tax than the highest earners. You keep choosing to ignore that point.

I think this is very much on topic as the 'low tax' myth is often thrown about as if it is a great achievement of Bertie Aherne. Well the trick to running a country is take in the necessary revenue to run the country efficiently while ensuring the tax burden is fair. We are a long way from that even 10 years down the road of FF/PD government.

Tommy T

Bduffman wrote: »

And I state yet again - income tax is not the point - indirect tax is inherently less fair because if you are on the minimum wage, while you don't pay income tax, you do pay a far higher proportion in the form of indirect tax than the highest earners. You keep choosing to ignore that point.

I think this is very much on topic as the 'low tax' myth is often thrown about as if it is a great achievement of Bertie Aherne. Well the trick to running a country is take in the necessary revenue to run the country efficiently while ensuring the tax burden is fair. We are a long way from that even 10 years down the road of FF/PD government.

Is our very low income tax rate an irrelevance or something that goes against your arguement so you try to avoid it...?

Bduffman

Tommy T wrote: »

Is our very low income tax rate an irrelevance or something that goes against your arguement so you try to avoid it...?

And for the third time, I was just pointing out that relative to other countries we DO NOT have a low tax economy, when all taxes are taken into account (an argument used again & again in support of Ahern). And if we are to generate revenue to run the country efficiently, income tax is a far fairer system.

Tommy T

Bduffman wrote: »

And for the third time, I was just pointing out that relative to other countries we DO NOT have a low tax economy, when all taxes are taken into account (an argument used again & again in support of Ahern). And if we are to generate revenue to run the country efficiently, income tax is a far fairer system.

I fundamentally disagree. Out historically low income tax rates contribute to us being a low tax economy compared to our EU neighbours.

Please give us figure to prove otherwise...

Bduffman

Tommy T wrote: »

I fundamentally disagree. Out historically low income tax rates contribute to us being a low tax economy compared to our EU neighbours.

Please give us figure to prove otherwise...

I fundamentally disagree. Figures already posted on this thread prove that we pay more indirect tax than most of Europe. The definition of a low tax economy should encompass all taxes - not just income tax. And (for the fourth time), all countries need a similar amount of revenue per head of population to run efficiently. It is WHO funds that & HOW it is collected determines how fair it is and what kind of society we have. By FF blindly following PD philosophies just to cling on to power, we have an unfair tax system which penalises the average to low paid. The trouble is, try as I might it is near impossible to find out how much the average person spends on indirect tax - I believe thats why they are called stealth taxes

LostinBlanch

snyper wrote: »

May i respectfully suggest splitting the thread and starting a new taxation thread

Good idea.

Tommy T

Bduffman wrote: »

I fundamentally disagree. Figures already posted on this thread prove that we pay more indirect tax than most of Europe. The definition of a low tax economy should encompass all taxes - not just income tax. And (for the fourth time), all countries need a similar amount of revenue per head of population to run efficiently. It is WHO funds that & HOW it is collected determines how fair it is and what kind of society we have. By FF blindly following PD philosophies just to cling on to power, we have an unfair tax system which penalises the average to low paid. The trouble is, try as I might it is near impossible to find out how much the average person spends on indirect tax - I believe thats why they are called stealth taxes

But look at what happened when Charlie Mc started reducing the inc tax levels. The tax take increased. Therefore by reducing rates the income to the exchequer increased. Yet another win/win. The same can be said for the halving of Corporation Tax.

The overall tax burden is far heavier on the French, Germans and Scandinavians...

IRLConor

Bduffman wrote: »

I fundamentally disagree. Figures already posted on this thread prove that we pay more indirect tax than most of Europe. The definition of a low tax economy should encompass all taxes - not just income tax. And (for the fourth time), all countries need a similar amount of revenue per head of population to run efficiently. It is WHO funds that & HOW it is collected determines how fair it is and what kind of society we have. By FF blindly following PD philosophies just to cling on to power, we have an unfair tax system which penalises the average to low paid. The trouble is, try as I might it is near impossible to find out how much the average person spends on indirect tax - I believe thats why they are called stealth taxes

May I refer you to my previous post #16. The figures there are not just for income tax. They include tax from ALL sources. Ireland is a low tax state.

Now that does not mean the tax is fairly distributed, but on average Irish people do pay less tax than our neighbours.

oscarBravo

Split from the "should Bertie resign?" thread.

bonkey

IRLConor wrote: »

Ireland is a low tax state.

I vaguely remember seeing something in the Swiss papers a month or so ago, saying that the Swiss were a low-tax State, behind only Ireland in Europe.

murphaph

Tommy T wrote: »

The overall tax burden is far heavier on the French, Germans and Scandinavians...

.....and they're CF sufferers live 60% longer than ours. Go figure. It seems many people in Ireland want the tax model of the US but the social services of the Scandinavians. Can't have both in reality. Either you care about your fellow (less fortunate) citizens or you don't. It's all fine until somebody close to you suddenly needs 'the system' to help them.

aside: Ireland has turned into one of the greediest places on earth and I hope all the people who despair at paying a few cents in the euro more tax are the ones who end up needing the health'care' we provide as a nation. Heck, if you're so interested in "each to their own" you'll surely have private cover for every eventuality, right?

Of course this doesn't excuse the horrendous levels of mismanagement of our wealth in recent years.

IRLConor

murphaph wrote: »

.....and they're CF sufferers live 60% longer than ours. Go figure. It seems many people in Ireland want the tax model of the US but the social services of the Scandinavians. Can't have both in reality.

From 2001-2005 we have spent almost exactly the same amount on our health service as Finland (GDP-adjusted). (Source) Did we get the same level of service?

Even before then, despite taking approximately 50% more tax (GDP-adjusted, see my previous data) they didn't spend 50% more on their health system.

Our health system isn't crap due to lack of money. It's crap due to bad management and spending money in the wrong places.

murphaph wrote: »

aside: Ireland has turned into one of the greediest places on earth and I hope all the people who despair at paying a few cents in the euro more tax are the ones who end up needing the health'care' we provide as a nation. Heck, if you're so interested in "each to their own" you'll surely have private cover for every eventuality, right?

I despair at paying a few extra cents in the euro more tax because I don't believe that any potential government with any possibility of being elected in the near future will spend my extra tax money in the right places. Given that I've judged them incompetent, I think the only rational thing is to decide for myself where to spend my cash.

I don't like paying the VHI for private cover when I've already paid for health cover in my tax bill. I pay for it because I don't believe I can be without proper health care when I need it. I want a high quality of care from the public system I just don't see it happening any time soon.

fly_agaric

snyper wrote: »

I just detest hardcore socialism

A "good" (by standards of rest of Europe) public transport system and a "good" (by same standards) public health service != "hardcore socialism" IMO. It's just the way things should be.

snyper wrote: »

I lived in New Hampshire, where there motto is live free or die

Why didn't you stay there if you hate "socialised medicine" and "socialised transport":) so much?

murphaph

IRLConor wrote: »

From 2001-2005 we have spent almost exactly the same amount on our health service as Finland (GDP-adjusted). (Source) Did we get the same level of service?

Even before then, despite taking approximately 50% more tax (GDP-adjusted, see my previous data) they didn't spend 50% more on their health system.

Our health system isn't crap due to lack of money. It's crap due to bad management and spending money in the wrong places.



I despair at paying a few extra cents in the euro more tax because I don't believe that any potential government with any possibility of being elected in the near future will spend my extra tax money in the right places. Given that I've judged them incompetent, I think the only rational thing is to decide for myself where to spend my cash.

I don't like paying the VHI for private cover when I've already paid for health cover in my tax bill. I pay for it because I don't believe I can be without proper health care when I need it. I want a high quality of care from the public system I just don't see it happening any time soon.

Fair enough and I agree with what you say-we do spend money poorly and the core issue here is a lack of value for money, however I believe my point still stands.....irish people want to pay taxes as low as the states but want public services as good as the best in Europe. I think it is generally accepted that it is impossible to deliver that (unless you have a lot of homegrown industry which you can tax at 40% and hope they don't offshore out of a sense of patriotism).

Oh, and I wouldn't rely on VHI to do all that much for you should you need it. If you need A&E etc. you'll still have to queue and be seen based on your condition.

murphaph

fly_agaric wrote: »

Why didn't you stay there if you hate "socialised medicine" and "socialised transport":) so much?

Indeed. Things may have been alright in New Hampshire but some of the poorest people in the world live in the United States. People do die in the US due to poverty. I don't want to live in a country where people die like that.

Bduffman

IRLConor wrote: »

May I refer you to my previous post #16. The figures there are not just for income tax. They include tax from ALL sources. Ireland is a low tax state.

Now that does not mean the tax is fairly distributed, but on average Irish people do pay less tax than our neighbours.

But HOW it is disrirbuted IS the point. The average worker pays up to 41% and then pays further tax on nearly everything they buy - double taxation. And as for how the govt. spend it - don't get me started. Thats why this was part of the Ahern thread - his govts. bad management of the economy, how tax is collected & how its spent. I don't think there was a need to split this thread at all as the issue of taxation is just another indictment of 'saint bertie'

IRLConor

murphaph wrote: »

Fair enough and I agree with what you say-we do spend money poorly and the core issue here is a lack of value for money, however I believe my point still stands.....irish people want to pay taxes as low as the states but want public services as good as the best in Europe.

I would say that everyone in the world wants to pay as little as possible in tax for the best possible public services (excepting of course those nutters who object to the very notion of public services).

murphaph wrote: »

I think it is generally accepted that it is impossible to deliver that (unless you have a lot of homegrown industry which you can tax at 40% and hope they don't offshore out of a sense of patriotism).

I don't think that it's impossible to have a top-notch health system at the current levels of taxation, after all if other countries can do it then so can we. Certainly lowering the current tax levels would reduce our chances of getting there any time soon, but I don't think we need to increase taxes either. We should tackle the issue of waste first before deciding that we need to levy higher taxes.

There is no way businesses will stay here, indigenous or not, if they are taxed at 40%. Mine would be one of the first out the door. It's nothing to do with patriotism, patriotism doesn't put food on the table or pay the rent.

murphaph wrote: »

Oh, and I wouldn't rely on VHI to do all that much for you should you need it. If you need A&E etc. you'll still have to queue and be seen based on your condition.

In my own experience the VHI has been very valuable. They paid for 6 months of chemotherapy and other treatment in the Mater Private for me. I needed it, they delivered. There was no delay, unlike some horror stories I've heard from the public sector side of things.

As for A&E situations, the only time I've been in an A&E department in the last decade was with my girlfriend. She was having trouble breathing and was treated immediately. It turned out that she had a clot in her lung which was pressing on her heart. From check-in to triage was <10 mins. After triage she was treated immediately and after 4-5 hours of diagnostics in the A&E she was admitted to the Coronary Care Unit where she stayed for almost a week. The standard of care from the start was excellent.

From these experiences and others I've heard from friends and relatives I've come to view the health system(s) like so:

1. Stuff that will kill you now. (Like arriving in A&E unconscious or with major trauma injuries from an accident)
   The public health system deals with this reasonably well. There's plenty of room for improvement, but it works OK. The private sector doesn't appear to cover this at all.
2. Stuff that will kill you later. (Any short-to-medium term fatal illness, cancer being a good example)
   The public health system can treat these just as well as the private one, but since early treatment is critical and they're over capacity you're much better off going private if you have the ability to do so.
3. Long-term illnesses.
   The public system has a mixed record on this, probably because it doesn't have the resources it needs and has done macro-scale triage to prioritise the first two categories above. Private health cover will make a big difference to your quality of life in this category.
4. Non-critical repair work and elective/cosmetic work.
   Both sectors are fine, the private sector will just allow you to not have to wait for as long.

So while VHI won't help for category 1 it is very helpful for the other three. In fact, in category 2 it can be the difference between life and death.

bonkey

murphaph wrote: »

Fair enough and I agree with what you say-we do spend money poorly and the core issue here is a lack of value for money, however I believe my point still stands.....irish people want to pay taxes as low as the states but want public services as good as the best in Europe.

I would disagree. My understanding is that people generally don't begrudge paying extra taxes if they believe that they will see a benefit from it. This means that they should see that their current tax-money is being well-spent and that thare is a short-fall.

If you feel your tax-money is not being well-spent, then it is only natural that you will begrudge paying more as you are being asked to do so because someone else will not (or cannot) fix the problems that are wasting the money you already pay.

Here in Switzerland, I (generally speaking) don't raise an eyebrow when my medical insurance goes up by a few percent, or when rail-prices go up....because in both areas an exemplary service is being offered, and the price-increases are regulated to be (roughly) in line with inflation. If I was in Ireland, and was being asked to pay more for either public transport or medical services, I'd be far less happy...due to the quality and efficiency of service offered.

I think it is generally accepted that it is impossible to deliver that (unless you have a lot of homegrown industry which you can tax at 40% and hope they don't offshore out of a sense of patriotism).

Don't tell the Swiss. If they hear that, their system will collapse overnight. They charge nowhere near 40% and still manage to deliver.

IRLConor

Bduffman wrote: »

But HOW it is disrirbuted IS the point. The average worker pays up to 41% and then pays further tax on nearly everything they buy - double taxation.

The average worker does not pay 41%, it's pretty much impossible to pay that much tax in Ireland. The only way you can is if the portion of your taxable income in the higher band dwarfs the portion of your income in the lower band, at this point you're earning many times the salary of the average worker. Take the average wage statistics, tax them and then calculate the percentage if you don't believe me.

The distribution of taxation could be balanced more towards the upper end of the scale (and I would be in favour of more moves in this direction), but this is hard to do. The people earning huge money typically have the resources to move abroad if they judge the taxes to be too high, so you can't just tax the crap out of them because they'll just leave.

Bduffman wrote: »

And as for how the govt. spend it - don't get me started. Thats why this was part of the Ahern thread - his govts. bad management of the economy, how tax is collected & how its spent.

How tax is spent by the current government - you have full agreement from me over that. It's shockingly badly done.

The_Minister

snyper wrote: »

i dont like the PD's.. bit too far right for my taste..

There is no far-right party in Ireland.

murphaph

Fair enough if they're your experiences. My experiences with VHI have been dreadful with them refusing to pay for 2 elective procedures. But I digress.

I don't agree with you that irish people have the same attitude to taxation and public services as our continental cousins. You will (just for example) never hear of public transport in Germany being treated like a leper in the popular press because it requires public subsidy. It is simply considered part of the social fabric. Here in this country there is resentment by people who don't use public transport that their taxes (a very small proportion!) are used to subsidise public transport and the newspapers constantly play up to this with sensationalist nonsense about how much such and such costs to subsidise a year. For heaven's sake-the Luas actually makes a profit after construction costs are taken out (virtually unheard of in the public transport world but indicative of how starved of quality public transport we are).

We had high income taxes once. We did a good job of reducing the national debt (and I will credit this and previous governments for that) however instead of slashing our income taxes they could have reduced them a lot less and diverted the excess to fund public schemes.

The core issues of waste and innefficiency in the public service should be tackled of course. Germany has fewer civil servants per capita than the UK, despite people assuming it would have more as it is perceived as a more 'socialist' state.

We still have dreadful public services compared to the continentals (and the UK). Your Finland example neglects to mention that their corporation tax is 29%-much higher than ours and Finland has some very large domestic companies (like shipbuilders, steel makers, Nokia) that are apparently happy to remain in Finland and pay these. We don't have very many such high value indigenous industries sadly and even if we did we'd have no guarantess they wouldn't leave for lower taxed shores if we hiked corporation tax. Our biggest companies are........banks and construction companies. These sadly do not export all that much and infact make much of their money from irish people (and in the case of CRH etc. from the exchequer through infrastructural spending) who in turn make theirs from working for foreign companies located here.

The fundamentals of our economy aren't all that great tbh.

murphaph

bonkey wrote: »

Don't tell the Swiss. If they hear that, their system will collapse overnight. They charge nowhere near 40% and still manage to deliver.

What does switzerland do to be so wealthy?

bonkey

murphaph wrote: »

What does switzerland do to be so wealthy?

Technically they're less wealthy than the Irish at present. What does Ireland do?

It doesn't really matter though...I was merely showing that the 'impossible without 40% corporate tax' argument was false.

If you still believe its "widely accepted" to be true, then I think you should consider the difference between what is true and what is accepted to be true.

Alternately, you may wish to consider that it is possible to do without 40% corporate tax as long as you meet other criteria. Then the trick becomes figuring out what those criteria are.

IRLConor

murphaph wrote: »

Fair enough if they're your experiences. My experiences with VHI have been dreadful with them refusing to pay for 2 elective procedures. But I digress.

I'm sorry to hear about that. I hope that, as elective procedures, the VHI didn't put you at any risk health-wise.

murphaph wrote: »

I don't agree with you that irish people have the same attitude to taxation and public services as our continental cousins. You will (just for example) never hear of public transport in Germany being treated like a leper in the popular press because it requires public subsidy. It is simply considered part of the social fabric. Here in this country there is resentment by people who don't use public transport that their taxes (a very small proportion!) are used to subsidise public transport and the newspapers constantly play up to this with sensationalist nonsense about how much such and such costs to subsidise a year. For heaven's sake-the Luas actually makes a profit after construction costs are taken out (virtually unheard of in the public transport world but indicative of how starved of quality public transport we are).

Public transport here definitely needs more care and attention. I don't know how much of it is funding-related and how much is incompetence. It's a pity that it took a private company to provide the service the Luas does, it's a genuinely great service. I don't have a lot of confidence that CIE would be able to provide a similar service having been subjected to the Dublin Bus "service" for so long.

I personally would prefer public transport to be free and funded by everyone rather than putting the balance of the cost onto those of us who use it. Public transport should be like clean drinking water, something that the state just pays for and everyone gets for free. <insert water charges insanity rant here :rolleyes:>

murphaph wrote: »

We had high income taxes once. We did a good job of reducing the national debt (and I will credit this and previous governments for that) however instead of slashing our income taxes they could have reduced them a lot less and diverted the excess to fund public schemes.

The core issues of waste and innefficiency in the public service should be tackled of course. Germany has fewer civil servants per capita than the UK, despite people assuming it would have more as it is perceived as a more 'socialist' state.

We still have dreadful public services compared to the continentals (and the UK). Your Finland example neglects to mention that their corporation tax is 29%-much higher than ours and Finland has some very large domestic companies (like shipbuilders, steel makers, Nokia) that are apparently happy to remain in Finland and pay these. We don't have very many such high value indigenous industries sadly and even if we did we'd have no guarantess they wouldn't leave for lower taxed shores if we hiked corporation tax. Our biggest companies are........banks and construction companies. These sadly do not export all that much and infact make much of their money from irish people (and in the case of CRH etc. from the exchequer through infrastructural spending) who in turn make theirs from working for foreign companies located here.

The fundamentals of our economy aren't all that great tbh.

Their corporation tax is 26% not 29%. It was reduced because it was recognised that it was hurting them more than it was helping them. They don't take in twice the amount of corporation tax than we do. In the last budget we took in €6.3 billion. I can't find figures for Finland's corporation tax but in their last budget they took about €45 billion in total tax and subtracting their income tax, VAT and excise receipts leaves about €10 billion for all other taxes. Even if the balance was entirely made up of corporation tax (it isn't) they're not doing as well out of their corporation tax regime as we are.

We definitely do need to create more exporting companies (I'm doing my best ) if we want to actually grow our economy in the right direction and reduce our dependence on foreign companies based here. Otherwise, one day the EU is going to harmonise the corporation tax rates and we're going to be up the creek without a paddle.

As an explanatory note:
I've been using Finland as an example for two main reasons:

• It's approximately the same size as Ireland (population-wise), independent (of a larger power to their east ) for about as long as we have. Their economy is quite similar in size to ours. The only major difference is that they have public services that work very well and we don't.
• My girlfriend is Finnish and an economist so she can find and translate articles about their economy much more easily than I can.

oscarBravo

IRLConor wrote: »

I personally would prefer public transport to be free and funded by everyone rather than putting the balance of the cost onto those of us who use it. Public transport should be like clean drinking water, something that the state just pays for and everyone gets for free. <insert water charges insanity rant here :rolleyes:>

You obviously have an issue with the "polluter pays" philosophy. I rarely use public transport, and I use orders of magnitude less water than my dairy farming neighbour.

AckwelFoley

The_Minister wrote: »

There is no far-right party in Ireland.

Thats not what i meant.

They are too much right wing for me.

Of all the parties in Ireland, they would be more right of centre than the rest.

We have however plenty of far left.

Sinn Fein, Greens, Socialist party...

AckwelFoley

fly_agaric wrote: »

A "good" (by standards of rest of Europe) public transport system and a "good" (by same standards) public health service != "hardcore socialism" IMO. It's just the way things should be.



Why didn't you stay there if you hate "socialised medicine" and "socialised transport":) so much?

Because, we dont have the loonie left in power here. .. and im glad to be here.

Yea.. China has great public transport.. Magic health syster too...

Im still waiting for somone to point out to me 1 country on the PLANET that has a sucessful Socialist / Communist lead country.

The left wing are great and saying how much better everythinh would be if they were in power..

The one thing they fail to mention IS HOW THEY COULD FUND A SOCIALIST ECONOMY

fly_agaric

snyper wrote: »

Because, we dont have the loonie left in power here. .. and im glad to be here.

Yea.. China has great public transport.. Magic health syster too...

Okay, yes we get your hatred of thw "loonie left" loud and clear but wanting a good public health service and good public transport doesn't make one a "loony leftie" or a "filthy commie" or whatever no matter what GWB, the Yanks, or yourself may think about it...

IRLConor

oscarBravo wrote: »

You obviously have an issue with the "polluter pays" philosophy. I rarely use public transport, and I use orders of magnitude less water than my dairy farming neighbour.

I do support the notion of "polluter pays" but people have to get around and since public transport is the least polluting mechanised transport it doesn't make sense to treat it as "polluting" for the purposes of "polluter pays". Unless of course you're one of the loonies that suggests that everyone cycles everywhere.

If you're willing to accept that free health care and a free education system are required bare minimums for the government to provide then it's utter nonsense to charge people for drinking water. If you're using industrial quantities of water, sure levy some charges but for private dwellings?

murphaph

snyper wrote: »

Because, we dont have the loonie left in power here. .. and im glad to be here.

Yea.. China has great public transport.. Magic health syster too...

Im still waiting for somone to point out to me 1 country on the PLANET that has a sucessful Socialist / Communist lead country.

The left wing are great and saying how much better everythinh would be if they were in power..

The one thing they fail to mention IS HOW THEY COULD FUND A SOCIALIST ECONOMY

Germany is a socialist country and until the reunification or thereabouts it had one of if not the strongest economy and currency in the world for many years. Even when the CDU (Conservatives) were in power they would maintain the socialist policies of the SPD as the country is broadly speaking, socialist in nature. Even today, with its ailing economy it is still the biggest economy in Europe and Germany is still the most productive nation on earth (it regained the title from China who held it for a year or two).

I would much rather be sick, educated, unemployed or otherwise disaffected in Germany than here. In some instances you will live longer there as you will receive better care. It costs €10 per quarter to see your doctor/dentist-a charge which most germans were up in arms with when introduced. I had to go to the doc twice last week and paid €100 just to see him.

They funded it by levying heavy taxes on their indigenous industries (of which they have many) and heavily taxing the individual also. There are problems with the german economy but to be quite honest they are only problems from an out and out capitalist's perspective. Germany has restrictive set of labour laws but look at it from a 50 year old german's perspective. He's worked under these labour laws from the early days of the Wirtschaftswunder and he still saw his country become very wealthy with the best infrastructure in the world and could take 3 holidays a year. Why would he think the worker should now be screwed over despite these very workers building up these german industrial industries from the ashes of WWII to be the economic giants they became-all under a socialist system.

Asking them to abandon socialism in favour of cut-throat capitalism because chinese and indian folks will work for 20c an hour is a big ask. We are in a new era whereby multinational corporations function above the laws of the states the operate in and are in effect bigger than any government. We as individual electorates have no control over them but we should all start buying locally produced goods to support local jobs and tell these multinationals to shove it. They have no loyalty to any nation or region and will move around the globe to lower and lower labour economies. We are slowly surrendering all power to them.

moe_sizlak

murphaph wrote: »

.....and they're CF sufferers live 60% longer than ours. Go figure. It seems many people in Ireland want the tax model of the US but the social services of the Scandinavians. Can't have both in reality. Either you care about your fellow (less fortunate) citizens or you don't. It's all fine until somebody close to you suddenly needs 'the system' to help them.

aside: Ireland has turned into one of the greediest places on earth and I hope all the people who despair at paying a few cents in the euro more tax are the ones who end up needing the health'care' we provide as a nation. Heck, if you're so interested in "each to their own" you'll surely have private cover for every eventuality, right?

Of course this doesn't excuse the horrendous levels of mismanagement of our wealth in recent years.

one of the reasons public services are so much better in scandanavia than they are in ireland is because public servants over there have a sense of duty
here they have a sense of entitlement
if all the surplus staff working in administration here were to be culled from the health service alone , the money saved on paying theese pen pushers could be spent on beds
this of course will never happen while berite( best friend of the unions ) aherne is around

AckwelFoley

Germany is a socialist country

LOL, no .. not the type of leftwing socialism that most ppl on boards are advocating.

Its still a free Market with large Foreign and domestic Multinationals employing thousands

AckwelFoley

one of the reasons public services are so much better in scandanavia than they are in ireland is because public servants over there have a sense of duty

While i feel that Sweden and Norway have the best examples of a successful socilaist type system in the world, it comes at a cost.

Very very high taxes.

Which in Particular, has ruined Danish Agricultural life. Danes cannot inherit small family owned farms, because the taxes are so high its workdsout cheaper to buy it. However as most farmers here will testify to, the value of the farm is way higher than the profits from the business would justify in paying for it.

Hence the farms are sold to big "Factory" farms, killing Danish rural life.

DublinWriter

FF have done a great job on spinning the whole 'low-tax' economy line.

Ireland is a low corporate-tax economy - end of story.

Direct taxation - we have a 41% 'top' tax rate for earnings over 34K. Employers also have to pay 10.75% PRSI on gross earnings for their employees, many of which will also have group or individual health insurance with VHI or the like.

Indirect taxation - VAT, Duty, Road Tax, VRT, Stamp Duty, DIRT...the list goes on.

We do pay a lot of tax in Ireland but get very little 'bang for the buck' due to a complete lack of leadership and vision in our politicians.