Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The Pro Austerity Crowd

13567…26

Comments

  • #62
    mickydoomsux
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,287 ✭✭✭mickydoomsux


    tayto lover wrote: »
    So I wanted him to explain his point.
    No need for the arrogant comment.
    That's the kind of thing that has your party hated.

    My "party"? What are you on about?

    Also, the "him" you want to explain their point was me.

    Try to keep up sweetie xoxo.


  • #63
    tritium
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,793 ✭✭✭tritium


    darkpagandeath wrote: »
    And when all the tax loopholes/havens are closed and we move to more of a global tax system ? were will they go then

    In the interests of having a clear understanding of the position, can someone from the' tax the rich' side give me an answer to the following:

    1. What percentage of the gross pay do they feel someone should pay in tax (income tax+USC and levies)? Let's take below the following bands; 25k, 50k, 75k, 100k, 100k?

    2. What percentage of the total tax take do they feel that the top 25% of earners should contribute?

    3.how much in total (in millions of euro) extra would they look to take in taxes from the >100k group?


  • #64
    KyussBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭KyussBishop


    RecordStraight wrote: »
    But then how has Steve Keen arrived at this 'true' understanding of economics, devoid of ideological bias?

    (from Wikipedia)
    Are you just making posts, fishing for something to nitpick over?


  • #65
    tayto lover
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 54,386 ✭✭✭✭tayto lover


    mickydoomsux wrote: »
    My "party"? What are you on about?

    Also, the "him" you want to explain their point was me.

    Try to keep up sweetie xoxo.

    Well then just make your point clear and you wont get the "so" bit sweetie.


  • #66
    RecordStraight
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,292 ✭✭✭RecordStraight


    KyussBishop wrote: »
    Are you just making posts, fishing for something to nitpick over?
    No, I asked you a straight question about how you became so certain that increased government debt was the solution to our current economic crisis. You answered that you read some economics, and you were relying particularly on the views of Steve Keen, as his seemed the most devoid of ideological bias.

    I'm pointing out that he too has been accused of ideological bias. I guess, much like accents, it is possible that when people's ideology aligns with yours, you think they have none.

    I don't think the defensive tone of your post was merited.


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    road_high
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,874 ✭✭✭✭road_high


    RecordStraight wrote: »
    Did the anti-Austerity crowd ever tell us where the magical money tree has been found?

    No but I believe Ming Flanagan and SF surely know, don't they? Lets hope they can tell us all soon though.


  • #68
    longhalloween
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,207 ✭✭✭longhalloween


    tayto lover wrote: »
    Anything but taxing those who can afford to pay it most.

    Have a quick look at the Deloitte Tax Calculator and you'll see that all's not rosy for high earners.

    If someone on 90k gets a 10k wage increase, they'll pay an extra 6k in tax.

    Is that not high enough for you?


  • #69
    KyussBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭KyussBishop


    RecordStraight wrote: »
    No, I asked you a straight question about how you became so certain that increased government debt was the solution to our current economic crisis. You answered that you read some economics, and you were relying particularly on the views of Steve Keen, as his seemed the most devoid of ideological bias.

    I'm pointing out that he too has been accused of ideological bias. I guess, much like accents, it is possible that when people's ideology aligns with yours, you think they have none.

    I don't think the defensive tone of your post was merited.
    You're just subtly rewording what I said, in order to pick an argument by the looks of it really - waste of time.


  • #70
    RecordStraight
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,292 ✭✭✭RecordStraight


    KyussBishop wrote: »
    You're just subtly rewording what I said, in order to pick for an argument by the looks of it really - waste of time.
    Clearly. I can tell an ideologue when I see one.


  • #71
    tayto lover
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 54,386 ✭✭✭✭tayto lover


    longhalloween wrote: »
    Have a quick look at the Deloitte Tax Calculator and you'll see that all's not rosy for high earners.

    If someone on 90k gets a 10k wage increase, they'll pay an extra 6k in tax.

    Is that not high enough for you?

    They will still live comfortably.
    Someone on a low wage who gets another cut or new tax will have a lot more problems.


  • Advertisement
  • #72
    KyussBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭KyussBishop


    RecordStraight wrote: »
    Clearly. I can tell an ideologue when I see one.
    Ya - I can tell someone looking to stir shít when I see it too; how many times have you re-regged and been banned now?


  • #73
    RecordStraight
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,292 ✭✭✭RecordStraight


    tayto lover wrote: »
    They will still live comfortably.
    Someone on a low wage who gets another cut or new tax will have a lot more problems.
    Follow-up question: do people who work harder/are smarter deserve to earn more?


  • #74
    RecordStraight
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,292 ✭✭✭RecordStraight


    KyussBishop wrote: »
    Ya - I can tell someone looking to stir shít when I see it too; how many times have you re-regged and been banned now?
    Please do not address any posts to me - I will be ignoring you from now on due to your uncivil response to a polite post on my part.


  • #75
    KyussBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭KyussBishop


    RecordStraight wrote: »
    Please do not address any posts to me - I will be ignoring you from now on due to your uncivil response to a polite post on my part.
    It's a bit uncivil to keep re-regging to tank threads all the time, don't you think?


  • #76
    Celly Smunt
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 9,463 ✭✭✭Celly Smunt


    tayto lover wrote: »
    They will still live comfortably.
    Someone on a low wage who gets another cut or new tax will have a lot more problems.

    So punish higher earners because they've studied/worked to live comfortably?


  • #77
    longhalloween
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,207 ✭✭✭longhalloween


    tayto lover wrote: »
    They will still live comfortably.
    Someone on a low wage who gets another cut or new tax will have a lot more problems.

    Or they'll probably just leave and find work in another country.

    Then you have a double brain drain system, where entrepreneurs, businessmen, engineers and scientists (ie. the people who create jobs) are leaving the country due to high personal taxes, and the graduates and entry level workers are following them due to lack of employment at home.

    This whole idea of "Sure isn't he earning enough to live" is ridiculous as is removes the incentive for people to better themselves, strive for promotion or start new enterprises.


  • #78
    Celly Smunt
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 9,463 ✭✭✭Celly Smunt


    longhalloween wrote: »
    Or they'll probably just leave and find work in another country.

    Then you have a double brain drained system, where entrepreneurs, businessmen, engineers and scientists (ie. the people who create jobs) are leaving the country due to high personal taxes, and the graduates and entry level workers are following them due to lack of employment at home.

    This whole idea of "Sure isn't he earning enough to live" is ridiculous as is removes the incentive for people to better themselves, strive for promotion or start new enterprises.
    And this sums up why lefty economics will never benefit anyone.


  • #79
    tayto lover
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 54,386 ✭✭✭✭tayto lover


    RecordStraight wrote: »
    Follow-up question: do people who work harder/are smarter deserve to earn more?

    Every worker is working hard now.
    Those who earn most should be prepared to give a little more as they can afford it. It hurts them less.
    We are in a recession as most of you keep pointing out.


  • #80
    RecordStraight
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,292 ✭✭✭RecordStraight


    tayto lover wrote: »
    Every worker is working hard now.
    Those who earn most should be prepared to give a little more as they can afford it. It hurts them less.
    We are in a recession as most of you keep pointing out.
    Are you talking about what you think people SHOULD do, or what you think they WILL do?

    Do you think they WILL stay around if we keep increasing their taxes? If they leave, what happens to our tax take?


  • #81
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    tayto lover wrote: »
    Every worker is working hard now.
    Those who earn most should be prepared to give a little more as they can afford it. It hurts them less.
    We are in a recession as most of you keep pointing out.

    How much is a "little more"?

    Another 2%? 5%? 15%?

    Seeing as you want the people who are paying tax to pay a little more can i also assume (to help the country out of recession quicker) that you would advocate social welfare recipients and OAP's to take the same % in cuts?


  • Advertisement
  • #82
    Celly Smunt
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 9,463 ✭✭✭Celly Smunt


    tayto lover wrote: »
    Every worker is working hard now.
    Those who earn most should be prepared to give a little morethey can afford it. It hurts them less.
    We are in a recession as most of you keep pointing out.

    But they are giving more, some are giving more than what ten workers are, not to mention entrepreneurs that employ those so they can pay tax in the first place.Why should they lift anybody else up?, higher earners are already propping up the majority of sectors, to say they should suffer more is a bit crap.


  • #83
    longhalloween
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,207 ✭✭✭longhalloween


    RecordStraight wrote: »
    Do you think they WILL stay around if we keep increasing their taxes? If they leave, what happens to our tax take?

    Not only will the tax take decrease, but all the wealth generated by these individuals will disappear. All the jobs created by these individuals will disappear. All the associated jobs created by their custom will disappear.

    And all the graduates, who the Government have spent millions educating, will disappear.

    And when you have MNC's, who employ 150k professionals in Ireland, saying that personal tax is already too high, the case for increasing it further is just a joke.


  • #84
    padd b1975
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,853 ✭✭✭✭padd b1975


    RecordStraight wrote: »
    Did the anti-Austerity crowd ever tell us where the magical money tree has been found?

    No, Gerry got arrested before they got a chance.


  • #85
    tritium
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,793 ✭✭✭tritium


    tayto lover wrote: »
    They will still live comfortably.
    Someone on a low wage who gets another cut or new tax will have a lot more problems.

    Maybe you'd like to answer the questions I posed earlier so- you seem like a good 'tax the rich' advocate. How much if their gross should they pay? How much of the total tax take should they pay?


  • #86
    tayto lover
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 54,386 ✭✭✭✭tayto lover


    The recession was caused by the well off.
    The low paid workers, special needs children, elderly etc are shouldering more of the pain than the rich.
    It's time to spread it out.


  • #87
    road_high
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,874 ✭✭✭✭road_high


    RecordStraight wrote: »
    Follow-up question: do people who work harder/are smarter deserve to earn more?

    Of course they do and rightly so. This "tax the rich" non-sense really grates on my ears. Why should somebody who is successful, presumably worked very hard to get to their high-paid position, then see half the rewards taken off them and be doled out to a cohort of welfare and "disability" scroungers , who in many cases never did a days work in their lives?
    The welfare/tax system in Ireland blatantly favours those who contribute least (in many cases nothing at all). The incentive to work seems to have gone out the window amonst a whole section of society. I don't see why those earning and working hard should be asked to stump up for their lifestyles, no more so than those on low/middle incomes I might add.


  • #88
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    tayto lover wrote: »
    The recession was caused by the well off.
    The low paid workers, special needs children, elderly etc are shouldering more of the pain than the rich.
    It's time to spread it out.

    You really do like to avoid those hard to answer questions don't you?


  • #89
    KyussBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭KyussBishop


    tayto lover wrote: »
    The recession was caused by the well off.
    The low paid workers, special needs children, elderly etc are shouldering more of the pain than the rich.
    It's time to spread it out.
    Problem with this narrative, is it leads straight to a divide in the debate. I think now, that focusing on stopping further upward distribution of wealth (like the new property bubble), is another way of achieving the same thing (well, preventing it getting worse), and without dividing people.


  • #90
    Phoebas
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,371 ✭✭✭Phoebas


    tayto lover wrote: »
    The recession was caused by the well off.

    I knew the 'well off' were up to something. We should round them up before they strike again.


  • Advertisement
  • #91
    longhalloween
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,207 ✭✭✭longhalloween


    tayto lover wrote: »
    The recession was caused by the well off.
    It actually wasn't. Most of the well off are capable of paying their debts.
    tayto lover wrote: »
    The low paid workers, special needs children, elderly etc are shouldering more of the pain than the rich.
    Granted, they're less well off now, but that's mainly due to cuts in public services and benefits, and less due to wage cuts. The minimum wage hasn't changed in a decade.
    tayto lover wrote: »
    It's time to spread it out.

    Higher earners pay most of the tax, so "spreading it out" would involve increasing taxes for low earners, which goes against your argument. :confused:
    road_high wrote: »
    Why should somebody who is successful, presumably worked very hard to get to their high-paid position, then see half the rewards taken off them and be doled out to a cohort of welfare and "disability" scroungers , who in many cases never did a days work in their lives?
    Let's not jump from one extreme to another. Scroungers only make up a tiny percentage of the population.
    The problem as I find it is that low income workers see a high earner and see the big car, nice house, holidays and all the rest, without seeing the sacrifice and years of education and toil to attain that position.


Advertisement