Budget 2016

BoJack Horseman

Captain Chaos wrote: »

This is the last chance for this type of budget ever. New EU rules come in from next year meaning no more buying elections like this will be possible anymore.

Tell that to France...
or every country for that matter.

The "3% deficit" thing can be ignored at will & it's not like it is a tricky target anyway.
(3% of GDP being just shy of €6bn)

Bacchus

seamus wrote: »

The funny thing is, I think if the Government said they were leaving taxes as is, but pumping €1bn into health and €250m each into transport and education, the vast majority of voters (and FG's key voters in particular) would be just as happy with that as with tax cuts.

I'd much rather see that. I don't mind the taxes if the services benefited from them. The health service is straining as it is and could badly do with that money.... just don't pump it into the management level. It needs to go to more nursing staff & doctors, as well as any other front line staff.

Stranger Danger

Bacchus wrote: »

I'd much rather see that. I don't mind the taxes if the services benefited from them. The health service is straining as it is and could badly do with that money.... just don't pump it into the management level. It needs to go to more nursing staff & doctors, as well as any other front line staff.

Of course Irish voters like to tell themselves such fairy tales. That we want world class Health and Education systems and we don't mind paying for them.

But we do mind, we mind very much, and we've consistently voted in Parties who've promised to prioritise tax-cuts on earned income.

The Govt. aren't stupid. They know Paddy prefers to see a few extra quid on the pay slip come January than hear we're going to improve the Health system.

Paddy is greedy and Paddy doesn't trust the Govt. with his money. They'll only waste it he tells himself.

Paddy doesn't like feeling greedy however so occasionally he'll get worked up about the homeless crisis or people on trolleys and he might phone Joe Duffy and do a bit of shouting about the Minister for Health of the day and what a bastard/bitch he or she is.

But when he's calmed down, he'll take the pay slip out of the back pocket and calculate how many extra pints he can buy this month and he'll nod to himself and carry on as usual.

BoJack Horseman

Bacchus wrote: »

just don't pump it into the management level. It needs to go to more nursing staff & doctors, as well as any other front line staff.

The perception of bloat is probably unfounded at this point.

2.7% of HSE staffing numbers are for Management & Administration
7.4% of HSE expenditure is on same.

Which I think would rate quite well in a large private company.

I wonder if people were polled on the above where would they assume the numbers would be?

Villa05

ezra_pound wrote:

Well if we are cutting sw in half then it's fair enough for demonstrative purposes to literally apply a 50% reduction to all benefits.

Half a free transport scheme and half a medical card it is then

Buford T. Justice XIX

Villa05 wrote: »

Half a free transport scheme and half a medical card it is then

They get taken to their destination but have to pay to get home?:)

Bacchus

Stranger Danger wrote: »

Of course Irish voters like to tell themselves such fairy tales. That we want world class Health and Education systems and we don't mind paying for them.

But we do mind, we mind very much, and we've consistently voted in Parties who've promised to prioritise tax-cuts on earned income.

The Govt. aren't stupid. They know Paddy prefers to see a few extra quid on the pay slip come January than hear we're going to improve the Health system.

Paddy is greedy and Paddy doesn't trust the Govt. with his money. They'll only waste it he tells himself.

Paddy doesn't like feeling greedy however so occasionally he'll get worked up about the homeless crisis or people on trolleys and he might phone Joe Duffy and do a bit of shouting about the Minister for Health of the day and what a bastard/bitch he or she is.

But when he's calmed down, he'll take the pay slip out of the back pocket and calculate how many extra pints he can buy this month and he'll nod to himself and carry on as usual.

Sad but true. The majority are unable to see beyond their own payslip or welfare payment. Granted, I'm in a position where I'm not living month to month waiting on wages but better public services benefits everyone and I'd support a party that had that approach.

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

The perception of bloat is probably unfounded at this point.

2.7% of HSE staffing numbers are for Management & Administration
7.4% of HSE expenditure is on same.

Which I think would rate quite well in a large private company.

I wonder if people were polled on the above where would they assume the numbers would be?

So, you've covered management, do you think that front line services are adequately paid and staffed?

BoJack Horseman

Bacchus wrote: »

do you think that front line services are adequately paid and staffed?

Paid?
Absolutely (with the possible exception of the NCHDs)

Staffing levels are pretty good.
Ireland rates quite highly for staff numbers per capita.

Bacchus

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Paid?
Absolutely (with the possible exception of the NCHDs)

Staffing levels are pretty good.
Ireland rates quite highly for staff numbers per capita.

From the experience of friends and family of mine who work within the health service, I would have to disagree. I hear stories of working crazy hours, back to back shifts, being exhausted and being officially told they should go home but doing so puts patients health and lives at risk so they struggle on.

http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/time-to-bring-back-irish-doctors-and-nurses-who-have-emigrated-1.2352831

BoJack Horseman

Bacchus wrote: »

From the experience of friends and family of mine who work within the health service, I would have to disagree. I hear stories of working crazy hours, back to back shifts, being exhausted and being officially told they should go home but doing so puts patients health and lives at risk so they struggle on.

Nurses work a basic 40hr (or less) per week, they cannot exceed working time directive hours.

I said above that the NCHD's could do with more help, they are the whipping boys of the system.

But overall, its not that bad.... as this 'nurses per capita' indicates

Bacchus

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Nurses work a basic 40hr (or less) per week, they cannot exceed working time directive hours.

I said above that the NCHD's could do with more help, they are the whipping boys of the system.

But overall, its not that bad.... as this 'nurses per capita' indicates

Well, I do agree anyway that the NCHD's bear the brunt of the system.

keane2097

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Paid?
Absolutely (with the possible exception of the NCHDs)

Staffing levels are pretty good.
Ireland rates quite highly for staff numbers per capita.

I wonder, just out of interest, where you think the whole thing is falling down currently?

I would have been one of those still thinking we were spending untold fortunes on double-jobbing admins etc., so good to hear that seems not to be the case.

TheDoc

ezra_pound wrote: »

It's not being cut by 2%. It's being reduced by two percentage points from 7% to 5%. In other words it's being reduced by about 30%. It will make you a lot more than 3.50eur better off a month.

Geuze wrote: »

Note that it's a possible cut in the rate by 2%, not a 2% cut in the amount that you pay.

Can you explain this a bit more? Appears I might have mis-read/mis-understood what this means?

I've probably totally done incorrect maths here. But from the article I read and even some tax guy was speaking on newstalk this morning, both sources indicated that the USC cut would probably result in around €350 a year for someone earning circa €40,000. Which equates to roughly €35 a month.

Obviously rough figures, but I'm not seeing nor hearing anything that makes that USC change sound anything more then something I wont even notice on a monthly basis.

JustTheOne

TheDoc wrote: »

Can you explain this a bit more? Appears I might have mis-read/mis-understood what this means?

I've probably totally done incorrect maths here. But from the article I read and even some tax guy was speaking on newstalk this morning, both sources indicated that the USC cut would probably result in around €350 a year for someone earning circa €40,000. Which equates to roughly €3.50 a month.

Obviously rough figures, but I'm not seeing nor hearing anything that makes that USC change sound anything more then something I wont even notice on a monthly basis.

350 a year= 3.50 a month?

joeguevara

TheDoc wrote: »

Can you explain this a bit more? Appears I might have mis-read/mis-understood what this means?

I've probably totally done incorrect maths here. But from the article I read and even some tax guy was speaking on newstalk this morning, both sources indicated that the USC cut would probably result in around €350 a year for someone earning circa €40,000. Which equates to roughly €3.50 a month.

Obviously rough figures, but I'm not seeing nor hearing anything that makes that USC change sound anything more then something I wont even notice on a monthly basis.

€3.50 x 12 does not equal €350

TheDoc

Sorry sorry meant to be typing €35. On the mobile at the mo

JustTheOne

TheDoc wrote: »

Sorry sorry meant to be typing €35. On the mobile at the mo

Pretty noticeable Imo.

TheDoc

JustTheOne wrote: »

Pretty noticeable Imo.

Didn't look back on what I was posting until you two quoted it.

Eric Cartman

ezra_pound wrote: »

OK just to take first point- halving social welfare.

How on earth do you deal with the riots as 800k oaps take to the streets in wed. morning saying no way are we voting for you and probably justifiably petrified of how they're going to make ends meet.

Why does it have to come from old age pensions ?

Limit child benefit to 2 children, take child benefit from households earning over 50k combined , cut the non stamp jobseekers in half , remove RA from people under 25, tighten up on fraud from disability, no christmas bonus , put non stamped/ non pension welfare on a payment card that cant be used to pay for alcohol, cogarettes, pay tv services, holidays or take out cash. Put child benefit on the same, remove welfare from anyone not in an employment or training program - job done

JustTheOne

TheDoc wrote: »

Didn't look back on what I was posting until you two quoted it.

Ah I mean just with regards noticing it each month.

I always get fat fingers too!

BoJack Horseman

keane2097 wrote: »

I wonder, just out of interest, where you think the whole thing is falling down currently?

(In my opinion)...

The public health system here is pretty good.
They sometimes face calamities...(for example: last winter's bed crisis was worsened by the unforseen problem of the winter flu jab proving inadequate to combat the most common flu strain around then).

but overall, if I can pin down one problem... its simply capacity.

Capacity is insufficient at every level of the system.
- Bed numbers overall are lower than they were in the 80's when the population was younger & 1/4 lower.
- insufficient step-down beds & social care capacity (not entirely the HSE's fault)
- Insufficient private hospital beds in order to accommodate their clients, thus unnecessarily stretching public capacity further.

Invest in greater capacity & a lot of the problems go away.

This would be capital expenditure & tax breaks so wouldn't affect the HSE's budget.

stefanovich

ezra_pound wrote: »

And what on earth would the Leitrim equivalent of the dart be - a taxi driven by a unionised driver?

A rickshaw?

Reduce social welfare in half, take rickshaw in Leitrim, take two panadol and dissolve in Irish water.

A ride on the wheel arch of a toyota hiace

TheDoc

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

(In my opinion)...

The public health system here is pretty good.
They sometimes face calamities...(for example: last winter's bed crisis was worsened by the unforseen problem of the winter flu jab proving inadequate to combat the most common flu strain around then).

but overall, if I can pin down one problem... its simply capacity.

Capacity is insufficient at every level of the system.
- Bed numbers overall are lower than they were in the 80's when the population was younger & 1/4 lower.
- insufficient step-down beds & social care capacity (not entirely the HSE's fault)
- Insufficient private hospital beds in order to accommodate their clients, thus unnecessarily stretching public capacity further.

Invest in greater capacity & a lot of the problems go away.

This would be capital expenditure & tax breaks so wouldn't affect the HSE's budget.

But it never is just one thing unfortunately. There is a number of issues that are all linked, and trying to tackle one is pointless without actioning the others.

There is outdated process' in the health service and too stringent process' that do not allow for proper initiative taking on behalf of front line staff. Not to mention their general bloated management structure that adds further timesinks and red tape.

Everyone knows the stories, everyone has heard of them. Everyone knows someone who had an A&E nightmare or general hospital problem. So while increased investment will provide some quick wins, it doesn't tackle some of the root problems in regards outdated procedures, piss poor communication across departments, and providing more initiative to frontline staff. And lets not forget a massively overbloated management structure, on contracts from the previous organisation that makes them nearly untouchable.

Villa05

Eric Cartman wrote:

Why does it have to come from old age pensions ?

Check the social welfare budget spend, from memory, I think only 25% is spent on unemployment payments.

quadrifoglio verde

TheDoc wrote: »

But it never is just one thing unfortunately. There is a number of issues that are all linked, and trying to tackle one is pointless without actioning the others.

There is outdated process' in the health service and too stringent process' that do not allow for proper initiative taking on behalf of front line staff. Not to mention their general bloated management structure that adds further timesinks and red tape.

Everyone knows the stories, everyone has heard of them. Everyone knows someone who had an A&E nightmare or general hospital problem. So while increased investment will provide some quick wins, it doesn't tackle some of the root problems in regards outdated procedures, piss poor communication across departments, and providing more initiative to frontline staff. And lets not forget a massively overbloated management structure, on contracts from the previous organisation that makes them nearly untouchable.

I'm training to be a pharmacist at the moment and work in a busy pharmacy in west dublin but we are a good bit away from any of the hospitals
Do you know how many scripts a week I get in from a&e with either solpadeine, ibuprofen, laxose and paracetamol on them?

At least 5 a day, maybe 10. Now it doesn't sound like much but remember, on any routes that they could take from the hospital to our pharmacy, they pass at least 5 if not 10. 99% of these scripts will be medical card patients. In fact I can't remember the last time I had a private patient come in with a hospital script for ****ing paracetamol.
They're not going to go to A&e for paractemaol as they have to pay 125 Euro for the privellage.
A small fee of even 10 Euro a visit for medical card patients would help clamp down massively on a&e overcrowding. That way, just like the private patient you're not going to go unless you need to.
And if you need to go to a&e, you should be coming out with a script for something that isn't readily available over the counter or in your local Tesco

TheDoc

quadrifoglio verde wrote: »

I'm training to be a pharmacist at the moment and work in a busy pharmacy in west dublin but we are a good bit away from any of the hospitals
Do you know how many scripts a week I get in from a&e with either solpadeine, ibuprofen, laxose and paracetamol on them?

At least 5 a day, maybe 10. Now it doesn't sound like much but remember, on any routes that they could take from the hospital to our pharmacy, they pass at least 5 if not 10. 99% of these scripts will be medical card patients. In fact I can't remember the last time I had a private patient come in with a hospital script for ****ing paracetamol.
They're not going to go to A&e for paractemaol as they have to pay 125 Euro for the privellage.
A small fee of even 10 Euro a visit for medical card patients would help clamp down massively on a&e overcrowding. That way, just like the private patient you're not going to go unless you need to.
And if you need to go to a&e, you should be coming out with a script for something that isn't readily available over the counter or in your local Tesco

I don't understand what you mean. Are you saying there is a large portion of A&E crowding, by people looking to secure prescriptions?

naughto

No she is saying that people on medical cards go to the doc to get nurofen \brofen as it will only cos them 2.50 for 100 tabs

BoJack Horseman

RTE budget liveblog is here

http://www.rte.ie/news/budget/2015/1013/734420-budget-2016-blog/

Baggy Trousers

I reckon people see right through this budget and what the government are trying to do. It's downright patronising.

Baggy Trousers

Baggy Trousers wrote: »

I reckon people see right through this budget and what the government are trying to do. It's downright patronising.

And embarrassingly will work.

The electorate will take the pat on the head and the accompanying 50p piece, grinning from ear to ear, and will go get some sweets and forget all about the cut on their knee.