Clery's lash the cabinet.

liammur

Headline on the Sunday Independent.
They said that the retail sector is in turmoil.

Fair dues to them for speaking out.

Seems the cabinet only want to help the banks and a few select developers and let everyone else perish.

thebman

Well we a car trade in scheme and a developer bail out scheme so I can see why they feel left out.

Kind of like taxpayers feel left out.

What exactly can the government do to help the retail industry other than lower vat.

liammur

That's a good good question, and 1 i'm not paid to answer, but they seem to be oblivious to the carnage out there, telling us things are getting better etc.

You are also right about the tax payer being shafted.

ninty9er

Rabble rabble populist comment...

Liam Byrne

liammur wrote: »

Seems the cabinet only want to help the banks and a few select developers and let everyone else perish.

They certainly seem to forget whose employees they are meant to be, and their party members dismiss any criticism as populist or witch-hunts.

If only they actually viewed people's opinions of them objectively, saw why their actions are criticised, and acted accordingly, both them and us would be better off.

However, while they refuse to acknowledge their unacceptable actions, there's no hope of anything changing.

flutered

ninty9er wrote: »

Rabble rabble populist comment...[/QUOT
ah yes a stock in trade f.f. supporter answer.

mikemac

Link to article here if you're interested

http://irishindependent.newspaperdirect.com/epaper/viewer.aspx
Click on the article to expand

Full of criticism, no possible solutions though

drunkmonkey

feelingstressed wrote: »

no possible solutions though

10% Vat and a drop in the minimum wage:rolleyes:

We'd become the bargin basement of Europe. Tourist revenue though the roof, jobs a plenty, it will be remembered as the golden age of retail & tourism.

liammur

wouldn't agree with the cut in minimum wage (those people are already struggling the most) , but certainly VAT could be looked at.

ninty9er

Typical. All critical and seemingly in support of Clerys until the minimum wage comes into the equation.

It wouldn't suit me for minimum wage to be cut, but give me an alternative that can actually SAVE MONEY. A VAT rate drop certainly won't. That has relatively no effect on a retailer's cost base.

If you take the average spend as €40, do you see the droves scrambling to Clerys on the basis that it'll be 2 quid cheaper, that's assuming retailers pass on the saving.

Heads out of cloud cuckoo land class, the Junior Cert is only 10th years away.

Liam Byrne

The minimum wage could be cut if the cost of living in this country was cut to match; i.e. if EVERYTHING came down in price. Economically, it would be better if everyone earned 50% less and everything was 50% cheaper, because tourists and business people would bring money into the country.

Unfortunately, taxes are going up, new taxes are being introduced, insurance has gone up, bank loans and mortgages remain unchanged (or even rising) etc.

So there is no way that people can afford to pay more if they simultaneously get charged more.

Plus watching those responsible get half a million salaries or payoffs makes it even more difficult to stomach.

Moral authority to lead us out of this mess by getting everyone to take cuts has been lost because of the way that it has been approached.

mikemac

Charlie McCreevy cut VAT before.
And consumer saw no savings at all so the VAT rate was put back up.
The retailers pocketed the difference.

sceptre

feelingstressed wrote: »

Link to article here if you're interested

http://irishindependent.newspaperdirect.com/epaper/viewer.aspx
Click on the article to expand

Full of criticism, no possible solutions though

Or nice convenient not-like-the-print-edition version here.

dan_d

Liam Byrne wrote: »

The minimum wage could be cut if the cost of living in this country was cut to match; i.e. if EVERYTHING came down in price. Economically, it would be better if everyone earned 50% less and everything was 50% cheaper, because tourists and business people would bring money into the country.

Unfortunately, taxes are going up, new taxes are being introduced, insurance has gone up, bank loans and mortgages remain unchanged (or even rising) etc.

So there is no way that people can afford to pay more if they simultaneously get charged more.

Plus watching those responsible get half a million salaries or payoffs makes it even more difficult to stomach.

Moral authority to lead us out of this mess by getting everyone to take cuts has been lost because of the way that it has been approached.

A drop in the minimum wage would mean the cost of living drops. One will not drop without the other. Ideally, VAT should drop a few points at the same time. However, there will be a period of pain, where things are tough.

People just don't want to hear that as a solution even though it should happen...and hopefully will eventually. The elephant in the room continues to be the massive mortgages people are locked into, as you rightly say. Taxing the way out of this is not an option.

liammur

Well they could start by cutting rates, esb, gas, and water charges etc

I read in the local paper the other day, i think it was the limerick post, the gaelic grounds have had to pay €75,000 this year for water charges alone. This is totally absurd and no wonder nearly half the city retail units have closed down.

Liam Byrne

dan_d wrote: »

A drop in the minimum wage would mean the cost of living drops. One will not drop without the other. Ideally, VAT should drop a few points at the same time. However, there will be a period of pain, where things are tough.

Why should there be a further period of pain ? And for the record, things are already tough for average people, or hadn't you noticed ?

dan_d wrote: »

People just don't want to hear that as a solution even though it should happen...and hopefully will eventually. The elephant in the room continues to be the massive mortgages people are locked into, as you rightly say. Taxing the way out of this is not an option.

Hopefully the cost of living will come down and then it will be possible to lower the minimum wage - and indeed EVERY wage, so that a portion of an ESB bill or mortgage payment isn't going to pay some fat cat €400,000+ a year.

number10a

Liam Byrne wrote: »

a portion of an ESB bill or mortgage payment isn't going to pay some fat cat €400,000+ a year.

Oh naivety! (note: this is sarcasm - I don't really think you're naive! ) The ESB's pet fat cat gets €750,000 a year so €400,000 is way off the mark - even with the +! Link Those wages should be cut first, along with any other high-ranking official employed by the state or semi-state. Then savings and falling costs should follow - but alas this is Ireland.

donkey balls

lads the prices we pay for comms like internet/mobile costs along with grocery costs,car/house insurance are never going be the same as the UK.
the likes of IBEC allways compare us to the UK about the min wage/productivty etc we only have to look at our political elite and their expenses if they dont have the will to cut their own costs how are they to convince the normal joe public:mad:.

johnnyskeleton

thebman wrote: »

Well we a car trade in scheme and a developer bail out scheme so I can see why they feel left out.

Kind of like taxpayers feel left out.

What exactly can the government do to help the retail industry other than lower vat.

Well, the car scrappage scheme was in effect the same thing - a reduction on VRT (which is an extortionate tax anyway).

I suppose a trade in your old telly vat reduction scheme might be what they're after, or perhaps a trade in your old jeans scheme.

oppenheimer1

liammur wrote: »

Well they could start by cutting rates, esb, gas, and water charges etc

I read in the local paper the other day, i think it was the limerick post, the gaelic grounds have had to pay €75,000 this year for water charges alone. This is totally absurd and no wonder nearly half the city retail units have closed down.

Could you please tell me why this is absurd? If the gaelic grounds did indeed pay €75,000 in water charges then they consume an awful lot of water. If they are on the highest commercial rate Limerick charge (which I doubt) that means they consume almost 29,000,000 litres. To put a more human way of expressing it, thats 11.5 times the volume of the olympic pool in UL. If they are on the cheapest rate they would be using 69,000,000 litres or 26 olympic pools. Have you any idea on how expensive it is to treat water and sewage? No, didn't think you did, because €75,000 barely covers the cost, if indeed at all (depends on the contamination of the source).

So what do they do with all this drinking water at the gaelic grounds? No doubt some is used in showers, more in the automatic flush systems in urinals even when the stadium is not in use, but I can bet the vast majority is used in irrigation. Now should the gaa wish to reduce their water bill, I suggest they hire a tanker and draw water from the shannon for irrigation, for the few hot weeks in the year.

The taxpayer subsides water, I don't see why enterprises that use vast amounts of it shouldn't pay for it.

oppenheimer1

number10a wrote: »

Oh naivety! (note: this is sarcasm - I don't really think you're naive! ) The ESB's pet fat cat gets €750,000 a year so €400,000 is way off the mark - even with the +! Link Those wages should be cut first, along with any other high-ranking official employed by the state or semi-state. Then savings and falling costs should follow - but alas this is Ireland.

Are not ordinary staff in the semi-states that are overpaid or just that it isn't popular to attack the wages of the ordinary worker? The reason ESB is so high is that A) wages are protected and the agreed pay rises have been given and the regulator wants to introduce competition. You cannot introduce competition into a market where the price of electricity is delivered at near cost. As competition drives down the base cost one initially needs higher prices in order to attract the first competition into the market. It was this policy that allowed bord gais to dramatically undercut the ESB. It is hoped this competition will allow the production cost of electricity to fall thus benefiting the consumer in the long term. But of course some here are too short sighted to see that. Why doesn't that surprise me?

Liam Byrne

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

You cannot introduce competition into a market where the price of electricity is delivered at near cost. As competition drives down the base cost one initially needs higher prices in order to attract the first competition into the market. It was this policy that allowed bord gais to dramatically undercut the ESB. It is hoped this competition will allow the production cost of electricity to fall thus benefiting the consumer in the long term. But of course some here are too short sighted to see that. Why doesn't that surprise me?

And all the while the cost is propped up we are paying way too much.

So any savings which might occur later have already been paid for - by us!

And even saying that, they're only "hoping" that competition will allow the production cost to fall.......there's no guarantee, despite the fact that we've paid the extortionate propped-up cost one way or the other.

dan_d

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Why should there be a further period of pain ? And for the record, things are already tough for average people, or hadn't you noticed ?
Hopefully the cost of living will come down and then it will be possible to lower the minimum wage - and indeed EVERY wage, so that a portion of an ESB bill or mortgage payment isn't going to pay some fat cat €400,000+ a year.

I had noticed, actually. But the cost of living is not just going to drop out of nowhere. There are a lot of external factors, chief among them being that while people still continue to pay for items, even if it's a struggle....prices will remain the same.

I've said this before - everyone harps on about how cheap Europe is. That is because they are payed less than us in many, many cases, and taxed more. Therefore the portion of their wages they have left to actually spend is a lot less than we do. But their prices are correspondingly low, so they can afford to live. The reason they are low is because shops don't have as big a wage bill as we do, VAT is lower, and in many cases, things like delivery costs (trucks), overheads etc are lower than here.

You've just illustrated what I'm trying to say yourself. Part of the reason our utilities are so expensive is because the companies have to pay their workers union rates or minimum wages(which are quite high), and it fat cats massive wages.Obviously there are a number of other reasons, but wages are one of the big ones.

Everything is relative. Our wages rose, and the cost of living rose accordingly. Why do you think Ireland suddenly because such an expensive place to live in?It wasn't because we were all suddenly importing gourmet food from Norway to feed everyone. Or because we only have the best quality in everything. It was because people's wages got higher. Therefore those who were selling had to cover their staff wages, and to do that, raised their prices - knowing that their customers could afford it, because we had high wages and low taxes. The customers had a high proportion of their monthly salary available to them to spend on everyday items. The greed to cover their nice little profits did kick in eventually, but that is by no means the sole reason.

I completely agree that we are paying those in upper management far too much money, and there are many people out there who are extremely greedy. But the minimum wage has to drop and so does social welfare (and I'm on social welfare - or at least, waiting for it).

And as you've also just illustrated.....people just don't want to hear that. Not in my backyard....But I've no idea what other magical solution the Irish population thinks is going to make the cost of living suddenly drop.

oppenheimer1

Liam Byrne wrote: »

And all the while the cost is propped up we are paying way too much.

So any savings which might occur later have already been paid for - by us!

And even saying that, they're only "hoping" that competition will allow the production cost to fall.......there's no guarantee, despite the fact that we've paid the extortionate propped-up cost one way or the other.

You are being short-sighted. The ESB was a monopoly which allowed the organisation to become bloated and inefficient, thus raising the cost of creating electricity. This expensive electricity was sold on at near cost price. The regulator wants to introduce competition, so in order to do so the profit margins have to be attractive. Following on from this there will be pressure to reduce the basic cost of creating electricity which in turn will reduce the bill for the consumer. Evidence of this can be seen with the entry of Bord Gais into the electricity market.

Seeing as you (and jmayo) thanked liammur's post on water charges in Limerick, can you explain why you think that enterprises that use vast quantities of water shouldn't pay for it?

Head The Wall

The point is why should the end users be used as pawns in this so called competition to drive prices down. there has been some reductions recently but prices spent many years only going one way.

I still don't hear about any companies proclaiming they have low power costs due to all this competition, it's quite the opposite you hear in fact.

thebman

The high prices to encourage competition model does not work.

It takes too long for competition to form and consumer costs are way too high in the mean time.

It was a disaster with eircom as the Irish broadband market demonstrates perfectly as it is only now starting to recover from a regulator that has had no interest in things like local loop unbundling and was only ever interested in keeping line rental high.

slimjimmc

thebman wrote: »

The high prices to encourage competition model does not work.

It takes too long for competition to form and consumer costs are way too high in the mean time.

It was a disaster with eircom as the Irish broadband market demonstrates perfectly as it is only now starting to recover from a regulator that has had no interest in things like local loop unbundling and was only ever interested in keeping line rental high.

The broadband situation had nothing to do with maintaining high prices to attract competition. The State didn't tell Eircom to raise their prices to make it attractive for others to come in, they actually forced Eircom to open up their networks to competitors.
Once that happened there were and still are loads of competitors in the market trying to offer a service at lower cost than Eircom but they are stiffled by a greedy incumbant and a tooth-less regulator. The likes of Wireless ISPs and UPC are able to provide a cheaper broadband service on their own private network at much lower cost than the Eircom-network dependant ISPs.

Head The Wall

The line rental charged for the local loop is as much a rip off as the standing charge for ESB. There won't be much competition while these are still in place and still under the control of the regulator who is told what to do by the govt.