Do we pay too much tax for crappy services?

ZilkyG

It seems to me that compared to other European countries, we pay an eye-watering amount of tax for a transport system that would fit in perfectly in the less affluent neighborhoods of Nairobi. Dublin Bus is not fit for purpose, the Luas has just been shoe-horned in without any proper planning. Besides that, transport is stupidly expensive. Is this just me, or do other people think that they're getting fleeced.

Eric Cartman

We pay too much tax
its wasted on terrible services
its also wasted on rules ensuring better private operators are either completely banned or have to waste insane amounts of money to compete.

There should be no infringment on a private operator competing, especially for transport and utilities.

LeinsterDub

Eric Cartman wrote: »

There should be no infringment on a private operator competing, especially for transport and utilities.

Which would lead to private operators taking all the money making routes, running services when they felt like ,with whatever standards they feel like, killing off the competition and then scaling back on the services.

No thanks!

James Brown

Eric Cartman wrote: »

We pay too much tax
its wasted on terrible services
its also wasted on rules ensuring better private operators are either completely banned or have to waste insane amounts of money to compete.

There should be no infringment on a private operator competing, especially for transport and utilities.

However when some private concerns have the ear of government it doesn't mean a fair deal for the tax payer.

Old diesel

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Eric Cartman wrote: »

There should be no infringment on a private operator competing, especially for transport and utilities.

Which would lead to private operators taking all the money making routes, running services when they felt like ,with whatever standards they feel like, killing off the competition and then scaling back on the services.

No thanks!

Some of the coach travel stuff works quite well. Good service frequency on say airport runs and running in the night.

Wheras Bus Eireann can be lathargic and slow to deliver.

lawred2

Yes. We pay far too much tax.

Eric Cartman

Matt Barrett wrote: »

However when some private concerns have the ear of government it doesn't mean a fair deal for the tax payer.

lobbying and corruption is an entire different thread but it too needs to be on the chopping block. Without issuing licences or regulation standards suited to some operators there would be nothing to lobby for though.

James Brown

Eric Cartman wrote: »

lobbying and corruption is an entire different thread but it too needs to be on the chopping block. Without issuing licences or regulation standards suited to some operators there would be nothing to lobby for though.

Not wanting to point out the obviousness, no need for a thread. Just saying that when private is brought in it's often not for the tax payers benefit. I'd suggest tighter accountability on state services and value for money. We seem to have manys a money hole and when contractors are brought in we get similar. The contract brokers and state need to be held accountable and rewarded or punished based on quality.

johnnyskeleton

I think everyone who lives in a social democracy believes that they pay too much tax and dont get enough services! Even the huge multinationals corporations who pay very little corporation tax in Ireland probably believe they pay too much in tax and dont get enough for it.

In reality, we have good services and medium taxes. Not amazing services like one might expect in many other Western EU states, nor amazingly low taxes like Dubai etc, but nor do we have the dangerously small level of social care that the USA or Somalia has, but nor do we live in North Korea.

The focus of government should be on slowly and proportionately making things better. If people are too dismissive of how the country is run, nothing will change IMO, as each fresh scandal will be met with shurgged shoulders and an "ah sure what do you expect" attitude. Which is kind of what got us here in the first place

Del2005

Old diesel wrote: »

Some of the coach travel stuff works quite well. Good service frequency on say airport runs and running in the night.

Wheras Bus Eireann can be lathargic and slow to deliver.

The private companies treat there staff the complete opposite of the state companies. Neither are good options but that's what we have. Overpaid unionised staff in state run companies, unless you are a new entrant, and over worked staff earning the same, or less, than someone packing shelves in a supermarket in the private companies.

keithm1

Business people should be hired to run public sector services
Doctors should not run hospitals.
Just because you were a train driver for 20 years inspector for 10 years shouldn’t qualify you to run eireann rud eireann
Until these services are run like a well oiled machine we will carry on paying too much tax for slow inefficient services.

kippy

keithm1 wrote: »

Business people should be hired to run public sector services
Doctors should not run hospitals.
Just because you were a train driver for 20 years inspector for 10 years shouldn’t qualify you to run eireann rud eireann
Until these services are run like a well oiled machine we will carry on paying too much tax for slow inefficient services.

What's a 'business person'?

keithm1

Private sector business person not someone who dragged there heels through the ranks of an inefficient business model

Spanish Eyes

LPT should apply to everyone whether renting or owner. We all avail of the same services.

Happens in every other EU country, but not here for some reason. Anyone know why?

If everyone who avails of services (such as they are) there would be so much more income available to improve things in local areas.

But most things have been privatised. So therefore fly tipping and so on.

Oh to be honest I just don't know anymore why part of my LPT is going to deepest rural areas up the side of a mountain whose council hasn't got enough. Gas isn't it.

keithm1

I don’t mean to be offensive to public sector folks but the reality is they probably don’t realise how inefficient there work day is because they come through the ranks in that environment.

James Brown

keithm1 wrote: »

I don’t mean to be offensive to public sector folks but the reality is they probably don’t realise how inefficient there work day is because they come through the ranks in that environment.

Can you give examples of poor quality public sector workers?

keithm1

Sorry I can’t personally fault any 1 person.every one feels there busy.
It’s the business model that’s inefficient.
I’ve worked as a subcontractor to both public and private sectors for many years,
If you brought me into an office floor blindfolded with no signage 9/10 times I could tell you if it was public or private within minutes

kippy

keithm1 wrote: »

Private sector business person not someone who dragged there heels through the ranks of an inefficient business model

So a corner shop owner or an owner of a garage? Estate agent? That type of business person?

kippy

keithm1 wrote: »

I don’t mean to be offensive to public sector folks but the reality is they probably don’t realise how inefficient there work day is because they come through the ranks in that environment.

I don't generally disagree with some of your thoughts but there are a lot of new entrants in the public sector in the past number of years that wouldn't have come through the ranks as such.

im hoping starting the same thread every two weeks isnt an example of private sector efficiency

keithm1

kippy wrote: »

So a corner shop owner or an owner of a garage? Estate agent? That type of business person?

Don’t be silly

keithm1

kippy wrote: »

I don't generally disagree with some of your thoughts but there are a lot of new entrants in the public sector in the past number of years that wouldn't have come through the ranks as such.

Fair point but major shake ups needed to get what the OP asked
tax spend V services provided

LeBash

By the national debt and the money still being borrowed, I'd say we aren't paying enough tax.

Yeah the services suck as a whole when compared to some parts of continental Europe but I'd prefer to have them there than not to be honest.

Equally we are miles ahead of most countries in the word. Mexico for example doesnt have a postal service, or at least a mate told me that over a few pints and I believed him.

facehugger99

We don't pay too much tax, but we do pay too much for the services we get.

I personally wouldn't have an issue paying even more in tax if I knew the money was going to be properly invested and wasn't going to be wasted on vote-buying and paying a bloated public service.

facehugger99

LeBash wrote: »

Equally we are miles ahead of most countries in the word. Mexico for example doesnt have a postal service, or at least a mate told me that over a few pints and I believed him.

Mexico do have a postal service - Correos de Mexico

James Brown

keithm1 wrote: »

Sorry I can’t personally fault any 1 person.every one feels there busy.
It’s the business model that’s inefficient.
I’ve worked as a subcontractor to both public and private sectors for many years,
If you brought me into an office floor blindfolded with no signage 9/10 times I could tell you if it was public or private within minutes

There are likely inefficiencies but the idea that managers sit idle while their staff sit idle nearby and there's no agenda, job of work that anyone is bothered doing, is unbelievable.

keithm1 wrote: »

Fair point but major shake ups needed to get what the OP asked
tax spend V services provided

Agreed, however getting in contractors doesn't seem to work either.
There's something wrong when catastrophic loses to the tax payer are shrugged off as a mystery while we look to the proverbial corpo worker leaning on a shovel.
People will happily pay taxes for services. Seeing waste and poor services, will lead to a feeling of paying too much tax.

wiggle16

I think it would be interesting to find out if the people who are adamant that they pay "too much tax" know what the tax rates are in other Western European countries and can evaluate them accordingly.

kippy

keithm1 wrote: »

Don’t be silly

Are these people not business people?

keithm1

Matt Barrett wrote: »

There are likely inefficiencies but the idea that managers sit idle while their staff sit idle nearby and there's no agenda, job of work that anyone is bothered doing, is unbelievable.






Correct but there are major inefficiencies, but I never said people sit idle, I can just tell if I’m in the Opw/county council/ HSE /etc... etc... offices by the general pace and vibe in comparison to similar private offices.






Agreed, however getting in contractors doesn't seem to work either.
There's something wrong when catastrophic loses to the tax payer are shrugged off as a mystery while we look to the proverbial corpo worker leaning on a shovel.
People will happily pay taxes for services. Seeing waste and poor services, will lead to a feeling of paying too much tax.




I agree with all of the above, along with a big shake up ,corruption needs to be rooted out for us to get value for money services. A lot of private contracted business to the public sector is done with a wink and a nod.

.......

keithm1

kippy wrote: »

Are these people not business people?

They are

But to help with your pedanticness.....
Someone with a track record of running a profit making company of similar size.

Look the reality is it will take multiple generations to shake it up 100plus years.
Or privatise the lot which comes with its own problems.

kippy

keithm1 wrote: »

They are

But to help with your pedanticness.....
Someone with a track record of running a profit making company of similar size.

Look the reality is it will take multiple generations to shake it up 100plus years.
Or privatise the lot which comes with its own problems.

Out of interest what company would be comparable to Temple Street and what kind of track record of profits would the business person need to have?

keithm1

kippy wrote: »

Are these people not business people?

They are

But to help with your pedanticness.....
Someone with a track record of running a profit making company of similar size.

Look the reality is it will take multiple generations to shake it up 100plus years.
Or privatise the lot which comes with its own problems.

TCM

Eric Cartman wrote:

There should be no infringment on a private operator competing, especially for transport and utilities.

So what you're proposing is that private bus operators, for example, should be allowed compete on all profitable routes and leave those routes that might be loss making to public operators.

Enlighten me!

Yer Da sells Avon

Old diesel wrote: »

Some of the coach travel stuff works quite well. Good service frequency on say airport runs and running in the night.

Wheras Bus Eireann can be lathargic and slow to deliver.

Unlike Bus Éireann, private coach operators have the luxury of being able to pour their resources into profitable routes, without having to adhere to the same public service requirements. In addition to that, some of them save money by cutting corners with regard to safety. I work with several people who used to work for well-known private coach companies and I've heard some shocking stories about the conditions they had to work under and the laws they were expected to break.

PeadarCo

Yer Da sells Avon wrote:

Unlike Bus Éireann, private coach operators have the luxury of being able to pour their resources into profitable routes, without having to adhere to the same public service requirements. In addition to that, some of them save money by cutting corners with regard to safety. I work with several people who used to work for well-known private coach companies and I've heard some shocking stories about the conditions they had to work under and the laws they were expected to break.

How do you know that? Where is your proof?

From reading some of the enlightening posts on the transport forum, you'd know we have limited competition on routes ie a lot of intercity routes are restricted to 2 operators with controls over timetables. In the case of intercity routes private companies identified the opportunities available from the new motorways before Bus Eireann and got in ahead of them.


For all this talk about private sector cutting corners etc I'd argue without solid proof it's at best hearsay if not outright made up. Again going back to threads on transport forum where quiet regularly you had different posters saying Go Ahead were having difficulties getting drivers for their new routes in Dublin only for Go Aheads website to stop taking new driver applications. Which indicated that they didn't have a problem.

Even outside the bus sector if you take airlines Ryanair from my limited knowledge had no worse a safety record than Aer Lingus did when it was government owned.

Yer Da sells Avon

PeadarCo wrote: »

How do you know that? Where is your proof?

I've heard the exact same kind of stories about the same couple of companies from several colleagues whose words I'm inclined to trust. This isn't court, so I don't need to provide proof. A quick glance at the fleet of some private operators should be enough to raise alarm bells.

PeadarCo wrote: »

For all this talk about private sector cutting corners etc I'd argue without solid proof it's at best hearsay if not outright made up. Again going back to threads on transport forum where quiet regularly you had different posters saying Go Ahead were having difficulties getting drivers for their new routes in Dublin only for Go Aheads website to stop taking new driver applications. Which indicated that they didn't have a problem.

Go Ahead have had huge difficulty retaining drivers - not because they're a bad company to work for, but because drivers are quickly discovering that €14.50 an hour simply isn't enough to live on in Dublin. Take a look at their Twitter account tomorrow morning and count the number of services they'll be cancelling due to 'operational issues'.

LeinsterDub

Old diesel wrote: »

Some of the coach travel stuff works quite well. Good service frequency on say airport runs and running in the night.

Wheras Bus Eireann can be lathargic and slow to deliver.

They are all extensively regulated by the NTA

PeadarCo

PeadarCo wrote: »

For all this talk about private sector cutting corners etc I'd argue without solid proof it's at best hearsay if not outright made up.

we can only pray you are consistent in this laudable approach to hearsay but alas people seldom are i find

quokula

Having lived in other parts of Europe, Ireland does have a pretty poor tax-to-service ratio. However I don't think I've seen any evidence that the public sector or projects are generally any more wasteful here, or that more privatisation would magically solve anything. Every country has its issues with projects over running and services not meeting expectations.

I think it's mostly down to circumstances, like the legacy of being a colony. We'd have far better public transport for our money if an army of slaves had built a network of rail tunnels under Dublin in the early 20th century, but that didn't happen. Really we've been playing catch up from no adequate infrastructure over the last half a century. On top of that we're a fairly sparsely populated island at the edge of the continent, which doesn't lend itself to getting good value for money either.

PeadarCo

Deleted User wrote:

we can only pray you are consistent in this laudable approach to hearsay but alas people seldom are i find

What's the point of this post?

A big issue with the whole public/private sector rabbit hole these threads tend to go down is a reliance on hear say.

Depending on the poster the private sector are paragons of efficency and cost/pay minimum wage cut corners with similar extremes about the public sector. I have no problem calling out posters on the transport sector as it is regulated by the NTA. The point about Bus Eireann not running on some of the more profitable inter City routes is due to bad management not spotting the opportunities and NTA regulations.

Even when you look at the "public sector" as a whole it covers a wide range of different jobs and naturally is going to a wide variation in standards and have different issues. It's a complex debate and trying to paint posters into corners as anti public or private is insulting and stupid. Personally my exact position depends on the service in question.

markodaly

An interesting question that always throws up differences of opinion.

I suppose we are a fairly high tax country, with taxes and charges for many things. Value for money is not something pride ourselves on and the services we get on the end of our tax euro's is certainly not great at all. From Teachers to Gardai, who are some of the best paid in the world, yet do we get the best Teachers and Gardai in the world? Far from it.

The crux of our society is that we try and please everyone. Try and reform something, well here is an extra €5k for your troubles as compensation, try and lower taxes, well here is an extra €5 for the OAP's as well. Try and raise a carbon tax, well here is a €300 grant so that you can continue to burn fossil fuels. No one ever wants to make hard choices.

Our problems are entirely cultural. We are a post-colonial nation and it shows, where the British were the ones who took the big decisions and whether they were good or bad decisions we resented them for it. Now we run things ourselves, we have a peculiar notion that any change we make has to mean that everyone is happy and no one is left out or left disadvantaged. Water charges being an example, as well as property taxes.

If you run a state on the premise that no one can be affected negatively by any change you want to enact, you can see that it's an impossible situation.

The broadband debate was another example of this. Sure, its good that everyone especially in rural Ireland has access to broadband, but did anyone raise the issue of ribbon development and one-off housing, a unique notion in Ireland? The cost of broadband is a result of 40 years of not taking the bull by the horns in relation to the development of our countryside. If we took those hard decisions 40 years ago, rolling out broadband would have been infinitely cheaper.

This type of thinking is endemic in society. The worst thing you can call someone in government is a Tory or Thatcherite. In other words, you are mean and British, not Irish who care for all. The media buys into this stuff too.

ZilkyG

wiggle16 wrote: »

I think it would be interesting to find out if the people who are adamant that they pay "too much tax" know what the tax rates are in other Western European countries and can evaluate them accordingly.

https://salaryaftertax.com/ie

You can use this to calculate salary after tax for alot of countries. France (notorious for high taxes), for example has much better and cheaper services, e.g €25 to see a doctor, €75 for a metro monthly ticket (which includes buses) and on a base salary of 60k, they are taxed €500 less per month than the Irish.

FreudianSlippers

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Which would lead to private operators taking all the money making routes, running services when they felt like ,with whatever standards they feel like, killing off the competition and then scaling back on the services.

No thanks!

It's very easy for the licence to require the private company to provide routes in various areas, it doesn't stop the government from providing a competing service at a better price... the market will vote with their wallet.

FreudianSlippers

LeinsterDub wrote: »

They are all extensively regulated by the NTA

Which actually makes me think of the other problem which is the likes of the taxi lobby who hold the country to ransom every time they don't get their way. Would love to see Uber/Lyft here which works so well in UK and US.

Geuze

Eric Cartman wrote: »

We pay too much tax
its wasted on terrible services
its also wasted on rules ensuring better private operators are either completely banned or have to waste insane amounts of money to compete.

There should be no infringment on a private operator competing, especially for transport and utilities.

Our overall taxes are not high.

They are below the EU average.

PRSI in particular, is very low.

Hundreds of thousands of earners pay 0% income tax on their earnings.

However, our top MTR starts at a very low point, approx 35k. This may lead to the mistaken perception that our overall taxes are very high.

Taking my parents as an anecdotal example, they pay 8-10% direct income tax on income of 50k approx, and in return they get:

two medical cards
two free travel passes
free TV licence
35 pm / 420pa off their electricity bill.

No country in Europe is as generous.

Geuze

We don't have very high taxes, but what we do have is very high prices.

This is caused by:

excessive profit margins
high energy, legal and medical costs
high insurance costs / crazy awards by Judges
massive rents

blanch152

Geuze wrote: »

Our overall taxes are not high.

They are below the EU average.

PRSI in particular, is very low.

Hundreds of thousands of earners pay 0% income tax on their earnings.

However, our top MTR starts at a very low point, approx 35k. This may lead to the mistaken perception that our overall taxes are very high.

Taking my parents as an anecdotal example, they pay 8-10% direct income tax on income of 50k approx, and in return they get:

two medical cards
two free travel passes
free TV licence
35 pm / 420pa off their electricity bill.

No country in Europe is as generous.

Absolutely correct.

We have extremely low taxes on incomes under 50k compared to the EU average. We have very high taxes on incomes between 50k and 100k. We have significantly above average taxes on incomes above that, though not as bad as the group below them as the MTR in other countries catches up.

Nobody wants to hear that kind of message. The usual response is Denis O'Brien.

On the other side, we have extremely generous social welfare and services targetted to particular groups, while general services to all remain poor.

The net effect is that people earning over 50k, are paying very high taxes compared to other countries, but are getting very poor services in return compared to other countries, because of very restrictive means testing and income limits.

Eric Cartman

Eric Cartman wrote: »

There should be no infringment on a private operator competing, especially for transport and utilities.

Public transport is a vital service to the economy and society, it should not be viewed as a profit making venture as its benefits to the economy would be in free movement of people and (by reducing traffic) goods, driving the economy.

Private companies will cherry pick routes and let others die.

*Not saying that the current system is not grossly mismanaged and union crippled (said as a union-movement supporter)*

facehugger99

blanch152 wrote: »

On the other side, we have extremely generous social welfare and services targetted to particular groups, while general services to all remain poor.

Indeed, those who are paying most are arguably receiving the worst value.

We have set up our taxation and welfare systems to achieve a very high income distribution. In fact we have one of the highest income distribution systems in Europe.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/business/ireland-has-one-of-best-rates-of-income-distribution-in-eu-841074.html

I don't have an issue with the model in principle, but in reality it leads to all kinds of negative knock on effects.
Our tax-base to too narrow for a start and we are very vulnerable to downturns.
We have a bloated PS set up to re-distribute taxes which again is a huge drag in a downturn - the borrowing during the recession to pay for day to day running of the PS and Welfare made the banking bailout look like the Teddy Bear's picnic.
We have also created a class of welfare junkies that are disincentivsed to find work.

There's been no national conversation about this either - it's something that every major political party seems to adhere to and the only opposition to it are the hard-left, that would like to do even more of it.

James Brown

TCM wrote: »

So what you're proposing is that private bus operators, for example, should be allowed compete on all profitable routes and leave those routes that might be loss making to public operators.

Enlighten me!

That's it in a nutshell.
Look at the broadband issue. If there's no profit or not enough they aren't bothered, (buses or broadband etc.) and why should they?
Services to the public are about value to the tax payer not profits we might see disappear down a hole due to incompetence or cronyism IMO.

James Brown

facehugger99 wrote: »

Indeed, those who are paying most are arguably receiving the worst value.

...

That's the way it should be.
What use has someone with a great salary for emergency housing, (although the time will come)? What use have they for food banks or welfare? Of course some benefit more than others. From cycling a bike and not paying road tax to subsidising museums even if you've no interest.
The whole point is that workers pay taxes to provide services for society and the more you earn the more you pay. It's a great idea IMO.