Wages worth less every month

lifeinireland

i seem to have less money each month,we are tod the cost of living is going down,so why is insurances,petrol,oil,coal,everything goin up,prsi is worth allmost nothing,we on very average wages are finding it hard,yet we are being pushed to the limit,by government maybe they think by more people loosing there homes to the banks is going to save the country.and its government that are putting ordinary people under pressure ,with all these new regulations:mad:

the_syco

lifeinireland wrote: »

petrol

The greens think that if they increase tax on petrol people will use less petrol, when in fact people have only used less petrol, as less people are driving to work, as less people have jobs.

Two thirds of the cost of petrol, me thinks, is tax.

dRNk SAnTA

the_syco wrote: »

The greens think that if they increase tax on petrol people will use less petrol, when in fact people have only used less petrol, as less people are driving to work, as less people have jobs.

Two thirds of the cost of petrol, me thinks, is tax.

Yeah they do think that, so does pretty much everybody. The best way to reduce carbon emissions is to tax them. That way it will influence future lifestyle decisions such as where you live/what car you buy/what appliances you buy and you can cut down on energy use.

Incentivising behaviour through tax is nothing new, the carbon tax is just the same as the plastic bag tax, cigarette/alcohol tax, congestion charges, parking meters, water charges etc.

Diarmuid

You do realise that fossil fuel are a finite, non renewable resource? The price is only going one way. Insurance premiums are going up as the investment gain are way lower last two years .If that's all you spend your money on then , yes, everything is going up. For the rest of us prices are going down http://www.cso.ie/quicktables/GetQuickTables.aspx?FileName=CPM01.asp&TableName=January+to+December+2009&StatisticalProduct=DB_CP

scudzilla

the_syco wrote: »

The greens think that if they increase tax on petrol people will use less petrol, when in fact people have only used less petrol, as less people are driving to work, as less people have jobs.

Two thirds of the cost of petrol, me thinks, is tax.

i think it's a lot higher than that, also add cigarettes to this, the government wants everybody to give up smoking, as do the do-gooders.

Do they not realise that on an average packet of smokes, costing 8.50, 7 euro of that goes to the tax man.

If everybody gave up smoking tomorrow this country would be in so much shit, tax would go up to 40% across the board in a matter of weeks

AARRRRGH

scudzilla wrote: »

i think it's a lot higher than that, also add cigarettes to this, the government wants everybody to give up smoking, as do the do-gooders.

Do they not realise that on an average packet of smokes, costing 8.50, 7 euro of that goes to the tax man.

If everybody gave up smoking tomorrow this country would be in so much shit, tax would go up to 40% across the board in a matter of weeks

They dont actually. They want to raise the tax on fags just enough that you can still afford to smoke and pay the tax. While pretending they are doing it for the good of your health. If they really wanted people to give up smoking add a tenner onto a pack. I bet that seriously cuts the amount of people who smoke straight away.

syklops

AARRRRGH wrote: »

They dont actually. They want to raise the tax on fags just enough that you can still afford to smoke and pay the tax. While pretending they are doing it for the good of your health. If they really wanted people to give up smoking add a tenner onto a pack. I bet that seriously cuts the amount of people who smoke straight away.

I doubt it. I bet it increases black market selling straight away. I am heading over to Ireland in the summer. A pack of Camel lights here is 3 euro. If I were to bring over 3 cartons(10 packs per carton) and sell those cartons for a fiver per pack, I would make 60 euro. Throw in another couple of packs, and thats my flights paid. Throw in a few more packs and I turn a profit.

I am not intending on doing this, instead the 3 packs will go to my uncle who smokes like a chimney, but a lot of people do do this, and the government is losing out big time.

The Corinthian

the_syco wrote: »

The greens think that if they increase tax on petrol people will use less petrol, when in fact people have only used less petrol, as less people are driving to work, as less people have jobs.

As a 'green' policy, it is complete failure. If you want to encourage people to stop driving, that is all well and good, but then you need to offer an alternative, and public transport in Ireland remains one of the worst in Europe.

The real reason is that taxes on petrol, alcohol, tobacco, gambling, pornography (in some countries), prostitution (where legal) and the like are often referred to as moral taxes - taxes on vices or things that are otherwise considered bad or difficult to defend, thus making it easier to tax them at high levels under the pretext that the government is trying to get people to smoke, drink, gamble less, or look at less porn. It's politically difficult, if not impossible, to defend cheaper cigarettes, after all.

We would probably have a tax on condoms, were it not for HIV.

The paradox, or more correctly hypocrisy, of moral taxes is best exemplified in countries that still retain control over the tobacco industry - often you will find one ministry taxing and campaigning against smoking, while another promoting the sale of the State brand cigarettes.

syklops wrote: »

I doubt it. I bet it increases black market selling straight away.

Unless the rest of the EU increases the price of cigarettes, I suspect you're right. Given that, even if 90% of cigarettes were smuggled from abroad, the tax revenue made is so enormous that it is still worth the state's while - I remember reading in the Irish Times, around 1991, that alcohol and tobacco taxation accounted for around 36% of all government revenue at the time.

However, I suspect that we are reaching a point with many traditional moral taxes where we have squeezed pretty much all we can and will see more imaginative moral taxes appear in the future. The new cohabitation bill suspiciously appears to want to shift the cost of unmarried lone parents away from the state and onto their partners, for example.

murphaph

syklops wrote: »

I am not intending on doing this, instead the 3 packs will go to my uncle who smokes like a chimney, but a lot of people do do this, and the government is losing out big time.

I bet even in Brno, you can buy black market fags for less than 3 quid a pack?? Fags are 4.50 a pack here in Berlin and I see the black market fags being sold every day, so it seems no matter what price they are, they will be cheaper elsewhere and people will buy black market ones.

syklops

murphaph wrote: »

I bet even in Brno, you can buy black market fags for less than 3 quid a pack?? Fags are 4.50 a pack here in Berlin and I see the black market fags being sold every day, so it seems no matter what price they are, they will be cheaper elsewhere and people will buy black market ones.

Most of the black market ones here are counterfeits. Dirt cheap, but varying levels of quality and often completely different flavour. Sometimes flavour varies within packs. If money is tight Ill smoke LM blue which is 66 corwns which is about 2.50. Paramount is 2 euro but they taste like crap.

dan_d

Have to say...the petrol tax and the Green's attitude towards driving etc annoys the hell out of me, for the simple reason that they preach on and on about carbon measures, and taking public transport....yet nowhere in this whol debate does anybody contemplate the fact that our public transport system is pathetic. People have no other options.If I live in Celbridge and work in, say Swords...how would I get there every day?3 buses? 4 buses?At irregular times of day and night? We have an obsession with connecting the outer city to the city centre....we never consider connecting the suburbs to each other.The irony being that you can actually walk across our city centre in the space of about 30 mins, from main shopping area to main shopping area.
I know I am absolutely scathing about public transport, but I've used public transport in cities and countries all over Europe, and in the states, and we are so far removed from a proper system it's ridiculous. Even in San Francisco, who's residents would consider their system to be poor relative to other cities...it's far above the standard of ours and the city is many times the size of Dublin. And then our politicians have the absolute cheek to tell us to get off the roads.....it leaves me speechless.
Rant over!!

ei.sdraob

dRNk SAnTA wrote: »

The best way to reduce carbon emissions is to tax them.

Irish carbon emissions fallen of a cliff anyways thanks to the recession

all these taxes will accomplish is drive more business away and cause more unemployment

the Greens never fail to amaze me in their stupidity despite all the hot air they produce about "smart economy"

danman

I drive 230 miles on a Monday morning to get to work, I then drive the same back home on a Friday.
Public transport would take me 7 hours, and considering I start work at 8 in the morning, I'd love to know how I can do it.

In principle, I agree with the carbon tax. The problem is, there is no alternitive unless you live and work in an urban area.

When I work in Dublin, I drive down at the start of the week and use public transport. But this option is rarely open to me.

I do agree with cutting emisions in the country, but at the same time, people need to drive to go aboun their daily lives in this country.
I can't see that changing in the foreseeable future.

woodseb

danman wrote: »

I drive 230 miles on a Monday morning to get to work, I then drive the same back home on a Friday.
Public transport would take me 7 hours, and considering I start work at 8 in the morning, I'd love to know how I can do it.

In principle, I agree with the carbon tax. The problem is, there is no alternitive unless you live and work in an urban area.

When I work in Dublin, I drive down at the start of the week and use public transport. But this option is rarely open to me.

I do agree with cutting emisions in the country, but at the same time, people need to drive to go aboun their daily lives in this country.
I can't see that changing in the foreseeable future.

If a carbon tax discourages people from driving 230miles to work every week - it seems like good policy - there's no way that kind of commute should be encouraged

BluePlanet

woodseb wrote: »

If a carbon tax discourages people from driving 230miles to work every week - it seems like good policy - there's no way that kind of commute should be encouraged

I agree.
Danman has decided to live in Celbridge, then he expects society to align around his choices.

I've decided I didn't want to live a motoring commuter lifestyle so have choosen a place to live near where i work.
I'll pay a higher rent to do that, but that's a sacrifice i'm willing to make.
I'm also willing to move if my work does.

AARRRRGH

syklops wrote: »

I doubt it. I bet it increases black market selling straight away. I am heading over to Ireland in the summer. A pack of Camel lights here is 3 euro. If I were to bring over 3 cartons(10 packs per carton) and sell those cartons for a fiver per pack, I would make 60 euro. Throw in another couple of packs, and thats my flights paid. Throw in a few more packs and I turn a profit.

I am not intending on doing this, instead the 3 packs will go to my uncle who smokes like a chimney, but a lot of people do do this, and the government is losing out big time.

There will always be a black market. Using it as an excuse to keep the tax on fags just affordable instead of really ramping it up if you want to quit smoking is just laziness. You will get more buying on the black market but Most people will just give up and will not buy on the black market.

AARRRRGH

BluePlanet wrote: »

I agree.
Danman has decided to live in Celbridge, then he expects society to align around his choices.

I've decided I didn't want to live a motoring commuter lifestyle so have choosen a place to live near where i work.
I'll pay a higher rent to do that, but that's a sacrifice i'm willing to make.
I'm also willing to move if my work does.

My work is in several different countries and several different cities in Ireland.
I just just move every couple of weeks then.

BluePlanet

AARRRRGH wrote: »

My work is in several different countries and several different cities in Ireland.
I just just move every couple of weeks then.

So what, you pursue a rather atypical sort of career but still expect the government to sort out handy public transport for you?

Or are you just giving out about carbon taxes since your carbon footprint is so big?

P. Breathnach

The Corinthian wrote: »

As a 'green' policy, it is complete failure. If you want to encourage people to stop driving, that is all well and good, but then you need to offer an alternative, and public transport in Ireland remains one of the worst in Europe...

One of the reasons why public transport in Ireland is bad is that people don't use it because they prefer to use cars.

It would be absurd to run a six-times-a-day bus service between two towns if the average number of passengers carried on each bus was 3.

In cities, especially Dublin, buses lose a lot of time because their routes are clogged by motorists making the same journey, and who justify their car preference on the basis that the bus is so slow.

danman

BluePlanet wrote: »

I agree.
Danman has decided to live in Celbridge, then he expects society to align around his choices.

I've decided I didn't want to live a motoring commuter lifestyle so have choosen a place to live near where i work.
I'll pay a higher rent to do that, but that's a sacrifice i'm willing to make.
I'm also willing to move if my work does.

I live in North Donegal. I have 2 choices.
Work, and contribute to the welfare of my family and the general economy, or, not work and and claim wefare for my family of the state.

I've had this discussion before on this forum.

There are those that see my living in North Donegal as a selfish choice.
I see it as being no choice at all. My family, including the support network to allow me to work, are all living in North Donegal.

My general cost of living is much less because we didn't have the housing bubble effected by the rest of the country. I was able to buy my house at a sustainable price in 2005. In fact, it's value still above the price I paid.

My commute is a choice between keeping my family in economic stability, and economic ruin.

I have no family network in Cellbridge and I believe my wife and children would not have the same life there. My children are growing up in a stable and well supported envoirnment, surrounded by grandparents, aunts, uncles, cousins and friends.

My 230 mile journey is less important to me than their happiness.

As I've said, I agree with the carbon tax.
But I do think that the money raised should be ringfenced towards proper public transport. Not simply go into the revenue coffers.

The Corinthian

BluePlanet wrote: »

I agree.
Danman has decided to live in Celbridge, then he expects society to align around his choices.

I've decided I didn't want to live a motoring commuter lifestyle so have choosen a place to live near where i work.
I'll pay a higher rent to do that, but that's a sacrifice i'm willing to make.
I'm also willing to move if my work does.

I think people are missing the point. One of the problems with the Irish economy is that it is too focused on a small number of urban areas, particularly Dublin. Without adequate public transport this has resulted in a residential demographic that has too many people living in too few areas around the country. This ultimately drives up costs and makes us highly uncompetitive, while leaving much of the countryside underutilized and empty.

Ultimately, what you are suggesting is that no one should live outside of a few cities in Ireland. After all, job density is not all that great outside them, so even if you accepted a job in Mayo and moved there, what happens if you lose it? Move to a new location, given that your chances of finding another job locally are thin? That would rule out buying a house, unless you want to take the hit for buying and selling every few years.

Suggesting that Danman should not be 'encouraged' to commute is ridiculous - what would you prefer? He goes on the Dole for the good of the environment?

Public transport is a joke in Ireland, and long has been. CIE has been run for the benefit of it's employees and there is little or no political will to do something about it. As a result, if you are from rural Ireland and are not going to inherit a job, you pretty much move to Dublin as soon as you turn 18. The number of towns in Ireland that have a demographic chasm in the age group 18 to 40 is incredible.

Meanwhile, in pretty much the rest of Europe, many live in rural areas and commute to urban areas to work, because they can relay upon public transport, additionally bringing their earnings back with them to stimulate local economies.

The Corinthian

P. Breathnach wrote: »

One of the reasons why public transport in Ireland is bad is that people don't use it because they prefer to use cars.

No, the reason that public transport in Ireland is bad is that it has been run atrociously for years. We don't even have integrated ticketing, let alone accurate timetables, FFS!

Whether people prefer cars or not is irrelevant, the reality is even if they preferred public transport it is unusable - in short, there is no alternative.

BluePlanet

danman wrote: »

I live in North Donegal. I have 2 choices.
Work, and contribute to the welfare of my family and the general economy, or, not work and and claim wefare for my family of the state.

There is feck all industry in North Donegal.
You've stated some reasons for making your choice to live there.
Now, what do you really expect of society to do?
Surely you don't expect us to subsidise High Speed Rail to suit your lifestyle choice?

Scofflaw

woodseb wrote: »

If a carbon tax discourages people from driving 230miles to work every week - it seems like good policy - there's no way that kind of commute should be encouraged

Indeed - I see, though, that once again the discussion around the carbon tax revolves around the spurious notion that all trips are necessary. Everyone cites their commute, nobody cites the Saturday morning trip to the shops that could equally well have not happened, or been undertaken on foot.

Nor, I notice does anyone mention the 12c rise in excise on petrol which has taken place over the same timeframe as the introduction of 4.2c of carbon tax on the same litre (and which appears to have taken the place of one of the excise rises).

Pardon me, therefore, if I'm somewhat sceptical of the genuineness of the "difficulties" apparently caused by the carbon tax.

cordially,
Scofflaw

danman

BluePlanet wrote: »

There is feck all industry in North Donegal.
You've stated some reasons for making your choice to live there.
Now, what do you really expect of society to do?
Surely you don't expect us to subsidise High Speed Rail to suit your lifestyle choice?

That would be fantastic, in the mean time I'd be happy with public transport that comes from this century.

This is what passes for public transport in North Donegal.


http://home.clara.net/sjp/nibus/ls323_15.jpg

Scofflaw, I'm actually in favour of the carbon tax, as I've stated.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Scofflaw

The Corinthian wrote: »

I think people are missing the point. One of the problems with the Irish economy is that it is too focused on a small number of urban areas, particularly Dublin. Without adequate public transport this has resulted in a residential demographic that has too many people living in too few areas around the country. This ultimately drives up costs and makes us highly uncompetitive, while leaving much of the countryside underutilized and empty.

Ultimately, what you are suggesting is that no one should live outside of a few cities in Ireland. After all, job density is not all that great outside them, so even if you accepted a job in Mayo and moved there, what happens if you lose it? Move to a new location, given that your chances of finding another job locally are thin? That would rule out buying a house, unless you want to take the hit for buying and selling every few years.

Suggesting that Danman should not be 'encouraged' to commute is ridiculous - what would you prefer? He goes on the Dole for the good of the environment?

Public transport is a joke in Ireland, and long has been. CIE has been run for the benefit of it's employees and there is little or no political will to do something about it. As a result, if you are from rural Ireland and are not going to inherit a job, you pretty much move to Dublin as soon as you turn 18. The number of towns in Ireland that have a demographic chasm in the age group 18 to 40 is incredible.

Meanwhile, in pretty much the rest of Europe, many live in rural areas and commute to urban areas to work, because they can relay upon public transport, additionally bringing their earnings back with them to stimulate local economies.

An extraordinary set of claims, rather (unusually) flying in the face of logic. Are you really saying that if the population of Ireland were more dispersed it would be more efficient? Even on basic physics that's rather obviously not going to be the case. And are you really saying that danman's choices are commuting long distances or being on the dole? Again, that's clearly not true!

I think you're overselling the concept of rural living here. It's not a right, and claiming that the practical difficulties are minimal or should be minimal is an argument for yet further subsidy of rural lifestyles by the cities they choose to avoid.

If people want to live in the countryside as their ancestors did, then let them live in the countryside as their ancestors did - subsistence farming. If they want to benefit from a modern economy and the country simultaneously, let them pay full price for their choice. I don't drive, I live in the city centre, and I have no interest in subsidising someone who decided it was nicer or cheaper to live in Blessington and commute to RTE than to live in Donnybrook.

cordially,
Scofflaw

P. Breathnach

The Corinthian wrote: »

No, the reason that public transport in Ireland is bad is that it has been run atrociously for years. We don't even have integrated ticketing, let alone accurate timetables, FFS!

Whether people prefer cars or not is irrelevant, the reality is even if they preferred public transport it is unusable - in short, there is no alternative.

Life is generally not so simple. I claimed that "one of the reasons why public transport in Ireland is bad is that people don't use it because they prefer to use cars". I didn't say that it was the only reason.

I don't dispute your suggestion that public transport has been badly run in many respects, and I accept that the failure to adopt an integrated ticketing system is a particularly good indicator of an incoherent approach. There are many other examples of questionable choices having been made, such as in the planning of the Luas routes and the licensing of taxis.

But if things are to improve, one of the things that has to be tackled is our car preference.

Scofflaw

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

A fair point, sadly, and unsurprising.

danman wrote:

That would be fantastic, in the mean time I'd be happy with public transport that comes from this century.

This is what passes for public transport in North Donegal.


http://home.clara.net/sjp/nibus/ls323_15.jpg

Scofflaw, I'm actually in favour of the carbon tax, as I've stated.

Apologies - if I've implied you're opposed to it I didn't intend to.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

BluePlanet

danman wrote: »

That would be fantastic, in the mean time I'd be happy with public transport that comes from this century.

Accessible Public Transport did not feature in your list of reasons for choosing to live in Donegal.
Obviously it wasn't a priority for you when choosing to live there.

While i agree with state-run public transport i don't see N. Donegal having a very strong case for it. It has no population to justify much a subsidy.

ei.sdraob

Agree with @df and others earlier in thread

There are friends of mine who live and work in Donegal and have family/social ties there

its sort of hard to "relocate" to Dublin when your job involves working with fishing boats, then again knowing the Greens they have it in for all sorts of fishing and farming industries, if it aint big & white and it doesn't spin then apparently its not "smart" enough :rolleyes:

Once again the Greens and their ideologically blinkered ignorance has no bounds

Scofflaw

ei.sdraob wrote: »

Agree with @df and others earlier in thread

There are friends of mine who live and work in Donegal and have family/social ties there

its sort of hard to "relocate" to Dublin when your job involves working with fishing boats, then again knowing the Greens they have it in for all sorts of fishing and farming industries, if it aint big & white and it doesn't spin then apparently its not "smart" enough :rolleyes:

Once again the Greens and their totalitarian stupidity has no bounds when it comes to economics

I think that's actually an issue with your interpretation of them.

regards,
Scofflaw

danbohan

Scofflaw wrote: »

I think that's actually an issue with your interpretation of them.

regards,
Scofflaw

their is only one way you can interpret the greens , unless of course you are a blinkered greenie yourself

ei.sdraob

Scofflaw wrote: »

I think that's actually an issue with your interpretation of them.

regards,
Scofflaw

My "interpretation" is based on seeing the Greens look down and tax people and industries which dont conform to "their" vision of the future where we all produce hot air and blow them at windmills.

As I said before in another thread, the Greens are all sticks and no carrots


btw @Scofflaw you are quite good at producing figures, please do tell us how much CO2 is produced by transportation in this country, I would very much like to see how it compares to having a mountains of coal being burned down in Moneypoint.

AARRRRGH

BluePlanet wrote: »

So what, you pursue a rather atypical sort of career but still expect the government to sort out handy public transport for you?

Or are you just giving out about carbon taxes since your carbon footprint is so big?

You seem to think that everyone can live beside where they work. They cant. Im Making the point that People travel to work. My company pays for my travel, so I dont care what the govt do.

Amhran Nua

To be honest Dublin, the main centre for employment and population in the country, is actually a case study as one of the worst designed cities in Europe, its hard to fault people who don't want to live there.

Another kind of infrastructure could help out in many cases however - pervasive fast broadband. If you don't absolutely need to physically be at work, I see no reason in this day and age why you should be there. Telecommuting could take much of the strain off road networks and public transport, with a few adjustments in management approaches.

AlekSmart

In cities, especially Dublin, buses lose a lot of time because their routes are clogged by motorists making the same journey, and who justify their car preference on the basis that the bus is so slow.

It`s interesting that a discussion of a somewhat General nature has rather quickly identified the issue of Public Transport as a core major problem to Ireland`s ability to compete and recover.

The major problem from a Public Transport perspective is one of planning,it simply does not exist in any cohesive,European sense.

Then we face the equally bafling Irish tendency to devise,construct and commission stuff only to lose all interest in the actual ongoing operation of it.

For example,this weekend in Dublin sees some major ESB works on Drumcondra Road adjacent to the Railway Station.

The works involve reducing the traffic flow in both directions to a single lane.

Most folks here will be hazily aware that Drumcondra Road is on the main drag Northwards and is the preferred access route to Dublins International Airport Terminal(s).
So.....one might imagine that a major restriction of a National Primary Route would have all administrative agencies putting maximum effort into minimizing the disruption etc etc..in the best European tradition...?

Full marks then to the contractor,who had several flag-men and even one dedicated to getting pedestrians across the now manually controlled busy (and dangerous) junction.

Absolutely ZERO marks to "The Rest"...ie Dublin City Council,An Garda Siochana,The NRA,The RSA,The NTA,Bus Eireann,Dublin Bus,Aircoach,Matthews Coach for their astonishing refusal to recognise a problem when it was quite obvious to everybody else.

The Bus Stop directly outside Drumcondra Station remains in-service,which means that each bus/coach required to stop at it thereby halts the traffic flow as it is the ONLY lane operational.

This constipational effect is seriously worsened by the reality that a substantial number of intending passengers here are Airport bound and perhaps foreign also.

Now,Bus and Coach drivers know well that this results in delay...questions,questions,questions..."Do you go to the Airport"...."Is it raining at the Airport"..."How much is it to......" "Do Ryanair serve canapés at the check-in desk"...then there`s luggage and payment etc etc...

My point is,one does not need a report from Mssrs Deloitte & Touché to tell one that this type of Bus Stop needs to be taken out-of-service/Relocated for the duration of the Civil Engineering Works.....well,on second thoughts maybe one does..if one is a senior Administrator in Ireland.

By far the most typically Irish effect of this institutional ignorance was the way in which the incompetence of the Public Transport agencies (Public AND Private) added greatly to the workload of the guy`s who WERE doing things correctly...The Flagmen.

I`m using this example merely to underline the most important single item which ,as yet,modern Irish thinking continues to ignore.....PLANNING.

We plan for Nothing and then when it eventually does go belly up we sit on the roadside and keen into our hands...although the Drumcondra Station scenario did reawaken my interest as to whether we still have a Director of Traffic in Dublin......Who is he ? How much is he Paid ? and what does he spend his day at ...???? :rolleyes:

God help yiz all up in Donegal

The Corinthian

Scofflaw wrote: »

An extraordinary set of claims, rather (unusually) flying in the face of logic. Are you really saying that if the population of Ireland were more dispersed it would be more efficient? Even on basic physics that's rather obviously not going to be the case.

Then basic economics may work better for you - supply and demand.

If the population is too concentrated in one area, then demand for services and accommodation becomes high and this leads to high prices. It costs significantly more to live in Dublin than it costs to live in, say, Roscommon. That becomes a wage pressure, which in turn affects competitiveness.

Meanwhile, less urban areas, cannot develop. Population density is too low. Companies have difficulty finding skilled people to hire and thus need grants to set up. Even then, many will refuse jobs down the country, because - as many have discovered - if you lose it, you're just stuck in the arsehole of nowhere.

The reality is that there are numerous other countries in Europe where it is perfectly normal to live 20, 30 or even 40km from work and commute by train (20 - 35 minutes each way) every day. In Dublin, it takes 20 minutes to go from Dun Laoghaire to the city center by DART (a distance of under 10km)!

And are you really saying that danman's choices are commuting long distances or being on the dole? Again, that's clearly not true!

We don't know what the story is with danman. I certainly know that many people were lured out of the cities to work for hi-tech and pharmaceutical companies that chose to set up in Ballygospittlebackwards for the tax breaks. Foolishly, some of these decided to put down roots in these areas, buying their own homes, and when the economy changed and their employers closed up shop, they found that they could not find any comparable jobs for hundreds of miles.

So they can't move, as the typically cannot sell their homes without taking an equity hit that would kill them. So this leaves unemployment or commuting. Actually, the only other option would be retraining, but given that rural areas are frankly economically backward, I can't see this being a viable option. What would you suggest?

I think you're overselling the concept of rural living here. It's not a right, and claiming that the practical difficulties are minimal or should be minimal is an argument for yet further subsidy of rural lifestyles by the cities they choose to avoid.

I'm not really interested in rights, just economics. If it is not viable to live in rural areas, then they won't live there. If no one lives there, it becomes an underutilized resource and everything (including costs) ends up concentrated in only one or two places. Ireland is just way too centralized.

As to people like danman, that is their choice, but even if it was, many no longer have a choice, tied as they are by properties they cannot give away in the present market.

If people want to live in the countryside as their ancestors did, then let them live in the countryside as their ancestors did - subsistence farming.

Actually, what is more likely is that the only industry outside of Dublin in the model you are suggesting would become tourism.

I don't drive, I live in the city centre, and I have no interest in subsidising someone who decided it was nicer or cheaper to live in Blessington and commute to RTE than to live in Donnybrook.

We all subsidize each other, or would you prefer we abolish all tax and social welfare?

The Corinthian

P. Breathnach wrote: »

But if things are to improve, one of the things that has to be tackled is our car preference.

I don't deny this, however this is all that is being tackled and without offering a public transport alternative, it will not solve the issue - assuming the whole thing is not in reality just an exercise in raising government revenue.

evolutionqy7

woodseb wrote: »

If a carbon tax discourages people from driving 230miles to work every week - it seems like good policy - there's no way that kind of commute should be encouraged

while i agree that 230 miles a week is ridiculous it shouldnt be discouraged by increasing petrol tax...i mean we pay road tax and all that **** the roads are fu<ked...road signs are terrible on n and r roads...pot holes EVERYwhere! i mean the i live in a small town and the potholes is the towns second name...you cant escape them...every one is destroying their cars on it! its not fair!

sceptre

danbohan wrote: »

their is only one way you can interpret the greens , unless of course you are a blinkered greenie yourself

There's clearly more than one way they and their policies can be interpreted, one can see that even on this thread.

The "unless you are a blinkered greenie yourself" doesn't add much to the discussion except for fog.

CamperMan

lifeinireland wrote: »

i seem to have less money each month,we are tod the cost of living is going down,so why is insurances,petrol,oil,coal,everything goin up,prsi is worth allmost nothing,we on very average wages are finding it hard,yet we are being pushed to the limit,by government maybe they think by more people loosing there homes to the banks is going to save the country.and its government that are putting ordinary people under pressure ,with all these new regulations:mad:

you think it's bad here... try living in the UK, it's far worse on your pocket

changes

BluePlanet wrote: »

Accessible Public Transport did not feature in your list of reasons for choosing to live in Donegal.
Obviously it wasn't a priority for you when choosing to live there.

While i agree with state-run public transport i don't see N. Donegal having a very strong case for it. It has no population to justify much a subsidy.

I think the arguement most people in donegal would have against the green policy of rising the cost of petrol as a dissincentive to drive is that we do not have a realistic alternative.

Nobody is suggesting 24 hour buses from places like castlefin to ardara and the like or high speed trains leaving letterkenny every half hour its just not feasible.

It might be a better idea to make public transport in the cities and between the larger towns first class and affordable so people are drawn to use them. And realise that the people in rural parts of the country are better served by using their cars.

murphaph

The Corinthian wrote: »

It costs significantly more to live in Dublin than it costs to live in, say, Roscommon. That becomes a wage pressure, which in turn affects competitiveness.

We simply need to exercise wage restraint for heaven's sake. There are wage pressures all over the world, they don't all turn into high pay etc. Berlin is a centre of employment for a huge swathe of eastern Germany. It is STILL affordable to live in Berlin though and wages have not shot through the roof.

The Corinthian wrote: »

The reality is that there are numerous other countries in Europe where it is perfectly normal to live 20, 30 or even 40km from work and commute by train (20 - 35 minutes each way) every day. In Dublin, it takes 20 minutes to go from Dun Laoghaire to the city center by DART (a distance of under 10km)!

Cite some cities where it's as common to commute 40km as where people live in the metro area itself. I know people who commute 40km to Berlin to work but I certainly wouldn't describe it as a common way of life.

The Corinthian wrote: »

I'm not really interested in rights, just economics. If it is not viable to live in rural areas, then they won't live there. If no one lives there, it becomes an underutilized resource and everything (including costs) ends up concentrated in only one or two places. Ireland is just way too centralized.

2 points: rural living IS subsidised in Ireland as the real costs of infrastructure such as roads and electricity provision are NOT borne by those living there. Why do you consider it under utilisation to use the land in Ireland for agriculture?

Ireland has a small population. It makes sense to concentrate that small population in the cities to develop the critical mass required to provide quality public services and amenities. Scattering the population across the whole island results in no ciritical mass. Why do you think people have been gathering in cities for thousands of years? The economies of scale delivered by cities cannot be replicated with a dispersed population.

Liam Byrne

Scofflaw wrote: »

I think you're overselling the concept of rural living here. It's not a right, and claiming that the practical difficulties are minimal or should be minimal is an argument for yet further subsidy of rural lifestyles by the cities they choose to avoid.

And why, pray tell, would they "choose" to avoid said cities, and tee themselves up for ridiculous commutes in dire traffic ?

Maybe, just maybe,

1) because the house prices and rent were half the amount
2) because the extended family required to bring up kids and actually have a life were located in their home location.....do you want people to force their sisters, parents and friends (and their families) to move too, so that the free service provided by many now grandparents in order to allow people to work long hours and pay their ridiculous mortgages in Dublin may continue ? Or maybe you want them to demand even higher wages (on top of those required to pay the ridiculous mortgage/rent) in order to pay for childcare ?

....and as for people "choosing" to live certain places......well not everyone wants to live in a high-rise apartment with zero facilities for their families and an ADDITIONAL monthly charge for a parking space.......if there were proper planning - including proper local schools and shops, and proper play areas, and proper parks and green areas, then people might consider this lifestyle.

Do you REALLY expect people to move house and uproot their family every time their job changes ?

Scofflaw wrote: »

If people want to live in the countryside as their ancestors did, then let them live in the countryside as their ancestors did - subsistence farming.

......ancestors, eh ?

So how did the equivalent ancestors live in a city ? Did they actually work and create stuff, or did they just commute between the crazily-planned car parks of "so-called retail parks" selling overpriced unwanted stuff to each other ?

If you're going to be patronising about historic occupations, please be consistent.

Scofflaw wrote: »

If they want to benefit from a modern economy and the country simultaneously, let them pay full price for their choice. I don't drive, I live in the city centre, and I have no interest in subsidising someone who decided it was nicer or cheaper to live in Blessington and commute to RTE than to live in Donnybrook.

And I have no interest in subsidising people who have massive mortgages for overpriced shoe-boxes and businesses that have massive commercial rent and rates.......unfortunately my interest is not protected because that subsidy is based on rip-off retail prices, while yours is because of the Green Party being in government.

Why should your choice take precedence over mine ?

Spudmonkey

BluePlanet wrote: »

There is feck all industry in North Donegal.
You've stated some reasons for making your choice to live there.
Now, what do you really expect of society to do?
Surely you don't expect us to subsidise High Speed Rail to suit your lifestyle choice?

There are industries in Donegal. The fishing for one. Do you think people who pay their taxes there do not deserve to see some of that returned into the local economy in terms of transport, road improvements etc? Or do you think they should purely be funding urban areas?

The Corinthian

murphaph wrote: »

We simply need to exercise wage restraint for heaven's sake. There are wage pressures all over the world, they don't all turn into high pay etc. Berlin is a centre of employment for a huge swathe of eastern Germany. It is STILL affordable to live in Berlin though and wages have not shot through the roof.

That is because, as with Frankfurt, Hamburg or even Munich, you don't have to live in the city to work there. Germany has an excellent public transport (S-Bahn) infrastructure that allows people working in, say, Frankfurt to live in surrounding towns or villages. As a result they pay less in terms of accommodation, alleviating one wage pressure.

Cite some cities where it's as common to commute 40km as where people live in the metro area itself. I know people who commute 40km to Berlin to work but I certainly wouldn't describe it as a common way of life.

40km would be an extreme example, but 20km certainly would not be. For Dublin, as I pointed out earlier, Dun Laoghaire - Dublin City center is a comparable commute, except it is a third of the distance, typically in the same time.

2 points: rural living IS subsidised in Ireland as the real costs of infrastructure such as roads and electricity provision are NOT borne by those living there.

I pointed out that rural Ireland is subsidized when I cited how companies are encouraged there with tax breaks. My criticism is purely related to public transport infrastructure which I believe is essential to any modern economy.

Why do you consider it under utilisation to use the land in Ireland for agriculture?

Call me a Keynesian but, I would say because agriculture is not very good at employing large numbers of people.

Ireland has a small population. It makes sense to concentrate that small population in the cities to develop the critical mass required to provide quality public services and amenities.

Rubbish. Switzerland has a population of only about seven million - the largest city is Zurich with about half a million and so the population is pretty well dispersed (allowing for the fact that the Alps make much of the country uninhabitable). Not concentrating the population in the cities has not stopped the Swiss from providing quality public services and amenities.

The same can be said, to a varying extents, of Germany, Italy, France, or most other European nations. In fact, when I try to think of another nation that concentrates most of it's economy and population to the once urban area other than Ireland,all I can think of is Greece.

Scattering the population across the whole island results in no ciritical mass. Why do you think people have been gathering in cities for thousands of years? The economies of scale delivered by cities cannot be replicated with a dispersed population.

You are thinking too literally. Modern transport has shrunk the World. Once Dundrum was a village in Co. Dublin that would take an hour or two to get to the city from and today it is a suburb that is 15 minutes on the Luas from the city center. Technology, where utilized competently, has rewritten the possible boundaries of our city limits.

DidierMc

Oh but if we all take wage cut then the price of goods will come down too:rolleyes:

Alan20

Only scenario I can see to this for me without getting completely screwed over (though as a student I am already considering the alcohol prices are crazy high, has anyone else noticed that the alcohol prices are starting to sneak up again bit by bit), is by leaving the country with a healthy degree and working in a country which doesn't have a government, which it seems in Ireland, that completely screws people over intentionally. Least Cowen will have a pleasant pension to retire too while everyone else still remains to try scrape together enough to pay off the electricity bill.

murphaph

The Corinthian wrote: »

That is because, as with Frankfurt, Hamburg or even Munich, you don't have to live in the city to work there. Germany has an excellent public transport (S-Bahn) infrastructure that allows people working in, say, Frankfurt to live in surrounding towns or villages. As a result they pay less in terms of accommodation, alleviating one wage pressure.

40km would be an extreme example, but 20km certainly would not be. For Dublin, as I pointed out earlier, Dun Laoghaire - Dublin City center is a comparable commute, except it is a third of the distance, typically in the same time.

I pointed out that rural Ireland is subsidized when I cited how companies are encouraged there with tax breaks. My criticism is purely related to public transport infrastructure which I believe is essential to any modern economy.

Call me a Keynesian but, I would say because agriculture is not very good at employing large numbers of people.

Rubbish. Switzerland has a population of only about seven million - the largest city is Zurich with about half a million and so the population is pretty well dispersed (allowing for the fact that the Alps make much of the country uninhabitable). Not concentrating the population in the cities has not stopped the Swiss from providing quality public services and amenities.

The same can be said, to a varying extents, of Germany, Italy, France, or most other European nations. In fact, when I try to think of another nation that concentrates most of it's economy and population to the once urban area other than Ireland,all I can think of is Greece.

You are thinking too literally. Modern transport has shrunk the World. Once Dundrum was a village in Co. Dublin that would take an hour or two to get to the city from and today it is a suburb that is 15 minutes on the Luas from the city center. Technology, where utilized competently, has rewritten the possible boundaries of our city limits.

I didn't realise that you thought I was in favour of the bit in bold. I am not. I am however in favour of densification of our cities, including Dublin but not limited to it, just like ALL the cities you quoted......our population density in our cities is much lower than Frankfurt, Zürich, Munich etc. etc. etc. You seem to want a bit of what they do (the long commute bit) but not the required densities to achieve a critical mass.

I'm just in from work. I am at home on the 4th floor of my apartment block, with one floor above me. Almost the entire city is built this way. In Ireland it is not.