How do we put more money in peoples pockets, or should we ?

Freddie Dodge

I'm just here watching Prime Time.

The main thrust of the discussion is the question of whether more money should be put in peoples pockets by tax cuts or wage rises. Usual suspects on either side. No government or political parties present.

In my opinion either approach is suicidal.

We have spent the last few years trying to set up a sustainable tax base in this country, (not entirely complete imo) and any rollback or slippage on this front completely scuppers any chance we have of ever getting to a sustainable debt level.

Small businesses employ most of the people in Ireland, and these businesses are still in survival mode, with barely any bottom line. Their owners have forgone wages altogether in many cases, cancelled pensions and health insurances, not changed their cars, or upgraded their homes, not taken holidays etc in the hope that their businesses would become profitable at some point in the future. they also know that in the current jobs market, that they would be fortunate to get a job themselves if they close their business.

So, is there a third way? or must the suffering continue unabated for us all?

Idbatterim

there is no way I would like to see PS wage hikes, cut income taxes, gives everyone working a payrise. I agree with the sustainable tax base, but by that I mean the property and water charges etc. I think the direct income taxes and social insurance contributions need a total overhaul, seen as that wont happen however, raising the threshold or cutting the marginal rate OR getting rid of USC (in one fell swoop, or over a few years) seems Noonan said earlier, this wasnt about winning favour with the electorate, it was about making work pay, either way, if there is extra revenue, job creation and income tax cuts, along with paying down debt, are priority number one IMO... The VAT rate is also fairly ridiculous... We need to focus on being competitive, start the pay hikes again and every bloody sector will be at it...

Frank Lee Midere

There is no hope for an economic system which makes people poorer.

Freddie Dodge

Idbatterim wrote: »

there is no way I would like to see PS wage hikes, cut income taxes, gives everyone working a payrise. I agree with the sustainable tax base, but by that I mean the property and water charges etc. I think the direct income taxes and social insurance contributions need a total overhaul, seen as that wont happen however, raising the threshold or cutting the marginal rate OR getting rid of USC (in one fell swoop, or over a few years) seems Noonan said earlier, this wasnt about winning favour with the electorate, it was about making work pay, either way, if there is extra revenue, job creation and income tax cuts, along with paying down debt, are priority number one IMO... The VAT rate is also fairly ridiculous... We need to focus on being competitive, start the pay hikes again and every bloody sector will be at it...

Agree with some aspects, but if you abolish the USC, you then abolish the ONLY bit of income tax that about 40% of the workforce pay. Imo, everyone should contribute to the national coffers, and while I know everyone pays the indirect taxes etc, these are somewhat avoidable.
Also; "extra revenue, job creation and income tax cuts while paying down debt" is a quadruple oxymoron.

Idbatterim

Agree with some aspects, but if you abolish the USC, you then abolish the ONLY bit of income tax that about 40% of the workforce pay. Imo, everyone should contribute to the national coffers, and while I know everyone pays the indirect taxes etc, these are somewhat avoidable.
Also; "extra revenue, job creation and income tax cuts while paying down debt" is a quadruple oxymoron.

Well thats part of the problem, far too many paying little or no income tax, this is the case because of high welfare, which is justified due to the high cost of living, its a chicken and egg scenario. Like I said, there should be a total overhaul of the entire income tax and social insurance contributions.

Also; "extra revenue, job creation and income tax cuts while paying down debt" is a quadruple oxymoron.

Extra revenue from higher than expected growth, with this, I believe it should be targeted towards job creation and income tax cuts, the paying down debt is a given, what I propose is exactly what Noonan has. The income tax cuts will increase personal spending and also increase consumer sentiment and confidence, putting a value on that is obviously impossible, but I reckon its worth a lot... It also happens to be the right thing to do morally IMO.

Cut the career welfarers, possibly cap welfare and reduce welfare the longer you have been on it (but base it on your contributions), I'm sure a few hundred million minimum could be saved on that. Again channel that into job creation and income tax cuts, show that you actually mean business Mr Noonan...

FG have mentioned reentering government with Labour for the next term, they wont get a majority regardless of what they promise, so they dont need to buy off every sector (ala FF), as it wont make a difference and will just make their life more complicated when they have to A) find out from where to stump up the money (and who loses out) Renege on their commitments...

Imo, everyone should contribute to the national coffers, and while I know everyone pays the indirect taxes etc, these are somewhat avoidable.

Totally agree that everyone should contribute...

touts

In an average year an average Irish person unfortunate enough to still have a job will pay PAYE, PRSI, and USC all up to 52%. THEN the government will start taxing them on what is left VAT, DIRT, Credit/ATM Card Tax, Excise Duty on Alcohol, Petrol and Tobacco, Carbon Tax on Fuel, Motor Tax, Local Property Tax, Plastic Bag Tax, Air Travel Tax, Health Insurance Levy. And that assumes they don't have any big event in their life such as buying a new car (VRT), buying a house (stamp duty), sell a valuable asset such as shares etc (capital gains tax), have a family member die (inheritance tax) etc. And not to forget Water tax coming next year.

And of course it also excludes services that the state charges for that were unheard of a few years ago or used to be provided from tax revenue. On street parking, Road tolls, NCT, A&E charge, Bin Charges, etc. And fon't forget in other countries the sort of tax we pay would cover state funded community services. But here in Ireland these services are still charged for. Childcare fees, "voluntary" school contribution, College registration fees, GP charges, Dentist, Optitian, A&E, hospital treatment. If you work none of these are covered by the tax you pay (or a very tiny amount is e.g. we'll pay for you to visit the dentist but not pay for them to actually fix anything).

So for me there is HUGE scope to reduce taxes. The working man gets nothing for the taxes he pays. Increasing pay won't do anything because the vast majority of it will just be sucked up into the taxation blackhole.

sarumite

Frank Lee Midere wrote: »

There is no hope for an economic system which makes people poorer.

Technically any economic system that is based around any form of taxation will make the person who is required to pay said taxes poorer.

Freddie Dodge

touts wrote: »

In an average year an average Irish person unfortunate enough to still have a job will pay PAYE, PRSI, and USC all up to 52%. THEN the government will start taxing them on what is left VAT, DIRT, Credit/ATM Card Tax, Excise Duty on Alcohol, Petrol and Tobacco, Carbon Tax on Fuel, Motor Tax, Local Property Tax, Plastic Bag Tax, Air Travel Tax, Health Insurance Levy. And that assumes they don't have any big event in their life such as buying a new car (VRT), buying a house (stamp duty), sell a valuable asset such as shares etc (capital gains tax), have a family member die (inheritance tax) etc. And not to forget Water tax coming next year.

And of course it also excludes services that the state charges for that were unheard of a few years ago or used to be provided from tax revenue. On street parking, Road tolls, NCT, A&E charge, Bin Charges, etc. And fon't forget in other countries the sort of tax we pay would cover state funded community services. But here in Ireland these services are still charged for. Childcare fees, "voluntary" school contribution, College registration fees, GP charges, Dentist, Optitian, A&E, hospital treatment. If you work none of these are covered by the tax you pay (or a very tiny amount is e.g. we'll pay for you to visit the dentist but not pay for them to actually fix anything).

So for me there is HUGE scope to reduce taxes. The working man gets nothing for the taxes he pays. Increasing pay won't do anything because the vast majority of it will just be sucked up into the taxation blackhole.

Great. Where does the money you wont collect intaxes come from then?

Jawgap

It's all about confidence.....

There should be very modest pay rises and equally modest tax cuts.

There should be a small increase in the minimum wage.

The amount any one individual can claim in SW benefits should be capped regardless of what the qualify for.

Unless people feel confident they won't spend which means any increase in incomes - whether through tax cuts or wage increases - will be 'wasted' on savings or paying down debt.

However, my own sense is that we'll be paying slightly less tax over the medium term, but once UHI kicks in I expect tax bills will accelerate appreciably over a very short time frame - whatever happens we'll be paying a lot more tax in 5 years from now.

shedweller

Freddie Dodge wrote: »

Great. Where does the money you wont collect intaxes come from then?

I would have thought the tax on everything we buy?
In my not expert opinion!

johnnyskeleton

Freddie Dodge wrote: »

Great. Where does the money you wont collect intaxes come from then?

By not paying as much welfare, pubic sector pay and unnecessary quangos.

The big problem is that the state had to decide what sort of a society and what kind of services can be provided and at what taxation level.

Look at the free GP care debacle, its either going to bankrupt the state or its doable within the revenue the state has now? it cant be both. Its the same with lots of state provided services, every other day there is some group saying we want more money education, healthcare, local council's,.

Sleepy

I'd love to see our tax system simplified - PAYE / USC / PRSI / Capital Gains etc. should all be consolidated into a single income tax where between you pay a gradiated percentage on all earnings (for example 1% of all income up to 10k, 5% on difference to 20k, 10% on difference to 30k, 20 % on difference to 40k, 30% on difference to 50k, 40% of income above that) with tax breaks only applied to any tax owed that's above the lowest percentage rate (i.e. ensure we get at least that from every worker in the system whether they're self-employed/PAYE, full/part-time etc.

Obviously I'm pulling percentages out of my arse in the illustration above and they'd need to be calculated to ensure enough was collected to meet expenditure but it serves for illustration.

We don't ring-fence any of our taxation so there's no point in maintaining separate streams of administrative overhead to collect them and a simplified tax system would benefit both business and Joe Bloggs who wants to work out his net pay.

Idbatterim

There should be a small increase in the minimum wage.

Maybe in dublin, given that the cost of living in Dublin is considerably higher than outside of it... I.e similar to the London weighting for many groups of employees over there...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_weighting

ardmacha

One of the (many) failures of the present shower in government is that they have failed to produce any kind of long term model for the sustainable level of taxation and public expenditure in the economy. It is all about short term tweaks here and stunts there, generally in a fact free zone as to the overall impact of these changes. In this year we are still running one of biggest deficits in Europe, yet everyone is musing about cuts to this tax and that and making bizarre and unsubstantiated statements that there is huge scope for reducing taxes. The average working man reckons he is overtaxed, yet the same guy is ranting about not enough Gardai or long queues in hospitals. Propose cutting children's allowance, the class size for his kids, or his mother's pension and this is not acceptable, yet he wants to pay even less tax!

Idbatterim

It is all about short term tweaks here and stunts there, generally in a fact free zone as to the overall impact of these changes. In this year we are still running one of biggest deficits in Europe, yet everyone is musing about cuts to this tax and that and making bizarre and unsubstantiated statements that there is huge scope for reducing taxes. The average working man reckons he is overtaxed, yet the same guy is ranting about not enough Gardai or long queues in hospitals.

Exactly, it is nothing but short terms tweeks, forget any proper overhaul. About the average worker ranting, the only ones being shafted as I would call it are middle and high income workers. Theres no shortage of revenue, its the way its divided up / spent & wasted thats the problem IMO...

The solutions to the problem are very simple. Its politics and wanting everyone's consensus, that is the problem...

Freddie Dodge

ardmacha wrote: »

One of the (many) failures of the present shower in government is that they have failed to produce any kind of long term model for the sustainable level of taxation and public expenditure in the economy. It is all about short term tweaks here and stunts there, generally in a fact free zone as to the overall impact of these changes. In this year we are still running one of biggest deficits in Europe, yet everyone is musing about cuts to this tax and that and making bizarre and unsubstantiated statements that there is huge scope for reducing taxes. The average working man reckons he is overtaxed, yet the same guy is ranting about not enough Gardai or long queues in hospitals. Propose cutting children's allowance, the class size for his kids, or his mother's pension and this is not acceptable, yet he wants to pay even less tax!

Everybody is in favour of taxing someone else. Old saying and true.

Idbatterim

Everybody is in favour of taxing someone else. Old saying and true.

Not necessarily, but if finances allow, those that actually deserve it should be the benefactors, it should be done for moral reasons, not political ones... I.e the government choose to raise the OAP and spend money here, this would be a p**s take given how many unemployed cant find work... Any extra funds should be used for job creation / capital expenditure and income tax cuts. The rest can go whistle AFAIC, by these I mean Public servants (these can have a pay rise via the income tax cuts), pensioners and the long term career welfarers...

Rightwing

touts wrote: »

In an average year an average Irish person unfortunate enough to still have a job will pay PAYE, PRSI, and USC all up to 52%. THEN the government will start taxing them on what is left VAT, DIRT, Credit/ATM Card Tax, Excise Duty on Alcohol, Petrol and Tobacco, Carbon Tax on Fuel, Motor Tax, Local Property Tax, Plastic Bag Tax, Air Travel Tax, Health Insurance Levy. And that assumes they don't have any big event in their life such as buying a new car (VRT), buying a house (stamp duty), sell a valuable asset such as shares etc (capital gains tax), have a family member die (inheritance tax) etc. And not to forget Water tax coming next year.

And of course it also excludes services that the state charges for that were unheard of a few years ago or used to be provided from tax revenue. On street parking, Road tolls, NCT, A&E charge, Bin Charges, etc. And fon't forget in other countries the sort of tax we pay would cover state funded community services. But here in Ireland these services are still charged for. Childcare fees, "voluntary" school contribution, College registration fees, GP charges, Dentist, Optitian, A&E, hospital treatment. If you work none of these are covered by the tax you pay (or a very tiny amount is e.g. we'll pay for you to visit the dentist but not pay for them to actually fix anything).

So for me there is HUGE scope to reduce taxes. The working man gets nothing for the taxes he pays. Increasing pay won't do anything because the vast majority of it will just be sucked up into the taxation blackhole.

I expect punters to pay NCT if their car is old and falls into that category.

Everything else, spot on. Bottom line is, government is far too big.

sarumite

ardmacha wrote: »

One of the (many) failures of the present shower in government is that they have failed to produce any kind of long term model for the sustainable level of taxation and public expenditure in the economy. It is all about short term tweaks here and stunts there, generally in a fact free zone as to the overall impact of these changes.

I think thats inherently unfair. The government inherited an economy in freefall so acute short term measures were always necessary. Hpwever the introduction of property tax and water charges shows that they are looking at introducing longer term, more predictable tax measures. I am not sure what kind of model for public expenditure you are expecting, however unlike other countries that entered Troika programs they have managed to cut expenditure without inflicting savage cuts on those in receipt of government funds.

In this year we are still running one of biggest deficits in Europe, yet everyone is musing about cuts to this tax and that and making bizarre and unsubstantiated statements that there is huge scope for reducing taxes.

FG have always said that tax cuts are high on their fiscal priority once the economy had stabilized. This is nothing new, however the fact that the economy seems to be picking up does mean it is more of a posibility

The average working man reckons he is overtaxed, yet the same guy is ranting about not enough Gardai or long queues in hospitals. Propose cutting children's allowance, the class size for his kids, or his mother's pension and this is not acceptable, yet he wants to pay even less tax!

You can be overtaxed and feel you are under serviced by the government. The man on the street you are talking about may be on the higher end of the tax bracket who does pay a disproportionate amount of tax and I think is justified in looking for a tax cut (or at least a shift of the tax burden to those on lower tax bands).

Freddie Dodge

You'd think that a government could make proper reform of the social welfare system palatable to working voters (who would make up the vast majority of FG voters I'd imagine) if they promised to spend the savings on tax reform for middle income workers. Who currently votes FG that wouldn't cheer? I know I'd vote for them again if they did that. Currently I won't due to broken promises.

Idbatterim

You'd think that a government could make proper reform of the social welfare system palatable to working voters (who would make up the vast majority of FG voters I'd imagine) if they promised to spend the savings on tax reform for middle income workers. Who currently votes FG that wouldn't cheer? I know I'd vote for them again if they did that. Currently I won't due to broken promises.

I agree with this, I have proposed it multiple times. Look in relation to the broken promises, I reckon they have done a lot better and are a hell of a lot better than any of the alternatives... They are in with the party of waste and wasters, how much could we really expect...

Sheldons Brain

People want certain public services, law enforcement, education etc and likewise they want a certain level of welfare. These things cost money, the only question is whether the expenditure on these things is appropriate. If people feel unserviced by the government let them look at the efficiency with which these are delivered, but pretending they don't cost anything is nonsense.

mick112

Simple answer,it is estimated that the banks cost this country 76 Billion ,yet,the Government is more willing to hit the soft soft targets of the lower paid and those on welfare.Think what some of those billions could have done for job creation ,taxation,public services etc

Freddie Dodge

mick112 wrote: »

Simple answer,it is estimated that the banks cost this country 76 Billion ,yet,the Government is more willing to hit the soft soft targets of the lower paid and those on welfare.Think what some of those billions could have done for job creation ,taxation,public services etc

No, thats the point, they are NOT willing to, and there is the problem.

"Soft targets" "Most vulnerable" The two most overused and misused phrases in this country.

By the way, the bank bailout cost is less than that, and is NOT the problem. Spending more than we take in is the problem.

Learn something before you inflict your ill informed "opinions" on people

mick112

Freddie Dodge wrote: »

No, thats the point, they are NOT willing to, and there is the problem.

"Soft targets" "Most vulnerable" The two most overused and misused phrases in this country.

By the way, the bank bailout cost is less than that, and is NOT the problem. Spending more than we take in is the problem.

Learn something before you inflict your ill informed "opinions" on people

Im far from being ill-informed,ive been involved in politics for a long long time,and the bank bailout is actually more than that ,i went with the low side.Im sure the figures that you are talking about are those that are being paid now, and not the projections that will be paid for many years to come.I have worked since i was 14 and was one of those that was paying a tax rate of 58% plus prsi at 7.75% in the 80s when haughey told us to tighten our belts while he and his cronies were robbing this country.The figures for those who are guilty of social welfare fraud pale in comparison to the figures of banks,big business,governmental and all white collar fraud,so,like i said easy targets like social welfare are the usual suspects used when the government was to shown to be doing something.By the way ,social welfare money circulates throughout the economy,the big money defrauded by the large defrauders leaves the country,social welfare money pays for goods and services and some of these are liable for vat ,the large fraudsters pay NO taxes at all.

chopper6

Corporation tax should be increased sharply...huge corporations like Google and Paypal are paying a pittance in tax here at the moment.

And for anybody worrying that they will up sticks and leave it can happen whether we raise taxes or not...FMC's owe the host country absolutely no loyalty.

We can use the additional revenue to create homegrown industry and not be so reliant on multinational corporations.

Freddie Dodge

mick112 wrote: »

Im far from being ill-informed,ive been involved in politics for a long long time,and the bank bailout is actually more than that ,i went with the low side.Im sure the figures that you are talking about are those that are being paid now, and not the projections that will be paid for many years to come.I have worked since i was 14 and was one of those that was paying a tax rate of 58% plus prsi at 7.75% in the 80s when haughey told us to tighten our belts while he and his cronies were robbing this country.The figures for those who are guilty of social welfare fraud pale in comparison to the figures of banks,big business,governmental and all white collar fraud,so,like i said easy targets like social welfare are the usual suspects used when the government was to shown to be doing something.By the way ,social welfare money circulates throughout the economy,the big money defrauded by the large defrauders leaves the country,social welfare money pays for goods and services and some of these are liable for vat ,the large fraudsters pay NO taxes at all.

Hello Joe Higgins....

Actually, no, even he doesn't come out with this idotic viewpoint anymore.

The tldr version of what you are saying is: If we borrow money which those of who work will have to pay back with interest, and give it to the people who don't work, they will spend it (less what of it goes to foreign companies) in the businesses, therefore there will be more money going around.
This is akin to us all borrowing money to buy houses from each other, making us all richer in the process.

beyond idotic.

.

Farmer Pudsey

Welfare is the biggest issue. it is unlikliy that any government will cut it to the extent needed. However at the ver least Inflation should be left to do this job. We also need to examine the disability payments these have jumped of the richter scale in the last 5 years.

People that advacote takeing income and payments off working farmily's( CA health benifits) fail to understand that we are at a tipping point. even after all the so called cuts those on low wages are still better of on benifit. The cost of going to work is never takent into account by those advacoting this. This week is Midterm how many working family's are sending 2nd level kid to study classes as they are not at home due to work.

We see from thr health Insurance debacle how increasing costs to working people tiped the system over. For all the extra charges and cuts in tax benifits the health servisce is no better off.

It is a crazy situtation that when you hit 33K everything else you earn is hit with a 52% tax. This encourages avoidance/evasion in the self employed and when you hit higher incomes workers question the advisability of extra work versus pay attached to it.

With all the extra taxation (water charges on the way property tax, extra charges for school, cost of 3rd level)it dimishes the urge to work. Looking at the car tax debacle is another huge tax on low paid workers where it cost more to tax a pre 2007 corolla or accent than to tax a recently new 3 serie diesel BMW or Avensis. The tax on old diesel cars is ridiclous and these are often used by workers commuting long distances.

mick112

Freddie Dodge wrote: »

Hello Joe Higgins....

Actually, no, even he doesn't come out with this idotic viewpoint anymore.

The tldr version of what you are saying is: If we borrow money which those of who work will have to pay back with interest, and give it to the people who don't work, they will spend it (less what of it goes to foreign companies) in the businesses, therefore there will be more money going around.
This is akin to us all borrowing money to buy houses from each other, making us all richer in the process.

beyond idotic.

.

I think you are idiot here ,i did not say borrow money ,its obvious you did not even read my post,but had a quote ready and stupidly posted it in response to whatever was posted.And regarding ''less what of it goes to foreign companies''.They provide employment here.The fraudsters you support put their ill-gotten gains beyond the Irish economy.

AlexisM

mick, it's not even clear what you are suggesting - obviously it's something to do with the banks but you start with describing what you're about to say as a simple answer but what IS your answer and what was the question?

mick112 wrote: »

Simple answer,it is estimated that the banks cost this country 76 Billion ,yet,the Government is more willing to hit the soft soft targets of the lower paid and those on welfare.Think what some of those billions could have done for job creation ,taxation,public services etc

The only thing you actually suggest is that we 'think' about what some of those billions could have done. What good is thinking about it going to do? What do you actually want done (your simple answer)?

FWIW, I would use any money available to reduce taxes on higher income earners so they are not driven out of the country. The last think the country needs is to drive out even some of the 5% who pay 50% of income taxes. Anyone with options would be mad to stay here paying high taxes for poor services - and being begrudged their high incomes while they're at it...

Rightwing

AlexisM wrote: »

mick, it's not even clear what you are suggesting - obviously it's something to do with the banks but you start with describing what you're about to say as a simple answer but what IS your answer and what was the question?The only thing you actually suggest is that we 'think' about what some of those billions could have done. What good is thinking about it going to do? What do you actually want done (your simple answer)?

FWIW, I would use any money available to reduce taxes on higher income earners so they are not driven out of the country. The last think the country needs is to drive out even some of the 5% who pay 50% of income taxes. Anyone with options would be mad to stay here paying high taxes for poor services - and being begrudged their high incomes while they're at it...

That 76 billion figure is a myth. Something SF likes to throw around, knowing there's a gullible % in society that have haven't a clue, and the higher the figure, the more impressed they will be with the messenger.

chopper6

Rightwing wrote: »

That 76 billion figure is a myth. Something SF likes to throw around, knowing there's a gullible % in society that have haven't a clue, and the higher the figure, the more impressed they will be with the messenger.

What's the true figure then hotshot?

Idbatterim

Welfare is the biggest issue. it is unlikliy that any government will cut it to the extent needed. However at the ver least Inflation should be left to do this job. We also need to examine the disability payments these have jumped of the richter scale in the last 5 years.

Yip reckon they will let inflation do their dirty work and devalue it, cant see an appetite for more cuts from the government and this close to an election, I wouldnt be holding my breath...

We see from thr health Insurance debacle how increasing costs to working people tiped the system over. For all the extra charges and cuts in tax benifits the health servisce is no better off.

I agree with most of your points, health insurance is optional however & in relation to the motor tax, yes the system is a joke, I am taking a CC based 2.5L = E1080 per year. But we can all drive around cheap tax cars if we want regarless of whether that is CC or emissions based. Emissions based cars are 6 years old now, also for those that buy new, its all well and good thinking they are getting away with murder on tax, in the case of even a fairly entry level 3 series bm, they are going to lose an average of at least 5k per year for the first few years on depreciation...

In relation to the self employed and them just taking out cash, which I wouldnt disagree with past E32,800 etc, will it really matter whether it is 52% or say mid 40's? its such an outrageous take, that I reckon those doing that now, wouldnt change their ways. Also its not like what you get out is based on what you pay in, so where is the incentive to run things through the book when its so easy to get away with just putting the cash in your back pocket...

You'd think that a government could make proper reform of the social welfare system palatable to working voters (who would make up the vast majority of FG voters I'd imagine) if they promised to spend the savings on tax reform for middle income workers. Who currently votes FG that wouldn't cheer? I know I'd vote for them again if they did that. Currently I won't due to broken promises.

With Labour in bed with them, this is probably never going to happen. They are going about it the best way they can and by stealth anyway IMO... No need to say out loud what you think and alienate or piss off potential voters, just keep your mouth shut and when necessary pay lip service...

Rightwing

chopper6 wrote: »

What's the true figure then hotshot?

I suggest you do a little research. It means more to you when completed.

Hope this helps.

Geuze

Rightwing wrote: »

That 76 billion figure is a myth. Something SF likes to throw around, knowing there's a gullible % in society that have haven't a clue, and the higher the figure, the more impressed they will be with the messenger.

The true figure is 64bn.

The recapitalisation of the various bank cost the taxpayers 64bn.

Now, we do own a few banks as a result, so we have some sort of asset worth something.

Plus we have sold some shares in banks, and recouped value from the banks in other ways.

But the gross cost was 64bn.

Jawgap

Geuze wrote: »

The true figure is 64bn.

The recapitalisation of the various bank cost the taxpayers 64bn.

Now, we do own a few banks as a result, so we have some sort of asset worth something.

Plus we have sold some shares in banks, and recouped value from the banks in other ways.

But the gross cost was 64bn.

.....plus not all of that was borrowed - some came from the exchequer and some the NPRF - but a lot was borrowed and we'd undoubtedly be in a better position if we didn't have those borrowings hanging around our collective necks.

Freddie Dodge

mick112 wrote: »

I think you are idiot here ,i did not say borrow money ,its obvious you did not even read my post,but had a quote ready and stupidly posted it in response to whatever was posted.And regarding ''less what of it goes to foreign companies''.They provide employment here.The fraudsters you support put their ill-gotten gains beyond the Irish economy.

You clearly suggested that social welfare spending was beneficial to the economy. It is not.

We are borrowing some 12billion thjs year. A proportion goes on welfare. So yes, you are advocating borrowing money to hand out in some deluded belief that this creates wealth in the evonomy.

Now, finally: What "fraudsters" do I support. Quote me please or shut your trap.

Farmer Pudsey

Geuze wrote: »

The true figure is 64bn.

The recapitalisation of the various bank cost the taxpayers 64bn.

Now, we do own a few banks as a result, so we have some sort of asset worth something.

Plus we have sold some shares in banks, and recouped value from the banks in other ways.

But the gross cost was 64bn.

We own nearly all of AIB on paper it is worth 70 billion so we are back in profit.

I joke BOI is worth about 10 billion at present is AIB worth the same. we more than likly have about 15 billion in assets to sell it just about getting the timing right. The money we have borrowed for this is on the never never with the EU central bank. Again inflation will do some of the dirty work there. I calculate that the banking crisis cost the country about 40-50 billion. The biggest issue we had was our deficit. It was over 30 billion at the start in 2008 this was equivlent to two banking crisis ever three years.

The reality is that it was the coping classes that paid for this and it is those that now need to be first to recieve any benifit back.

Freddie Dodge

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

We own nearly all of AIB on paper it is worth 70 billion so we are back in profit.

I joke BOI is worth about 10 billion at present is AIB worth the same. we more than likly have about 15 billion in assets to sell it just about getting the timing right. The money we have borrowed for this is on the never never with the EU central bank. Again inflation will do some of the dirty work there. I calculate that the banking crisis cost the country about 40-50 billion. The biggest issue we had was our deficit. It was over 30 billion at the start in 2008 this was equivlent to two banking crisis ever three years.

The reality is that it was the coping classes that paid for this and it is those that now need to be first to recieve any benifit back.

Somebody quoted a figure of about 55b from an article recently. Sounded about right.

Scofflaw

Jawgap wrote: »

.....plus not all of that was borrowed - some came from the exchequer and some the NPRF - but a lot was borrowed and we'd undoubtedly be in a better position if we didn't have those borrowings hanging around our collective necks.

As far as I know, not all of it has been paid up front either, so the actual borrowed amount isn't just the €64bn minus the cash input from the NPRF/Exchequer. The €25bn in "Anglo bonds" is currently held by the Central Bank, so at the moment the same interest flow as for the promissory notes is still happening, where the interest is paid by one arm of the State to the other.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Scofflaw

Freddie Dodge, mick112, can you pack in the fight, thanks. Otherwise red cards and bans if necessary.

moderately,
Scofflaw

Idbatterim

You clearly suggested that social welfare spending was beneficial to the economy. It is not.

Joan Burton also has the same opinion, with the financial experts in government, how did we ever reach this point? :rolleyes:

Whether its 50, 55 billion or whatever it turns out to be, its a disgusting and depraved amount either way...

Freddie Dodge

Scofflaw wrote: »

Freddie Dodge, mick112, can you pack in the fight, thanks. Otherwise red cards and bans if necessary.

moderately,
Scofflaw

Apologies, language was a bit strong, probably over-reacted there.

@ mick 112, I don't have a problem with you personally, but some of the beliefs you express make my blood boil, and in my view should be actionable in themselves. Anyway, I came over a bit too rough on you, it wasn't fair argument on my behalf.

Rightwing

Idbatterim wrote: »

Joan Burton also has the same opinion, with the financial experts in government, how did we ever reach this point? :rolleyes:

Whether its 50, 55 billion or whatever it turns out to be, its a disgusting and depraved amount either way...

Well I am against a welfare society, but strictly from an economic perspective, welfare can boost an economy, the multiplier effect. Of course, it's false economics imo, but the principle does apply.

Idbatterim

Well I am against a welfare society, but strictly from an economic perspective, welfare can boost an economy, the multiplier effect. Of course, it's false economics imo, but the principle does apply.

I dont know if she gets that, if she thinks its actually of benefit, why not increase welfare, problem solved :rolleyes: I dont think anyone here wishing for a welfare overhaul is actually again a welfare society, its the setup thats the problem...

Rightwing

Idbatterim wrote: »

I dont know if she gets that, if she thinks its actually of benefit, why not increase welfare, problem solved :rolleyes: I dont think anyone here wishing for a welfare overhaul is actually again a welfare society, its the setup thats the problem...

PS wages are a much bigger problem than welfare imo.

Her reasoning is probably as follows: they spend all their cash in the shops etc, keeping jobs in the local economy, the important part of the economy. If the country was wealthier, welfare and PS wages would increase. Short term the economy would be boosted. No question about that.

But that's precisely what got us into the mess, B Ahern giving out unsustainable and wreckless increases.

Engine No.9

However long ago it was when McCreevy dropped the tax bands to 20% & 42%, honestly, I think we should go back there.

Controversial, I accept that, but what does it really mean? It's gonna be a tenner a week, at most, less in the paypackets of the lower paid etc... But more than that, it's more money in government coffers and we'll not have to listen to any more sh1te about cutbacks in health and education (at least in theory). While it may not promote spending in these areas, it should at least alleviate some if not all of the pressure on them.

chopper6

Rightwing wrote: »

PS wages are a much bigger problem than welfare imo.

Her reasoning is probably as follows: they spend all their cash in the shops etc, keeping jobs in the local economy, the important part of the economy. If the country was wealthier, welfare and PS wages would increase. Short term the economy would be boosted. No question about that.

But that's precisely what got us into the mess, B Ahern giving out unsustainable and wreckless increases.

Ah...so it was PS emplyees that caused the mess?

Not reckless loans given to reckless developers to take punts on reckless developments?

Turns out it was the 10% or so pay increases awarded to people working for the country...i'm glad you cleared that up.
:rolleyes:

Idbatterim

I dont even bother mentioning the PS anymore, both sides are entrenched in their view and not for changing. At least we are all agreed on welfare...

chopper6

Idbatterim wrote: »

I dont even bother mentioning the PS anymore, both sides are entrenched in their view and not for changing. At least we are all agreed on welfare...

Well after the amount of shiite we in the PS have had to put up with over the last few years,both with misleading nonsense peddled in the media and several actual paycuts you can hardly blame us for fighting our corner.

Welfare imo is a disgrace,,i heard a woman on the bus complaining that the 460 euros she receives per week "goes nowhere"...i've a friend who's just completing his course in nursing and he said that figure per month would be more than he receives at the moment.