nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

One of the World's Top Bankers warns about the now staggering wealth inequalities.

Skommando

It must be getting shaky when one of the elites is issuing warnings about inequality :

Thing is, are the real controllers of politicians (large business interests) going to take any notice or does it have to get worse ?

Real wages for ordinary people are now lower than they were 10 years ago. That hasn't happened since the 1850's.

Corporations profits however are growing larger than ever.

And before anyone starts and try's to divert the thread, I'm neither left or right wing, and I'm pro business and pro profit with a fair wage paid to those who make that profit possible, so they can raise a family and have the basic security of their own home.

The Bank of England Governor Mark Carney has warned that people will turn their backs on free and open markets unless something is done to help those left behind by the financial crisis.
In a speech, he said: "Globalisation is associated with low wages, insecure employment, stateless corporations and striking inequalities."
In many advanced economies there are "staggering wealth inequalities," he added . . .

Mr Carney, giving the Roscoe Lecture at Liverpool John Moores University, spoke of the need for wealth distribution and putting individuals back in control.
He cited Prime Minister Theresa May's criticism of "stateless corporations" who paid little tax and had little responsibility to local communities.
The governor said: "Redistribution and fairness also mean turning back the tide of stateless corporations."
"As the prime minister recently stressed, companies must be rooted and pay tax somewhere.
"Businesses operating across borders have responsibilities," he added . . .

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-38210169

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Wanderer78

ZeroThreat wrote:

Seems with all this technology replacing workers, western society in general will have to reduce their populations to a (small) fraction of what it is today. No point in having masses of humanity with nothing to do and no purpose to exist.

Why would people have nothing to do and no purpose to exist?

The Wolverine

You see there's the assumption from some here that it's just what's referred to as low or non skilled who'll suffer from automation when in fact his comments have said he expects the middle classes to be decimated too for example he mentioned how he expects jobs in accountancy to be almost wiped out through hardware and software advances and he's right.

Even in IT with technology advances a company that has 100 IT staff today might only need 20-30 of those staff in 10 years time due to hardware and software advances.

It's not just the poor cabbies, bus drivers, etc who'll be out of a job it will be in fact as many of the third level degree with a master's on top too

The problem is how can you just say "well upskill" to half of the working population which I think was the number he expects to be out of a job?

This universal basic income isn't gonna work as say your country has a 2 million workforce havled, how can you expect that 1 million workers to carry the tax burden of that plus every other service.

This is looking like a waaaay bigger problem that the industrial revolution, at least then it was mostly only the men who worked and there was lots and lots of other manual jobs not taken by tech. Now we face men and women competing for work so obviously way more people needing work and also tech taking a lot of stuff.

Grayson

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Why would people have nothing to do and no purpose to exist?

There's a weird assumption that people have always had jobs and careers. Studies of tribal societies in jungles have found that generally after food gathering occurs they all just play games and keep active that way.

The idea that we need a job to feel good about ourselves is a very recent invention. It's referred to as the protestant work ethic. They tied work to moral well being. They saw not working as being sinful. It's one of the reasons work houses were invented. It was supposed to rehabilitate the sinful through hard labour.

Ferrari3600

ChikiChiki wrote: »

Most organisations are going through massive change at the minute as recommended by various consultancy bodies (big 4 cough). The introduction of technological improvements and automation is significantly lowering FTE requirements where savings then pass on favourably to the balance sheets.

Can't see these increased profits being transferred back to the average joe. Think many people will get caught out with the automation and now more than ever it's important to keep upskilling.

Upskilling to what?

Pulsating Star

I believe the issue of large scale tax avoidance has to be addressed at a G Summit level, starting at the G8 leveland eventually reaching G20.
Individual countries are being played off against each other by these stateless corporations so needs an international response. This can only be achieved if all are are to act as one and see the long term gain of seeing corporate revenue returning to help fund their fiscal programmes. It will take many voices like the governor of the Bank of England to overcome the short tern outlook at political level. I think it's going to take quite a few more Trump events.

Phoebas

Francie Barrett wrote: »

I don't think Carney is talking about this at all.

He is more likely attacking the ultra wealthy. By this, I mean people who have a net worth of at least $10 million.

I thought he was pretty clear that he was talking about large corporations, rather than individuals. He specifically says "The thrifty saver and the rich asset holder are often one and the same"

I think its a mistake to start targetting individuals who are to 'blame'; that just breeds jealousy and kneejerk responses, because anyone can insert their own villain into that piece (Denis O'Brien, the welfare class, U2!). Brexit and Trump aren't going to deal with wealth inequalities caused by globalisation, and Carney certainly isn't against globalisation.

If we agree with what Carney said, and identify 'stateless corporations' as the problem, then anti-globalisation doesn't solve that problem. You need better globalisation - policy responses like the CCCTB (for example) - you can agree or disagree with individual policies, but I think its pretty clear that Brexit and Trump make actual responses that can have a positive effect much less likely.

Oodoov

It's only now when the middle classes are being dragged down to the level of the less unfortunate that this is now becoming an issue. They had better get used to it the asset stripping and hunger of the establishment knows no bounds.

Wanderer78

Oodoov wrote:

It's only now when the middle classes are being dragged down to the level of the less unfortunate that this is now becoming an issue. They had better get used to it the asset stripping and hunger of the establishment knows no bounds.

Thankfully people are starting to stand up and revolt, it's up to us all to force change, but it won't be easy

KyussBeeshop

hmmm wrote: »

We have growing inequality because the jobs that used to be there for the lower educated workers are disappearing, while wealth is increasingly concentrated in the hands of the well educated. It's a natural progression, there's nothing particularly sinister about it.

The question is what do you do to improve the lot of the lower educated who want to work. Most people want a job, not a handout - and they despise those who look for handouts. The Trump election was won by a candidate who proposed to cut social welfare spending, and yet was voted into power by a group of people who largely depended on welfare - why? Because they want to work, and don't see themselves as long term welfare recipients.

I think the leftwing parties, and the occasional gob****e in FG & FF are missing the above point - they are falling over themselves to hand out goodies to the welfare class who don't want to work, while assuming that this will keep the people who don't want to be on welfare (or in a lower paid job) happy.

We need to figure out a way to create good jobs in a world that doesn't rely on low skilled labour. Answers on a postcard if you know how.

It's been parties on the left which have pushed for the solution to this a long time now: A Job Guarantee, in the style of government-created jobs, like a turbocharged/permanent New Deal or Marshall Plan style program.

It's been done successfully many times, by many countries before in the past, in various different styles throughout modern history - but it's vehemently opposed by pretty much any group that desires growing inequality, because it would give government all the power it needs to prevent the entire economy being distorted for the benefit of a few - so it's only ever been implemented temporarily, never permanently fixed in place like a Job Guarantee.

The Old Right/Left - the NeoLiberals - are incredibly hostile to this, and have done everything they can to keep it muted politically, to stop it entering the mainstream - but now things like Trump and Brexit have broken the NeoLiberal order, with Trump representing the Right-Wing alternative - Trump has now provided an opening for the Left-Wing alternative though, and this alternative is going to include New Deal style programs, maybe even the full Job Guarantee.

mahoganygas

CaptainR wrote:

Its a bit like the legend of John Henry's Hammer where a railroad worker is replaced with a steam drill and he talks about how the steam drill has no family to feed but he does.

It's a lovely analogy but it's lacking in details.

Who designs the steam drill? Who mines the ore and smelts the steel? Who constructs the drill and who sells it to railroad companies around the world? How many rivets can the drill work? How many can the railroad worker?
Maybe the worker could get a job in the new railroad company down the road. They are much more efficient and can afford to train their workers on how to use the new steam drill.

Oodoov wrote:

It's only now when the middle classes are being dragged down to the level of the less unfortunate that this is now becoming an issue. They had better get used to it the asset stripping and hunger of the establishment knows no bounds.

Wanderer78 wrote:

Thankfully people are starting to stand up and revolt, it's up to us all to force change, but it won't be easy

Plenty of rhetoric here.
If this is true, then why is union membership continually declining?

Oodoov

mahoganygas wrote: »

It's a lovely analogy but it's lacking in details.

Who designs the steam drill? Who mines the ore and smelts the steel? Who constructs the drill and who sells it to railroad companies around the world? How many rivets can the drill work? How many can the railroad worker?
Maybe the worker could get a job in the new railroad company down the road. They are much more efficient and can afford to train their workers on how to use the new steam drill.

Plenty of rhetoric here.
If this is true, then why is union membership continually declining?

The middle classes don't join unions unless they are in the PS. The working classes mostly don't trust unions and who could blame them when we see the way they have acted the last 20 odd years. It's not rhetoric. Already we see a situation where almost all households have two people working and some have two or three jobs each. This is a full blown race to the bottom where society doesnt matter just economy.

People getting in their cars at 6:30 in the morning for a two hour commute to work and the same again that evening isnt living, it's barely eeking out an existence. It's only heading one way and it's not good.

FTA69

KyussBeeshop wrote: »

It's been parties on the left which have pushed for the solution to this a long time now: A Job Guarantee, in the style of government-created jobs, like a turbocharged/permanent New Deal or Marshall Plan style program.

It's been done successfully many times, by many countries before in the past, in various different styles throughout modern history - but it's vehemently opposed by pretty much any group that desires growing inequality, because it would give government all the power it needs to prevent the entire economy being distorted for the benefit of a few - so it's only ever been implemented temporarily, never permanently fixed in place like a Job Guarantee.

The Old Right/Left - the NeoLiberals - are incredibly hostile to this, and have done everything they can to keep it muted politically, to stop it entering the mainstream - but now things like Trump and Brexit have broken the NeoLiberal order, with Trump representing the Right-Wing alternative - Trump has now provided an opening for the Left-Wing alternative though, and this alternative is going to include New Deal style programs, maybe even the full Job Guarantee.

I agree with much of what you're saying but the only problem with neo-Keynesiam is that is aims to fund increased consumption which is the biggest engine behind environmental destruction. The whole climate change is a ticking time bomb that a lot of "QE for the people" proponents often tend to ignore. Some advocate investing in 'green jobs' but I'm unsure as to what that would entail.

FTA69

Grayson wrote: »

There's a weird assumption that people have always had jobs and careers. Studies of tribal societies in jungles have found that generally after food gathering occurs they all just play games and keep active that way.

The idea that we need a job to feel good about ourselves is a very recent invention. It's referred to as the protestant work ethic. They tied work to moral well being. They saw not working as being sinful. It's one of the reasons work houses were invented. It was supposed to rehabilitate the sinful through hard labour.

Exactly. I think in future there needs to be a distinction between 'work' and 'labour'. There is huge amounts of socially useful 'work' that can be done that isn't necessarily commercial or to be done for profit. The Ancient Greeks called this kind of stuff 'praxis' and it involved community work, visiting the elderly, working with kids and the like - basically volunteering as we know it today.

Many of the jobs we are doing now are bullsh*t for want of a better word, low paid, terrible conditions, insecure and at risk of automation. The current economic model we have is unsustainable in the long run and if we don't come up with an alternative things like Trump and the rest are only the tip of the iceberg. We risk an increasingly authoritarian and divided society when the lower portion of our society are criminalised or infantilised, the middle shrinks dramatically and a portion at the top gate themselves off from the rest.

[Deleted User]

http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/223416.The_Right_to_Useful_Unemployment_and_Its_Professional_Enemies

Ivan Illich

KyussBeeshop

FTA69 wrote: »

I agree with much of what you're saying but the only problem with neo-Keynesiam is that is aims to fund increased consumption which is the biggest engine behind environmental destruction. The whole climate change is a ticking time bomb that a lot of "QE for the people" proponents often tend to ignore. Some advocate investing in 'green jobs' but I'm unsure as to what that would entail.

I don't think that's true - the biggest advocates of the Job Guarantee, would also (separately) advocate focusing the jobs on e.g. a Marshall Plan (or Manhattan project) style program, for completely overhauling western countries infrastructure (not 'green jobs' - large scale infrastructure overhaul), to reduce climate change emissions, and to do massive R&D programs for accelerating technological development in areas that will help this.

This alone shows that it is absurd to have so many people unemployed around the world, when massive amounts of work/jobs need to be created, to work on dealing with climate change - and to do this yesterday (as we'll already be starting too late, to avoid negative effects of climate change in the future).

An added minor point, is that the Job Guarantee advocates tend to be Post-Keynesian - which is a completely different branch of Keynes views, than what people consider 'Keynesian' today.

Yourself isit

Housing in Ireland lies at the heart of the insecurity of the new middle classes. The indo had a piece today about a couple on 60k getting kicked out of their rental and unable to afford a house.

Oodoov

FTA69 wrote: »

Exactly. I think in future there needs to be a distinction between 'work' and 'labour'. There is huge amounts of socially useful 'work' that can be done that isn't necessarily commercial or to be done for profit. The Ancient Greeks called this kind of stuff 'praxis' and it involved community work, visiting the elderly, working with kids and the like - basically volunteering as we know it today.

Many of the jobs we are doing now are bullsh*t for want of a better word, low paid, terrible conditions, insecure and at risk of automation. The current economic model we have is unsustainable in the long run and if we don't come up with an alternative things like Trump and the rest are only the tip of the iceberg. We risk an increasingly authoritarian and divided society when the lower portion of our society are criminalised or infantilised, the middle shrinks dramatically and a portion at the top gate themselves off from the rest.

Trump is only the beginning. I'd say 90% of those that voted for him don't even like the guy and don't expect things to change much. They did it out of desperation and a fcuk you to the establishment for enriching themselves whilst they and their families struggle more with every passing year. Same goes for Brexit another fcuk you to the top 1%.

Society as a whole had a complete meltdown with the 2008 banking collapse and it was a fantastic chance to amend and try and build a better way forward. In fact things have gotten much worse and no lessons have been learned worldwide not just in Ireland and the next crash is going to be even worse. Even today in Ireland we borrow millions per day to keep the countries head above water, our health service is in turmoil as one example and yet we see fit to give already well paid civil servants pay rises and social welfare applicants xmas bonus's. I mean seriously wtf??

KyussBeeshop

FTA69 wrote: »

Exactly. I think in future there needs to be a distinction between 'work' and 'labour'. There is huge amounts of socially useful 'work' that can be done that isn't necessarily commercial or to be done for profit. The Ancient Greeks called this kind of stuff 'praxis' and it involved community work, visiting the elderly, working with kids and the like - basically volunteering as we know it today.

Many of the jobs we are doing now are bullsh*t for want of a better word, low paid, terrible conditions, insecure and at risk of automation. The current economic model we have is unsustainable in the long run and if we don't come up with an alternative things like Trump and the rest are only the tip of the iceberg. We risk an increasingly authoritarian and divided society when the lower portion of our society are criminalised or infantilised, the middle shrinks dramatically and a portion at the top gate themselves off from the rest.

I agree with you a lot on socially useful work there, and you can actually pay people to do all of this socially useful work, as part of the Job Guarantee too - a lot of big advocates of the JG, like Bill Mitchell, very frequently cite the things you do there, as things that can be a part of the program.

Wanderer78

Oodoov wrote:

Society as a whole had a complete meltdown with the 2008 banking collapse and it was a fantastic chance to amend and try and build a better way forward. In fact things have gotten much worse and no lessons have been learned worldwide not just in Ireland and the next crash is going to be even worse. Even today in Ireland we borrow millions per day to keep the countries head above water, our health service is in turmoil as one example and yet we see fit to give already well paid civil servants pay rises and social welfare applicants xmas bonus's. I mean seriously wtf??

All very good points there but people are starting to mobilize and form groups around the world particularly in the western world. There's some really interesting ideas coming from these groups, but unfortunately our dear leaders are not listening yet, but I suspect they will eventually. Unfortunately that looks like it'll eventually happen after the next crash or something more serious. I don't think the last crash was wasted at all. It woke a large amount of the population, including myself, and things are happening behind the scenes. There are some really intelligent people coming together, forming these groups, and trying to force change. I do think many of these groups will eventually be successful but it is very disturbing to watch our leaders falter.

The problem isn't with people's pay or bonusus, the problem is with our fundamentally flawed economic and financial systems, all based on fundamentally flawed theories and principles. Sadly our leaders are choosing to ignore this, which is and will continue to cause mayhem, particularly at a social level. I do agree with you though, it is unacceptable to have a failing health service after the pain and sacrifices many have had in endure over the last few years

Cuddlesworth

Yourself isit wrote: »

Housing in Ireland lies at the heart of the insecurity of the new middle classes. The indo had a piece today about a couple on 60k getting kicked out of their rental and unable to afford a house.

Those stories are almost always made up or the reporter/reported leaves out very important details to intentionally create a bias. Throwing the word eviction out there is a great way to do this.

Rents in the area seem to be hitting 2k for houses. Achievable for a couple on 60k but they clearly need move to somewhere more affordable for their needs.

And I can understand why his landlord wants to sell. 2012 prices were 220-240k, current are 400k+ which would imply they are back at boom time prices. If they didn't want to be a landlord, seems like a good time to sell.

Yourself isit

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

Those stories are almost always made up or the reporter/reported leaves out very important details to intentionally create a bias. Throwing the word eviction out there is a great way to do this.

Rents in the area seem to be hitting 2k for houses. Achievable for a couple on 60k but they clearly need move to somewhere more affordable for their needs.

And I can understand why his landlord wants to sell. 2012 prices were 220-240k, current are 400k+ which would imply they are back at boom time prices. If they didn't want to be a landlord, seems like a good time to sell.

What's particularly made up about the story? They are being evicted. They probably cannot get a loan. And expecting renters to continually move on as rents skyrocket isn't solving the problem. It's just restating it.

What affects a couple on 60k now will affect a couple on 80k soon. This is very much what we are talking about.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Cuddlesworth

Yourself isit wrote: »

What's particularly made up about the story? They are being evicted. They probably cannot get a loan. And expecting renters to continually move on as rents skyrocket isn't solving the problem. It's just restating it.

What affects a couple on 60k now will affect a couple on 80k soon. This is very much what we are talking about.

The headline for a start would be a pretty big lie.

wrote:

"We're earning €60,000 a year but can't afford to rent or buy a house"

They can afford to rent and they can afford to buy. Just not in the area they want to at the price they want. Made obvious by this line.

"they are finding it impossible to locate comparable accommodation in Artane for a rent they can afford."

Keeping in mind, that they have been paying 50% of the market rate.

Luciano and Monica were horrified to realise that rents are, in some cases, almost 50pc above what they are currently paying and are rising by the week.

The subject in question also owned or owns another property, as he is specific about being applicable to the 20pc rule. And complains about things that have either been incredibly minor increases to him or not comparable at all?

"Luciano revealed his family have been trying to save for a mortgage for a decade – but found their ability to save hit first by the Universal Service Charge tax, then spiralling road tax and insurance rates, water charges, property tax, soaring rents and finally the Central Bank demand for a 20pc mortgage saving deposit."

Lets look through the list for 4 years of them being in this house.

Road Tax/Insurance Rates - He is a shop manger, he could easily drop a car. Plus they are not spiralling, there have been moderate increases in tax and insurance, you can drop them if you shop around.
Water charges - 160 Euros, if he even paid it?
Property Tax - He rents, FFS
Soaring Rents - Which he has not been paying

I think when you lay it out, its not really a particularly impressive list of spiralling costs is it? We all pay USC, its a income tax now and will remain. He competes in a rental market and property market with other people who pay it. In this circumstance it has not disadvantaged him any more or any less then it would have without it.

Not to mention the heart string tugging, the people who care about his plight, the Christmas for his poor lad and the throw away remarks about the evil bankers and developers.

Wanderer78

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

id both agree and disagree with you, the problem is with fundamental flaws within our political, economic and financial systems. all of which are creating and adding to these complex social issues.

i will admit some new building regs are just ridiculous but i think this was an overreaction to poor regulation not just in the building industry during the boom, but in other industries.

our housing situation is a mess and a manifestation of failures in dealing with fundamental problems deep within our political, economic and financial systems. many tenents and landlords are actually equally victims of these failures.

our leaders are lost, failing to realise these fundamental failures and their causes, some even choosing to ignore them, knowing they are flawed. unfortunately it looks like we re well on our way to another serious crash until we truly start changing things.

323

Ferrari3600 wrote: »

Totally agree. Particularly as regards the law and accountancy. Both professions are in decline due to automation and due to their institutes letting too many qualify. Hundreds of young solicitors and accountants emigrated during the crash - most have not come back. I personally know solicitors with good experience that work as journalists, and accountants that are (barely) scraping a living together from bits and bobs.

And the downside of this is???

Should have taken Science or Engineering.

Yourself isit

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Sure. It's never the free market. The free market would be producing quality housing for 100% of the population if we were to Just let it rip.

Crony capitalism is though, I agree, mostly the problem. Probably some of those regulations can be overturned. However the problem leading up to 2008 was lack of regulation. The free market under regulated produced 400k houses with pyrite.

That said the state - by bailing out developers and banks, not taxing land, and engaging in demand side fixes for supply side problems is also causing the problem.

The other problem is low wage growth. Inequality very much plays onto that.

TheDoc

Skommando wrote: »

In other words you've no argument worth making.

The fact remains that in real terms all wages are lower.

What are you actually afraid of ? that ordinary people, which includes professionals, might be paid more and have a better standard of living and more secure homes ?

No, I think he was pretty spot on when you somehow insinuated that solicitors, guardai and software developers were earning little more then shop keepers. I'd imagine it's an issue with you trying to convey your point correctly

In the last six years, my salary has increased year on year. Any other timeline and I'd be pretty comfortable and happy out. Unfortunately like many I'm in that uncertain world of spiralling rent in the private market and no prospects of home ownership being the sole earner in the house.

As the poster you quoted mentioned, thats the crux of the problem. How do you create jobs with meaningful earnings that can allow someone have a life of note, with the job being low skilled or unskilled.

And as that poster correctly said, we have governments who consistently just prop up those sectors or people, give little giveaways to social welfare recipients in the hope it will pop it up, but the reality is the markets going entirely another direction.

At a point, our sections of "classes"(hate that phrase) are going to have to reevaluate expectations. for example in the not to distant future, I don't believe it will be realistic for someone in low income to have expectations of house ownership. Still an expectation that is had here.

There will likely need to be a shift, but likely not before we have government who continue to try prop it up to secure votes, and probably walk us ignorantly into another financial crisis.

jmayo

hmmm wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Actually that is kinds incorrect.
A lot of pretty educated people are struggling as well.
Of course if you are an employee of Microsoft, Google, Facebook or such and a party to share options and the like then wipee.
If you are not lucky enough to be working for some of the big multinationals or one of the latest highflying tech companies then things may not be all that rosey despite your education.

The fact that you have the likes of the Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg, Larry Ellison, Larry Page, Sergey Brin, Steve Ballmer with more than 20 billion euro each at the same time their corporations pay shag all tax on their earnings shows how skewed the system has become.
Are all these above super intelligent or just intelligent, good business people, back stabbers who would sell their own kids, a combination of the above or just plain lucky ?
Of course some will say they worked really hard for their money as opposed to those who aren't millionaries/billionaries so thus must be lazy.

The new mantra is get education or upskill and you too will get a good job and be rich as well.
It used to be if you had a leaving cert, then it was a diploma of some sort, then a degree of some sort, then a masters and next thing you know you will need to get a PHD.

I think it is a kind of myth that is being proffered similar to the myth in the US where if you work real hard you too will live the American Dream and become the next millionaire or lately billionaire.
Except it is just that, a myth.
And slowly but surely a lot of people are copping on to it and getting disenchanted with the system.

Wanderer78 wrote: »

All very good points there but people are starting to mobilize and form groups around the world particularly in the western world. There's some really interesting ideas coming from these groups, but unfortunately our dear leaders are not listening yet, but I suspect they will eventually. Unfortunately that looks like it'll eventually happen after the next crash or something more serious. I don't think the last crash was wasted at all. It woke a large amount of the population, including myself, and things are happening behind the scenes. There are some really intelligent people coming together, forming these groups, and trying to force change. I do think many of these groups will eventually be successful but it is very disturbing to watch our leaders falter.

Any more in depth detail on these groups?

Permabear wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

You have to say there is need for regulations or more correctly enforcement of said regulations because otherwise we would have a priory hall on every corner.

Wanderer78

jmayo wrote: »

Any more in depth detail on these groups?

rushing here but i listen to a lot of alternative american radio such as prn.fm, kpfa.org, therealnews.com etc etc. obviously american based but similar movements are happening in europe such as yanis varoufakis's dim25. im a believer in cooperative organisations that are publically owned and run such as public banking, there are groups even in ireland advocating for these kind of organisations. by watching and listening to the above mentioned sources, you ll see people are actually mobilizing and forming groups.

Yourself isit

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

The headline for a start would be a pretty big lie.

They can afford to rent and they can afford to buy. Just not in the area they want to at the price they want. Made obvious by this line.

Keeping in mind, that they have been paying 50% of the market rate.

The subject in question also owned or owns another property, as he is specific about being applicable to the 20pc rule. And complains about things that have either been incredibly minor increases to him or not comparable at all?

Lets look through the list for 4 years of them being in this house.

Road Tax/Insurance Rates - He is a shop manger, he could easily drop a car. Plus they are not spiralling, there have been moderate increases in tax and insurance, you can drop them if you shop around.
Water charges - 160 Euros, if he even paid it?
Property Tax - He rents, FFS
Soaring Rents - Which he has not been paying

I think when you lay it out, its not really a particularly impressive list of spiralling costs is it? We all pay USC, its a income tax now and will remain. He competes in a rental market and property market with other people who pay it. In this circumstance it has not disadvantaged him any more or any less then it would have without it.

Not to mention the heart string tugging, the people who care about his plight, the Christmas for his poor lad and the throw away remarks about the evil bankers and developers.

You didn't attack the headline, you attacked the story. However the story is true.

As for the rest sure he could give up a car. That's just admitting that 60k isn't enough for a car these days. That said I doubt that public transport will work for him.

I mean he could move somewhere else. Not that artane is very posh. That too is relative poverty in my book. Move to meath. Don't have a car. Suck it up.

And pay usc. At the risk of being populist that is in fact in part bailing put the bondholders