Tax Increases dont work

We have been here before have we learned a thing? :mad:

http://books.google.ie/books?id=UhZ3iq47MLsC&pg=PA364&lpg=PA364&dq=lowering+budget+deficit+increases+output&source=bl&ots=vlwHy9MmPI&sig=qZSLqZeiu8QMaeRr1mlmLRvIG6s&hl=en&ei=atSjSuKLK5GNjAfV9MzuCQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2#v=onepage&q=&f=false

cowzerp

The irish government are pathetic, Right wing and seriously looking after the wealthy, the ordinary worker is getting screwed, me and my missus both work and are scraping by and with all these tax increases will be in trouble, plus there is many people i know worse of than us, we need a new way of thinking and a new government.

cowzerp

cowzerp wrote: »

The irish government are pathetic, Right wing and seriously looking after the wealthy, the ordinary worker is getting screwed, me and my missus both work and are scraping by and with all these tax increases will be in trouble, plus there is many people i know worse of than us, we need a new way of thinking and a new government.

Its capitalism for the good times and socialism for the wealthy in the bad times
They arent right wing they are systemically corrupt there is a big difference.

irish_bob

cowzerp wrote: »

The irish government are pathetic, Right wing and seriously looking after the wealthy, the ordinary worker is getting screwed, me and my missus both work and are scraping by and with all these tax increases will be in trouble, plus there is many people i know worse of than us, we need a new way of thinking and a new government.

the present goverment are not in the least bit right wing unless you have a different understanding of the term right wing than i do

thebman

The simple reality is cuts on the level required would kill the public sector and it would be unable to function properly and deliver the services people want. Also the loss of jobs in the public sector would seriously increase the number of unemployed given the number employed in the public sector in the country. Then you have the businesses dependant mainly on the public sector contracts which would go under if they were pulled and more people would be let go.

Even if you did there would probably still be a deficit that would need borrowing to cover or tax increases. Given the whole NAMA thing, we will be borrowing stupid amounts anyway and are going to have to pay them back eventually (yeah the assets will cover it my arse and we'll have to make repayments before then anyway).

thebman

thebman wrote: »

The simple reality is cuts on the level required would kill the public sector and it would be unable to function properly and deliver the services people want. Also the loss of jobs in the public sector would seriously increase the number of unemployed given the number employed in the public sector in the country. Then you have the businesses dependant mainly on the public sector contracts which would go under if they were pulled and more people would be let go.

Even if you did there would probably still be a deficit that would need borrowing to cover or tax increases. Given the whole NAMA thing, we will be borrowing stupid amounts anyway and are going to have to pay them back eventually (yeah the assets will cover it my arse and we'll have to make repayments before then anyway).

Quangos

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/ireland/article4596998.ece

The government argues that the recent explosion of quangos is a burden on public finances, especially as many agencies duplicate the work of others. While nobody officially knows how many quangos there are, Brian Lenihan, the minister for finance, says the number of their employees has grown by more than 60% to 17,000 since 2000.

A 2006 survey by Tasc, a think tank, found that the country has 832 such entities, with a combined annual budget of €13 billion.
The OECD said last April that we have a quango for every 5,000 people.

irish_bob

thebman wrote: »

The simple reality is cuts on the level required would kill the public sector and it would be unable to function properly and deliver the services people want. Also the loss of jobs in the public sector would seriously increase the number of unemployed given the number employed in the public sector in the country. Then you have the businesses dependant mainly on the public sector contracts which would go under if they were pulled and more people would be let go.

Even if you did there would probably still be a deficit that would need borrowing to cover or tax increases. Given the whole NAMA thing, we will be borrowing stupid amounts anyway and are going to have to pay them back eventually (yeah the assets will cover it my arse and we'll have to make repayments before then anyway).

thier are thousands who work in the public sector who provide no service to anyone and who wouldnt be in the slightest bit missed if they were let go , even better , it would save thousands paying them dole and benefits as opposed to a minimum of 25 k , no reason services to the public should be hit , let the ps workers work a little harder instead of thier 9.30 to 4.30 ( with a 90 min lunch break) day

P. Breathnach

irish_bob wrote: »

thier are thousands who work in the public sector who provide no service to anyone and who wouldnt be in the slightest bit missed if they were let go ...

Identify them and the jobs they fill.

P. Breathnach

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Identify them and the jobs they fill.

Every quango started since the year 2000. We got on fine before then without them.

MrMicra

thebman wrote: »

The simple reality is cuts on the level required would kill the public sector and it would be unable to function properly and deliver the services people want.

Cuts should be targeted at pay first and only after that.
The public sector wage bill is €20 bn.
The government deficit will be €20 bn.

I accept that many public servants are hardworking.
If all public servants received a 50% pay cut the government deficit would be halved and there would be no impact on service provision. (In fact because of tax bands and credits this is an oversimplification.)

This is not possible however I suspect that if a future government put this measure to the people it would pass.

thebman wrote: »

Also the loss of jobs in the public sector would seriously increase the number of unemployed given the number employed in the public sector in the country.

A person on the dole costs less than a public servant (I accept that many public servants are hardworking.)

thebman wrote: »

Then you have the businesses dependant mainly on the public sector contracts which would go under if they were pulled and more people would be let go.

So what?

thebman wrote: »

Given the whole NAMA thing, we will be borrowing stupid amounts anyway and are going to have to pay them back eventually (yeah the assets will cover it my arse and we'll have to make repayments before then anyway).

I believe that the European Union will save us from ourselves on NAMA, I may be naive. The competition commission have issued a guide (for governments) about what you can do to help your banks; basically you have to be transparent and agree your valuation methods with the EU. AIB, Bank of Ireland et al might be too big for the Government here to let them fail but the EU will disagree.
NAMA is legal according to the EU Commission and acceptable according to the ECB but not in the form that Brian Lenihan evisioned. It will be much cheaper than currently believed.

At any rate the argument that because I must waste money in one area of my life (like my daughter's wedding) I should waste it in other areas (like buying a BMW X5) is absurd.

No matter what amount we must borrow the public sector wages bill is too high.
I accept that many public servants are hard working and indeed I was discussing pay with a primary school teacher recently and she did not seem overpaid to me. She is hard working, commited and intelligent; that said we just can't afford her.

Stark

MrMicra wrote: »

No matter what amount we must borrow the public sector wages bill is too high.

I was directed to SIPTU's "There is a fairer way" document today. What a laugh. For one thing, it suggests continued heavy borrowing to pay for union worker wages. Because asking people who might not even be born yet to pay the salaries of today's workers is "a fairer way" in their eyes :rolleyes:

irish_bob

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Identify them and the jobs they fill.

print out with each name and adress in the post

irish_bob

Stark wrote: »

I was directed to SIPTU's "There is a fairer way" document today. What a laugh. For one thing, it suggests continued heavy borrowing to pay for union worker wages. Because asking people who might not even be born yet to pay the salaries of today's workers of today is "a fairer way" in their eyes :rolleyes:

id take as much advice on cost cutting from SIPTU as i would from dawn french on dieting

Dr Galen

irish_bob wrote: »

print out with each name and adress in the post

rhetoric means nothing. facts mean a lot more.

if you could provide even a smidge of factual evidence to show who and who wasn't useful with the PS, I'd back you up, I'm a taxpayer too. So far though we've not seen that (on here at least)

Mystik Monkey

Mystik Monkey wrote: »

rhetoric means nothing. facts mean a lot more.

if you could provide even a smidge of factual evidence to show who and who wasn't useful with the PS, I'd back you up, I'm a taxpayer too. So far though we've not seen that (on here at least)

Post #9 ^^^

Carbon Tax wont work either :mad:

http://trueeconomics.blogspot.com/2009/09/economics-09092009-has-green-party.html

Dr. Constantin Gurdgiev

Before we dive into the details, here is what the papers are not telling you - Green Ministers, the birdie has chirped (hat tip to KOD), received a trade-off from FF: in exchange for introducing a Carbon Tax they signed off on Nama. Why this is the bad news for the Greens and the country? Two reasons:

* First a minor one - Nama is infinitely more important to this country than the Carbon Tax, so much so, that the Greens' leadership in effect sold family jewels to buy a new broom;

* Second a major one - Carbon Tax is simply another punitive unavoidable tax for this country. Do not confuse it with some environment improvement incentive measure. Here is why. If Carbon Tax were to be a true behavior modification tax, then at least in theory its introduction should induce people to opt for greener alternatives: use of more public transport (that should be less polluting), more telecommuting, more energy efficiency etc. All of these are good things. But the problem is that a family that works in Dublin and, because of past FF policies was forced to buy their house in Cavan (for example), there is no alternative to driving and there is no alternative to switch to 'cleaner' energy. Indeed, with ESB (legacy of FF) in charge of generation and Eirgrid (legacy of FF) in charge of the grid, we have no real less polluting alternative. So Carbon tax will be unavoidable to many of us and thus it fails as a real 'behavior modification' tax.