The Debt isn't mine- Why should I pay for it

niallers1

Forgive me for taking a simplistic view but the bank debt isn't mine. The bank debt belongs to people who invested in the banks and especially those professional investors who invested in the banks.



Can somebodey tell me why I should vote for a party who accepts private debt as public debt?

This is not a rant , it's a genuine question.

RichardAnd

I mentioned this is another thread so I'll re-itterate my point. It's true that many people here had nothing to do with the debt the country faces. Plenty of people didn't mire themselves in debt, squander their money or otherwise contribute to Ireland's decline. In all fairness, these people shouldn't be effected by any of this but, as we all know, life isn't fair.

Some wonderful advice I was once given was this;

"Sometimes things aren't your fault at all. However, often they are still your problem".

Like you, I didn't do anything to get myself in the S**t as I was too young to get involved in property speculation or anything like that. But, all the same, I'm paying increasded taxes. Thus, none of this is really my fault but if I want to live here, I have to deal with that problem.

That's just life I'm afraid.

ei.sdraob

@op

unfortunately you have 2 options, neither is nice

* emigrate, opt out of the country, take you education with you
* evade taxes, not particularly ethical since you lower yourself to level of people who ran the country to the ground


there is also another option, at every single election going forward, choose wisely the least worst option out of the bad politicians we have, and never ever vote FF/Green :P

zig

not all parties represent this view, why dont you vote sinn fein or the socialist party.

niallers1

zig wrote: »

not all parties represent this view, why dont you vote sinn fein or the socialist party.

That's a really tough dilemma. I agree with what Sinn Fein and socialist parties say about separating public debt and private debt but that's about as close as we align.

Other than that I am fairly conservative.

My ideal scenario would be if Fine Gael said lets separate public debt from Private debt but that's not going to happen.

The Public debt can be worked through by budgetary adjustments e.t.c over time. Paying the investors debt is crazy in my opinion.

Would it not be cheaper to borrow 20 billion to cover the public deficit at 8% rather thank 85 billion at 5.8% ?


An interesting article in bloomberg a few days ago.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-02-01/iceland-proves-ireland-did-wrong-things-saving-banks-instead-of-taxpayer.html

Triangla

I will vote for anyone who refuses to bail out companies with tax payers money. I know I'm not alone.

Carbon Tax, USC so far, property tax and water charges probably on the way next year. For what - to be idiots and pay bond holders who gambled and lost, only a fool would pay them back.

Anyone with some time on their hands:

http://www.environ.ie/en/Publications/LocalGovernment/Voting/FileDownLoad,1869,en.pdf

NOMINATION OF CANDIDATES

Candidates may nominate themselves and be nominated by a Dáil elector for the
constituency. The latest date for nominating a person as a candidate is 12 noon on the
seventh day after the issue of the writs. A candidate may have their photograph included on the ballot
paper by providing a photograph in the specified format with their nomination. A candidate may also
include party affiliation and a party emblem. If the candidate has no party affiliation they may describe
themselves as "non-party" or leave the appropriate space blank.
Candidates at a Dáil election, not in possession of a certificate of political affiliation, must comply with
one or other of the following procedures before the expiration of the time for receiving nominations: (i)
the completion of statutory declarations by 30 assentors to the nomination who are registered as Dáil
electors in the relevant constituency. The assents must be witnessed by a Notary Public, a Commissioner
for Oaths, a Peace Commissioner, a member of the Garda Síochána or an official of the registration
authority (City or County Council). (ii) Alternatively, the candidate, or someone on his or her behalf, may
lodge a deposit of €500 with the returning officer.
The returning officer must rule on the validity of a nomination paper within one hour of its presentation.
They are required to object to the name of a candidate if it is not the name by which the candidate is
commonly known, is misleading and likely to cause confusion, is unnecessarily long or contains a political
reference. The returning officer is also required to object to the description of a candidate that is, in their
opinion, incorrect, insufficient to identify the candidate or unnecessarily long.
The candidate or the returning officer may amend the particulars shown on the nomination paper. The

returning officer may rule a nomination paper invalid only if it is not properly made out or signed.

hinault

Niallers : SF are correct to question the principle of making private debt, public debt.

I don't agree with SF's policies.
However on the issue of private debt being transferred to public debt, I think SF are correct.

I don't mind paying my taxes.
But paying taxes to bailout out Anglo/AIB/BOI and FF's builder mates. No thanks.

sollar

RichardAnd wrote: »

I mentioned this is another thread so I'll re-itterate my point. It's true that many people here had nothing to do with the debt the country faces. Plenty of people didn't mire themselves in debt, squander their money or otherwise contribute to Ireland's decline. In all fairness, these people shouldn't be effected by any of this but, as we all know, life isn't fair.

Some wonderful advice I was once given was this;

"Sometimes things aren't your fault at all. However, often they are still your problem".

Like you, I didn't do anything to get myself in the S**t as I was too young to get involved in property speculation or anything like that. But, all the same, I'm paying increasded taxes. Thus, none of this is really my fault but if I want to live here, I have to deal with that problem.

That's just life I'm afraid.

Was this not money lent by private european bankers to private irish bankers and onto private developers in the main through anglo. Stupidly guaranteed by our FF government. Banks taking no heed of the debt they themselves where getting into to fuel the whole thing.

This is not a problem of ordinary borrowers even if many people did over stretch themselves.

gigino

niallers1 wrote: »

Would it not be cheaper to borrow 20 billion to cover the public deficit at 8% rather thank 85 billion at 5.8% ?

I would say if Ireland defaulted on the bank debt, why would anyone lend us 20 billion a year ( to pay public service salaries + the dole etc ) even at 8% when the same bondholders would not be likely to get their 20 billion back either.

Its like a beggar on the street ; if you lend him the price of a house once and he deafults, would you lend him money again ?

And, a someone else said, why would investors in developed countries lend us money to pay our "police + nurses + politicians + unemployed" a lot higher than their own " police + nurses + politicians + unemployed" ?

They would know we are going to default / squander it,, like the country did with the last money, especially if the country defaults on hundreds of billions of euro.

niallers1

Maybe it would force us to live within our means which we probably should be doing anyway?

If we continue to borrow are we not just moving the problem of high wages up a generation for them to sort out.


Bi lateral loans maybe between Ireland and some of our friends.

It's sounds like Ireland is drowing and the EU is at the river bank saying they will throw us the life bouy but only if we pay them more that what the life bouy costs. .

RichardAnd

sollar wrote: »

Was this not money lent by private european bankers to private irish bankers and onto private developers in the main through anglo. Stupidly guaranteed by our FF government. Banks taking no heed of the debt they themselves where getting into to fuel the whole thing.

This is not a problem of ordinary borrowers even if many people did over stretch themselves.

I think you mis understood the point. The debts that banks ran up are not the fault of everyone no, however the fact that we are now being forced to deal with them make them our problem. Something can be your problem without it being your fault, sadly.

skelliser

The thing is we are heading for default anyways or "renegotiation" as the politicians will call it.

zig

niallers1 wrote: »

That's a really tough dilemma. I agree with what Sinn Fein and socialist parties say about separating public debt and private debt but that's about as close as we align.

Other than that I am fairly conservative.

My ideal scenario would be if Fine Gael said lets separate public debt from Private debt but that's not going to happen.

The Public debt can be worked through by budgetary adjustments e.t.c over time. Paying the investors debt is crazy in my opinion.

Would it not be cheaper to borrow 20 billion to cover the public deficit at 8% rather thank 85 billion at 5.8% ?


An interesting article in bloomberg a few days ago.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-02-01/iceland-proves-ireland-did-wrong-things-saving-banks-instead-of-taxpayer.html

Well i guess its really down to how strongly you feel, no party will ever suit your own personal policies on how the country should be run. Reason being there is no perfect way, theres just too many variables, its not like a business where profit is the sole target.
My point is, you must pick a party acknowledging that you wont be happy with some policies. So if you prefer Fine Gaels plan overall and the bailout is just a slight annoyance then vote FG. If the bailout is a huge issue for you then perhaps vote SF but acknowledge that they will have other policies you wont be happy about.

gigino

niallers1 wrote: »

It's sounds like Ireland is drowing and the EU is at the river bank saying they will throw us the life bouy but only if we pay them more that what the life bouy costs. .

We ainnt on the beach drowning.

We ( the Irish ) are on one beach. The germans are on another beach. We are borrowing money from the german beach ( 20 billion a year ) and giving it to our " police + nurses + politicians + unemployed + banks " to buy bigger and better cocktails + ice cream cones than the german " police + nurses + politicians + unemployed + banks " are able to buy for themselves. Lets party on + keep borrowing the money.

Liam Byrne

gigino wrote: »

I would say if Ireland defaulted on the bank debt, why would anyone lend us 20 billion a year

Ireland doesn't need to default on the bank debt.

Just put it back where it belongs - in the banks.

Then the banks are defaulting, not the country.

Of course, given the mess that FF have created, that may not be that simple.

But the bottom line is that it wouldn't have been Ireland that was defaulting if things had been done with the country in mind instead of FF and their cronies.

ilovesleep

gigino wrote: »

We ainnt on the beach drowning.

We ( the Irish ) are on one beach. The germans are on another beach. We are borrowing money from the german beach ( 20 billion a year ) and giving it to our " police + nurses + politicians + unemployed + banks " to buy bigger and better cocktails + ice cream cones than the german " police + nurses + politicians + unemployed + banks " are able to buy for themselves. Lets party on + keep borrowing the money.

And there is a tsunami heading towards our beach. And the germans are only going to send in the helicopters to save the bondholders who own the beach and no one else.

ISAW

niallers1 wrote: »

Forgive me for taking a simplistic view but the bank debt isn't mine. The bank debt belongs to people who invested in the banks and especially those professional investors who invested in the banks.



Can somebodey tell me why I should vote for a party who accepts private debt as public debt?

This is not a rant , it's a genuine question.

I think you point is based on economic liberitarian principles.

I have some sympathy for the idea that you have nothing to do with other peoples problems.

But let me address the underlying principles.

I assume you are not sick.
Why should you pay for a health service which is treating sick people when you are not and have never been ill?
Why should you pay for an Army when people can just defend their own property?
Why should you pay more for petrol just because Zionists or Arabs on the far side of the world have a dispute with which you have nothing to do?

professore

gigino wrote: »

I would say if Ireland defaulted on the bank debt, why would anyone lend us 20 billion a year ( to pay public service salaries + the dole etc ) even at 8% when the same bondholders would not be likely to get their 20 billion back either.

Its like a beggar on the street ; if you lend him the price of a house once and he deafults, would you lend him money again ?

Two important differences -

1. The beggar on the street was forced into paying back the money by a mafia boss who put a gun to his head and now is exonerated in court from having to pay back the money. Now he only owes back a much smaller sum that he DID borrow himself.

and

2. He's not a beggar, just someone who got a bit ahead of himself as a youngster and is now getting some sense.

gigino wrote: »

And, a someone else said, why would investors in developed countries lend us money to pay our "police + nurses + politicians + unemployed" a lot higher than their own " police + nurses + politicians + unemployed" ?

You have a good point there.

gigino wrote: »

They would know we are going to default / squander it,, like the country did with the last money, especially if the country defaults on hundreds of billions of euro.

I don't agree. I see Ireland with it's young well-educated population, lots of multinationals and flexible workforce and low tax (yes we still have low tax!!!) a much better investment than Greece, Portugal, Spain, Italy, or even many central European countries who are old, inflexible high tax economies. We just need to get rid of the bank debt and get our house in order.

professore

niallers1 wrote: »

That's a really tough dilemma. I agree with what Sinn Fein and socialist parties say about separating public debt and private debt but that's about as close as we align.

Other than that I am fairly conservative.

My ideal scenario would be if Fine Gael said lets separate public debt from Private debt but that's not going to happen.

The Public debt can be worked through by budgetary adjustments e.t.c over time. Paying the investors debt is crazy in my opinion.

Would it not be cheaper to borrow 20 billion to cover the public deficit at 8% rather thank 85 billion at 5.8% ?


An interesting article in bloomberg a few days ago.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-02-01/iceland-proves-ireland-did-wrong-things-saving-banks-instead-of-taxpayer.html

Fantastic article. Also your point about the 8% is that the interest would be much less than 8% as the lenders would see that the chances of getting back the smaller amount was much bigger. Also we have money in the pension reserve fund that is part of the € 85 b (€ 17.5 b) which would cover us for this year. That's our money. The "bailout" is 67.5 billion.

Yes we need to cut costs but our paying back the banks bondholders is nuts.

hatrickpatrick

I ask again, why not just let them fail?
That's capitalism, which they're so fond of. You f*ck up, you suffer the consequences.

Bondholders make stupid investments? They lose their money. Just like an ordinary person who bought Anglo sharers and has now lost their money.

Sure, other European governments will throw a hissy fit. But their banks made stupid decisions by investing in other bad banks. That is no government's responsibility.

And if we lose all the banks? Well then maybe people will for some new ones which won't be governed by the same insanely incompetent principles as these ones were.

niallers1

ISAW wrote: »

I think you point is based on economic liberitarian principles.

I have some sympathy for the idea that you have nothing to do with other peoples problems.

But let me address the underlying principles.

I assume you are not sick.
Why should you pay for a health service which is treating sick people when you are not and have never been ill?
Why should you pay for an Army when people can just defend their own property?
Why should you pay more for petrol just because Zionists or Arabs on the far side of the world have a dispute with which you have nothing to do?

That's a bit different. I have no major issue paying taxes or even borrowing to run the day to day services the country needs. I do not believe we should be borrowing to pay back poor decisions and investments made by people in another country.

billyboy01

OP, The Debt isn't mine- Why should I pay for it

Dont pay for it, Emigrate! As Bob Geldolf, Terry Wogan and millions of others have done over the decades since 1922!:mad:

Worztron

niallers1 wrote: »

Forgive me for taking a simplistic view but the bank debt isn't mine.

Hi niallers1. You've summed it up in that line. The whole situation is a damn mess. Private debt being paid by the public – there is no logic in it. Surely it is illegal anyway.

Sand

The Irish government, elected by the Irish people in free and fair democratic elections in 2007 decided to take on the debt on your behalf. Thats why youre on the hook for it, objectively. Either you voted for the Irish government, failed to vote at all, or voted against them but accepted the result on the basis of the Irish constitution.

Subjectively, should you be on the hook for it? No. But you are, until we choose to revoke the guarantee and accept the implications of that decision.

jimmyendless

Worztron wrote: »

Hi niallers1. You've summed it up in that line. The whole situation is a damn mess. Private debt being paid by the public – there is no logic in it. Surely it is illegal anyway.

Its the biggest con this country has ever accepted or any country for that matter. How did they swing it?? And if you believe we shouldn't pay it, you are being irrational or financially illiterate, what a joke.

UDAWINNER

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Ireland doesn't need to default on the bank debt.

Just put it back where it belongs - in the banks.

Then the banks are defaulting, not the country.

Of course, given the mess that FF have created, that may not be that simple.

But the bottom line is that it wouldn't have been Ireland that was defaulting if things had been done with the country in mind instead of FF and their cronies.

the problem with this is that we virtually own the banks, so separation of debt is tricky

Sticky_Fingers

[QUOTE=ISAW;704
46490]
But let me address the underlying principles.
[/QUOTE]
I'd like to take a stab at those if I may:

I assume you are not sick.
Why should you pay for a health service which is treating sick people when you are not and have never been ill?

What are we paying through the nose for a 2nd rate health service that is not fit for purpose?

Why are we bending over for the unions who are protecting the inflated salaries and jobs of backroom admin staff who are doing little except adding even more cost and inefficiencies in order to justify their own jobs?

Why do people feel the need to take out private health insurance when they have already paid for pretty much the exact same service through their taxes?

Why have these private health insurers seen the need to increase their costs, a reason being that the cost of a private bed in a hospital has increased by 20%

Why are consultants allowed to use the facilities in public hospitals to pursue private practice?

Why are the cost of drugs so high. My mother is on medication and often travels abroad (to Italy) to buy the exact same meds for one third the cost they are sold at here? Who is responsible for the negotiation of these contracts since the meds in question are manufactured in Ireland in the first place?

Why should you pay for an Army when people can just defend their own property?

The police force (not army) is a necessary expense, everyone except the most extreme libertarian would not depute that fact. IMO the army should never be used to keep the peace in a truly democratic country, it is there to protect the wellbeing of the country and citizens not the government.

Why should you pay more for petrol just because Zionists or Arabs on the far side of the world have a dispute with which you have nothing to do?

Why is the majority of the cost of fuel that we pay at the pumps going on tax to the government?

What are we really getting for these tax revenues, our roads are a shambles and haven't we already paid for them through road tax and VRT?

Why is the price of electricity so high in this country, hurting our competitiveness and increasing fuel poverty?

Why are the government afraid to challenge the extraordinary salaries paid to ESB workers which could help reduce the price of power for the man on the street?

ISAW

Sticky_Fingers wrote: »

I'd like to take a stab at those if I may:

What are we paying through the nose for a 2nd rate health service that is not fit for purpose?

I agree. But that is an issue of waste and how we spent money efficiently and not one about the principle of paying tax being wrong because you might get no immediate direct benefit.

Why are we bending over for the unions who are protecting the inflated salaries and jobs of backroom admin staff who are doing little except adding even more cost and inefficiencies in order to justify their own jobs?

Again I agree 100 per cent. And again overpaying people isn nothing to do with the principle of taxing people even though it will reduce the amount of tax necessary.

Why do people feel the need to take out private health insurance when they have already paid for pretty much the exact same service through their taxes?

Why have these private health insurers seen the need to increase their costs, a reason being that the cost of a private bed in a hospital has increased by 20%

Why are consultants allowed to use the facilities in public hospitals to pursue private practice?

Why are the cost of drugs so high. My mother is on medication and often travels abroad (to Italy) to buy the exact same meds for one third the cost they are sold at here? Who is responsible for the negotiation of these contracts since the meds in question are manufactured in Ireland in the first place?

Again I think all these questions are vital and I agree we should fleece the rich admin and senior people in the health service. But we still will pay tax. People are however happy to pay fair tax. Labour do go on about a "fair society" but I cant see them reducing higher public service pay. I have no problem with maintaining low pay at a decent level. If they want to cut I think they should start at the top as the current goverment began to do but got stymied.

I hope whoever gts in wont be hoodwinked by the Remuneration in higher Civil servants report which tells us University heads and the like got a pay cut of 30k from 260 to 220 k
A 60k salary cut in 2011 might see like a lot. Until you realise it is 80k more than the 150k the same people were getting in 2005!

The police force (not army) is a necessary expense, everyone except the most extreme libertarian would not depute that fact.

Ironically, Libertarians of the US variety usually support their buddies in the Military industrial complex which is the biggest waste of spending of all. It even makes health spending look like peanuts!

IMO the army should never be used to keep the peace in a truly democratic country, it is there to protect the wellbeing of the country and citizens not the government.

Which is why ove the last century or so the US Military have been involved in over 100 non war Military actions primarily to support business and economic interests e.g. invading countries to support US ships who were stuck in the port due to a strike; shooting union protests because the mine owners wanted them working.

Why is the majority of the cost of fuel that we pay at the pumps going on tax to the government?

Hint: peak oil suggests it isn't wise to embark on huge consumption. Why pay tax on tobacco or anything else for that matter? Sure why have any taxes at all? Now we are back to the principle rather than the amount.

What are we really getting for these tax revenues, our roads are a shambles and haven't we already paid for them through road tax and VRT?

You mist be joking! In the last 20 years or so we have built hundreds of kilometers of raods when in the 1980s we had about thee km of roads! THe bend in the M1 out to the airport was our entire bit of motorway then. and we brought in the DART and LUAS and upgraded all the airports!

Why is the price of electricity so high in this country, hurting our competitiveness and increasing fuel poverty?

I thought it was reduced. But the price is high because we use fossil fuels which keep going up see above under "peak oil"

Why are the government afraid to challenge the extraordinary salaries paid to ESB workers which could help reduce the price of power for the man on the street?

Now THIS is an issue Ion which I again agree 100 per cent!

Let us see of FG and Labour in oarticular sort out ESB quangoes pensions and labour?

Liam Byrne

UDAWINNER wrote: »

the problem with this is that we virtually own the banks, so separation of debt is tricky

Yep, FF have ensured that they left no stone unturned.

Remember when Lenihan claimed that the guarantee would ensure that the banks weren't nationalised ?

If that had been followed through, the separation would exist.

But by doing BOTH he completely screwed us.

And yet some people view him as competent and the "new" leader of FF reckons he's competent enough to keep as Minister for Finance.

It'd be a funny episode of Yes Minister or Fr Ted if it wasn't taking €22,000 and rising from each of us.

SkepticOne

ISAW wrote: »

I assume you are not sick.
Why should you pay for a health service which is treating sick people when you are not and have never been ill?
Why should you pay for an Army when people can just defend their own property?
Why should you pay more for petrol just because Zionists or Arabs on the far side of the world have a dispute with which you have nothing to do?

You pay for a health service because it is believed that society benefits from having one.

The issue of bank debt is different however since the primary function of a bank as a private business is to provide a return for its owners. There may have been some benefit to the country in rescuing the banks and the blanket guarantee scheme but the primary beneficiaries were for the shareholders and those who lent money to the banks.

In the view of many, it was not money that was wisely spent or spent for the benefit of the country. It did not solve any problems but merely brushed them under the carpet temporarily. It was done in the political interests of the politicians themselves rather than the national interest.

You may not agree with that view but I think that is where the OP is coming from. Why should citizens be burdened with private losses? This is a different question from whether or not citizens be burdened with the interests of society generally, which I think you have set out to answer.

I think RichardAnd may also have missed the point when he said:

Some wonderful advice I was once given was this;

"Sometimes things aren't your fault at all. However, often they are still your problem".

Like you, I didn't do anything to get myself in the S**t as I was too young to get involved in property speculation or anything like that. But, all the same, I'm paying increasded taxes. Thus, none of this is really my fault but if I want to live here, I have to deal with that problem.

That's just life I'm afraid.

That may well be true but you should also question the justness of this or that tax. Yes you have to pay your taxes otherwise you are prosecuted. But you don't just pay your taxes for fear of prosecution; you also pay them because you think they will be put to good use. If you feel they are not being put to good use then you may well consider ways in which you can (legally) avoid paying them. You may, for example, make yourself resident in a country where you feel your taxes are being put to better use.

Sponge Bob

Well the debt is not really ours, it is stuck in the Repo window of the ECB ( €180bn) and the ELA window in the Central Bank (€60bn) and the remaining €100bn or so ( less NTMA Reserves of €20bn) is ours.

So that is (180+60+100)-20 = €320bn of which €80bn is ours.

We are supposed to add €80bn 'IMF/Euro' funding to 'ours' and clean up the ELA operation with it.

While the number are headwrecking the real trick is to leave the €180bn repo in the ECB and pay the 1% interest on it....until they make us a decent offer we probably won't refuse ...maybe in a few years time