BUDGET 2012

dunphy3

irishgeo wrote: »

the dreaded carbon tax will increase which means, petrol diesel , home heating oil etc will all go up.

i expect that DIRT tax ill go up, thats tax on any interest you make on savings.

cant see them touching income tax or credits but as already said.

property tax. water tax, **** tax(ie tax on people's **** when it goes into a septic tank rather than a public sewage scheme.

i have noticed that they keep saying that the basick dole wont be touched,???? what about the extrass ie fuel allounce?

Lando Griffin

mickydoomsux wrote: »

This is a joke, right?

"MUHAHAHAHAH, i have 3 tellys. I'm a billionaire!!!!!!!!!!!"

I know someone with 5 tellys, and they brag about it often, I would love to see them being brought down a notch or 2 when they have to pay for a licence for each.

mickydoomsux

Lando Griffin wrote: »

I know someone with 5 tellys, and they brag about it often, I would love to see them being brought down a notch or 2 when they have to pay for a licence for each.

Is that person a 7 year old?

Galtee

Lando Griffin wrote: »

I know someone with 5 tellys, and they brag about it often, I would love to see them being brought down a notch or 2 when they have to pay for a licence for each.

And herein lies the issue. More fcukin begrudgery. Concentrate on looking after what you have and fcuk what anyone else has. :rolleyes:

Pride Fighter

Fianna Fail lowered betting tax in the early 2000's from 10% to 1%. The 1% raises 30 million, if increased back to 10 it would raise an 270 million euro.

1 cent tax on texts, 60 million euro as already mentioned.

An increase of the effective upper rate of income tax from about 30% to 40% would raise 1 billion per year.

Something I'd go for is a corporate tax on Irish earnings for foreign companies. Tesco made 4 billion last year in Ireland and syphoned it all away to Britain. A 25% tax on that could potentially raise 1 billion, but I admit, it may not be workable.

Monife

Lando Griffin wrote: »

I think you should have a TV licence for each telly you own, that way the rich in society would have to pay for all the tellys they bought during the boom. Also, since larger tellys use more eletricity, they should have an incremantal licence system as per size of telly, therefore those with carbon gobbling 42" tellys would pay a percent more than those with an eco friendly 32"er.

I thought you already had to pay for a licence for each tv? Correct me if i'm wrong.

Stiffler2

Monife wrote: »

Why is it only working people that are burdened with the debt?

Because the unemployed don't pay tax as they're not working , children don't work and most older people are getting pensions therefor not paying income tax.

Although everybody pays VAT

Hence why I left them out of my calculations

I also didn't take into account, imports, exports, cuts & savings which won't make much of a dent anyway + i don't have those figures.

What I said is also to be taken as a pinch of salt

Stiffler2

Pride Fighter wrote: »

Fianna Fail lowered betting tax in the early 2000's from 10% to 1%. The 1% raises 30 million, if increased back to 10 it would raise an 270 million euro.

1 cent tax on texts, 60 million euro as already mentioned.

An increase of the effective upper rate of income tax from about 30% to 40% would raise 1 billion per year.

Something I'd go for is a corporate tax on Irish earnings for foreign companies. Tesco made 4 billion last year in Ireland and syphoned it all away to Britain. A 25% tax on that could potentially raise 1 billion, but I admit, it may not be workable.

If you increased the corporate tax rate you would have foreign companies pulling out left, right & centre heading of to China etc. That would mean more unemployment, more people claiming social welfare etc..
Not a good idea imo

Increase on the betting tax is good IMO. If people have enough money to gamble with then take it off them via increasing the betting tax back to 10%

Suryavarman

niallsparky wrote: »

Reason our economy is so depressed at the moment is because of high savings. If you had any concept of economics you would know that Government should facilitate savings during times of expansion and promote spending during times of contraction. Ireland's savings rate is in double figures at the moment, far in excess of what would be considered normal in any country. Consequently there's a lack of growth.

Also the SSIA's were a crazy idea, completely inflated the boom when they matured.

The reason our economy is in a depression is not because of high savings. It is because of bad investments caused by an expansion of credit going tits up. If you had any concept of economics you would know that a higher savings rate is a good thing. People save in order to invest in capital goods, which will create jobs and cause the economy to grow.

BOHtox wrote: »

People spend €600 million a year on cannibas in an illegal drug trade. This money is lost to the black economy. Legalise it, sell it, tax it, create emplyoment from it and you can see this figure rise to around €750 million. There's a decent start. It will also save money from police not going after these petty crimes but onto more serious ones

If cannabis is legalised why would the amount spent on it rise? In other countries when drugs are decriminalised the amount of drug users has fallen. The cost of drugs also falls because new suppliers come into the market.

Pride Fighter

Stiffler2 wrote: »

If you increased the corporate tax rate you would have foreign companies pulling out left, right & centre heading of to China etc. That would mean more unemployment, more people claiming social welfare etc..
Not a good idea imo

Increase on the betting tax is good IMO. If people have enough money to gamble with then take it off them via increasing the betting tax back to 10%

It would not be an increase of corporation tax though. It would be a tax on retailers and not companies like Intel, Hewlett Packard that develop and make products and invest in FDI here.

Stiffler2

Suryavarman wrote: »

The reason our economy is in a depression is not because of high savings. It is because of bad investments caused by an expansion of credit going tits up. If you had any concept of economics you would know that a higher savings rate is a good thing. People save in order to invest in capital goods, which will create jobs and cause the economy to grow.




If cannabis is legalised why would the amount spent on it rise? In other countries when drugs are decriminalised the amount of drug users has fallen. The cost of drugs also falls because new suppliers come into the market.

I like the idea of legalizing it for revenue. Have a look at this site :
http://www.canorml.org/background/CA_legalization2.html

It shows that California or Amsterdam generated between €12 - €18 billion euro a year.
You also have to take into account tourism & how many tourists would flock to Ireland to smoke which would boost the tourism sector, create jobs etc etc.. bla bla bla

Edit : this figure includes everything from the tax on weed & all the spin offs industries etc, not just the sale of weed.

Amirani

Suryavarman wrote: »

The reason our economy is in a depression is not because of high savings. It is because of bad investments caused by an expansion of credit going tits up. If you had any concept of economics you would know that a higher savings rate is a good thing. People save in order to invest in capital goods, which will create jobs and cause the economy to grow.

High savings is a good things during inflationary times, not during recessions. No matter what our savings rate is, there will be a shortage of loanable funds because our banks aren't loaning money for investment purposes. Economic growth is a function of consumption, investment, government spending and international trade. Having a high savings rate right now is negatively impacting all of them.

I'd recommend a read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Rule_savings_rate

Keynes' view: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keynesian_economics#Excessive_saving

SeaFields

Get rid of the internship scheme. If a business is busy enough to warrant an extra member of staff let them hire someone and pay wages which will end up in the economy.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Galtee wrote: »

Huh?

The person I quoted feels entitled to clean water. He feels that somebody else should clean it and he should have to pay for it... which is laughable.

Suryavarman wrote: »

The reason our economy is in a depression is not because of high savings. It is because of bad investments caused by an expansion of credit going tits up. If you had any concept of economics you would know that a higher savings rate is a good thing. People save in order to invest in capital goods, which will create jobs and cause the economy to grow.




If cannabis is legalised why would the amount spent on it rise? In other countries when drugs are decriminalised the amount of drug users has fallen. The cost of drugs also falls because new suppliers come into the market.

Legalised and decriminalisation are not the same things.

Suryavarman

Terry wrote: »

Voice of reason.
Now you may not agree with this, but PSRI and PAYE should be brought back to 1980's levels.

It will only be a short term measure, but will help to get us back on our feet.

Having high taxes was a sh*t idea in the eighties and it's a sh*t idea now.

Stiffler2 wrote: »

I like the idea of legalizing it for revenue. Have a look at this site :
http://www.canorml.org/background/CA_legalization2.html

It shows that California or Amsterdam generated between €12 - €18 billion euro a year.
You also have to take into account tourism & how many tourists would flock to Ireland to smoke which would boost the tourism sector, create jobs etc etc.. bla bla bla

Edit : this figure includes everything from the tax on weed & all the spin offs industries etc, not just the sale of weed.

I'm all in favour of legalising it and any extra vat that can close the deficit is welcome. I was just pointing out that the amount Irish people spend on cannabis would more than likely fall if it was legalised.

It's also debatable whether cannabis tourism would make up for that decrease in spending. The increase in tourism probably wouldn't be as big as you would think either. We'd be competing with Holland for tourists and it is questionable whether Ireland is a more attractive destination than Amsterdam. It's also likely that California will try legalise it again and succeed withing the next couple of years. So personally I don't buy the argument that legalising cannabis will give a huge tourism boost.

niallsparky wrote: »

High savings is a good things during inflationary times, not during recessions. No matter what our savings rate is, there will be a shortage of loanable funds because our banks aren't loaning money for investment purposes. Economic growth is a function of consumption, investment, government spending and international trade. Having a high savings rate right now is negatively impacting all of them.

I'd recommend a read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Rule_savings_rate

Keynes' view: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keynesian_economics#Excessive_saving

CIG is negatively affected now by a high savings rate so that it can be higher in the future when those savings are spent/invested.

If I were to take all the money that somebody was saving, to start a business or put a deposit on a new house, out of their bank account and start buying them a nice new TV and clothes and maybe get a better Sky package, are they better off? Sure they have loads of nice new things but what about that new home or business? People accepting lower living standards today in order to enjoy higher living standards in the future might not make sense to the clueless Keynesians but it does make sense to people with common sense.

Johanna Enough Student wrote: »

Legalised and decriminalisation are not the same things.

I am aware of that but we won't cry over spilled milk. The results of both courses of action are the same.

the groutch

Lando Griffin wrote: »

I think you should have a TV licence for each telly you own, that way the rich in society would have to pay for all the tellys they bought during the boom. Also, since larger tellys use more eletricity, they should have an incremantal licence system as per size of telly, therefore those with carbon gobbling 42" tellys would pay a percent more than those with an eco friendly 32"er.

I'd like to see the tv licence replaced with a tax on every new telly, and the bigger the telly, the bigger higher the tax

btw, if they were to legalise cannabis, I'd still like to see at some basic regulation, not just anyone being able to walk into Spar/Centra to buy it and start puffing away the second they step outside.

BOHtox

Cut, cut, cut and privatise. No need for any additional tax. I'd be in favour of water charges if there was a fair free amount for every family depending on size and you pay for what you use over that.

Apart from that, we won't fill the deficit by cutting back and raising tax. The easiest way to do so is by creating jobs. I'd be in favour of cutting 4.3 billion and use the 500m to create jobs.

Also, if there will be a tax increase, don't go anywhere near Corporation tax. I'd be in favour of reducing it to 10%. We have a choice in this country. We don't get the best of both worlds. You can have Corporation Tax or you can have Jobs. I'd prefer jobs myself.

irishgeo

the tv licence is being reviewed anyway as you can watch all your tv on the internet without the need for a tv.

My name is URL

irishgeo wrote: »

the tv licence is being reviewed anyway as you can watch all your tv on the internet without the need for a tv.

Currently, if you have the Internet at home you 'should' have a TV license.. even if you do not own a TV.

Under Section 9-

“television set” means any electronic apparatus capable of receiving
and exhibiting television broadcasting services broadcast for general
reception (whether or not its use for that purpose is dependent on 40
the use of anything else in conjunction with it) and any software or
assembly comprising such apparatus and other apparatus;

http://193.178.1.235/documents/bills28/bills/2008/2908/B29c08D.pdf

Galtee

My name is URL wrote: »

Currently, if you have the Internet at home you 'should' have a TV license.. even if you do not own a TV.

Under Section 9-



http://193.178.1.235/documents/bills28/bills/2008/2908/B29c08D.pdf

Only if your puter has a signal receiver in it. If it doesn't then you're grand.

talktojesus

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lts2RScbndA

LighterGuy

I dont think the government will go mad on alcohol. But they definitely will hit the smokes hard.

I also expect an 8-10 euro drop on social welfare payments. Its already 188 per week for anyone on the full whack. So I expect that to be 180. Also, rent allowance will get hit too. Probably down 5 euro or something.

LighterGuy

My name is URL wrote: »

Currently, if you have the Internet at home you 'should' have a TV license.. even if you do not own a TV.

Under Section 9-

http://193.178.1.235/documents/bills28/bills/2008/2908/B29c08D.pdf

Thats a bad thing if its brought into effect officially.
I think that would open the door for Broadband/Internet tax down the line.

Agent Smith

I'd Means Test everything going.
Dole,Children's allowance, Single Mother Payments, Medical Cards

Invest money in a system where you are encouraged to report people commiting benifits fraud

OR


(and someone please, explain why this isnt a plan)

1. I'd lower corp tax to 11% for any company employing 200 or more
2. I'd lower corp tax to 10% for any company employing 500 or more
3 I'd lower corp tax to 8% for any company employing 1000 or more
4. I'd lower corp tax to 5% for any company employing 5000 or more


Simples!

chasm

LighterGuy wrote: »

I dont think the government will go mad on alcohol. But they definitely will hit the smokes hard.

I also expect an 8-10 euro drop on social welfare payments. Its already 188 per week for anyone on the full whack. So I expect that to be 180. Also, rent allowance will get hit too. Probably down 5 euro or something.

The Govt claim there will be no cuts to basic social welfare rate, all other payments will be up for grabs though i'd say. They are meant to be moving rent allowance over to the councils aren't they? I'd say it will be cut by more than €5 tbh.

LighterGuy

Agent Smith wrote: »

I'd Means Test everything going.
Dole,Children's allowance, Single Mother Payments, Medical Cards

Well, all the above is already means tested But somehow i think you mean 'means test' them further and take more away from them :pac:

What about someone who lost their job. Trying to another. Paying the bills is already hard for them on the dole. So we what, cut their dole more and completely slash their medical card? ... doesnt sound like a truly positive way forward.

Squall19

Stinicker wrote: »

I myself am afraid DIRT would raise also so I pooled my savings which were spread thin here and there before lodging them with PTSB at 10% over 26months, result I got a nice fat cheque and while I was going to use the interest cheque to buy a new car I have decided against and instead lodged it back in to a different account.

We need to reward people who are making the effort and no bailout those cretins who got sucked into the borrowed money mortgage ponzi scheme.

How much did you put in?

400k.

You gave the goverment 10.5k in dirt tax.

Would it not have been better to get a cheap flight to Luxembourg or some other country and opened an account there?

http://www.interest-rates.org.uk/sample_USD.htm

Shattered Dreamer

I'm kind of surprised nobody has brought up possible introduction of higher college fees (between €5500-€6000 a year) & college maintenance grants being cut 40%. I like Agent Smiths corporation tax idea even if the EU would hit the roof in a rage. My only problem is if you legalize cannabis the government would have to put extra money into mental health care to deal with the side effects. I'm not anti cannabis but you can't act like it being as accessible to the ordinary Joe Soap as alcohol would be a positive.

the groutch

Shattered Dreamer wrote: »

I'm kind of surprised nobody has brought up possible introduction of higher college fees (between €5500-€6000 a year) & college maintenance grants being cut 40%.

college fees wouldnt be needed if they cut the rediculous salaries of both college lecturers, and high end administrators

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Suryavarman wrote: »

I am aware of that but we won't cry over spilled milk. The results of both courses of action are the same.

Lol no they are not. They are completely different. The results are completely different... you're having an Giraffe mate...

My name is URL wrote: »

Currently, if you have the Internet at home you 'should' have a TV license.. even if you do not own a TV.

Under Section 9-



http://193.178.1.235/documents/bills28/bills/2008/2908/B29c08D.pdf

This is not true.