Off Topic Thread 3.0

CMOTDibbler · 30-03-2017 10:01AM

Bazzo wrote: »

I remember reading an article a while back about this. Taxation in Ireland isn't especially high in comparison to the rest of Europe, the difference is that services are pretty poor for what you pay. A sort of worst of both worlds scenario.

Without seeing the article, I'm not sure if this is true. A lot of countries in Europe have higher tax rates than us, but usually you have to go a lot further up the income ladder to pay them and at the same time there are pretty substantial allowances for being married or having children.

For example, France would be spoken about as a high income tax country because its top rate is 45%. But to get to 41% you have to earn over €71k, otherwise it's 30% and to get to 45% it's over €150k. It's as low as 14% if your income is under €27k.

But that's only for single people. If you're married, your gross income is divided into two parts and each part is assessed against the bands and then totalled. So if only one of the couple is working, a gross income of up to €142k is still only taxed at 30%. Add in children and it gets even lower.

sydthebeat · 30-03-2017 10:13AM

Podge_irl wrote: »

Which is an incredibly stupid way of paying for it. One way or another, investment in water infrastructure was far, far too low because it was financed through general taxation and other spending was consistently prioritized over it. Whatever we were spending on water wasn't enough.

I don't really understand the issue with it being a revenue generating exercise to widen the tax base either to be honest. The tax base in Ireland does seem awfully narrow.

Agree the implementation was ham-fisted though. Though I do find it interesting how this is what finally caused people to crack.

i completely agree with all that.
Our tax base is way too narrow and we depend way too much on indirect taxes (which are very high, in response to bazzo above)

The reason investment in municipal services dropped off is actually because back around 98' the government stopped finding local authorities centrally which put severe pressure on local authorities to fund themselves through rates and contributions... and obviously affected funding for capital projects as the day to day costs had to be met first.
However through all this, general taxation didnt drop, the government just funneled it to other areas.

where the government fell down on water is that they tried to be too clever by trying to argue irish water was an "off the books" company and therefore trying to set it up too big, too quickly.
the reason in my mind that it was the final straw was because it was so blatantly corrupt in its design (off the books company), construction (management made up of high ranking ex civil servants) and performance (data collection farces, wrong bills, bills to non existent people)

Ireland needs 'irish water' as it needs a centralised system similar to the esb. However this MUST be a state company with control over local authority projects.

Yeah_Right · 30-03-2017 10:16AM

Stheno wrote: »

Fancy swopping? I'll mod here, and you can take over in the cafe? :pac:

If you saw yes and the admins agree I'll buy you tickets to the pro12 final

That's a great idea. Zzippy is a fool and clearly knows nothing about rugby unlike the great ak......

Uh oh. That was meant to be a PM. Sorry Zzippy.

I'll mod both forums for two weeks for two tickets to both finals

Erik Shin · 30-03-2017 10:20AM

In effect, we've been triple taxed for water...Firstly it was rates...Then a water and sewerage charge...And then Irish water....But we still had to pay the same amount of the other 2 levys as it was....It's frankly laughable that any government or created body thought that was going to work....And yet we are now in a position where the majority of TF's realise it's morally wrong and don't want to implement it...But we are breaking European law if we don't have a separate water charge levy.... it's going to get very interesting indeed over the coming months

CMOTDibbler · 30-03-2017 10:20AM

sydthebeat wrote: »

i completely agree with all that.
Our tax base is way too narrow and we depend way too much on indirect taxes (which are very high, in response to bazzo above)

The reason investment in municipal services dropped off is actually because back around 98' the government stopped finding local authorities centrally which put severe pressure on local authorities to fund themselves through rates and contributions... and obviously affected funding for capital projects as the day to day costs had to be met first.
However through all this, general taxation didnt drop, the government just funneled it to other areas.

It goes back much further than that. In 1977, Jack Lynch abolished rates as part of a massive election purchasing plan and at one stroke completely denuded local authorities of their main source of funding.

From that point onwards, local authorities were funded from central government and completely dependant on the economic situation that lay behind that funding. A further whammy to local authority income was the push to sell off local authority housing which killed their rental income as well.

stephen_n · 30-03-2017 10:42AM

I don't object to paying for water, I just object to lining Dennis O'Brien's pockets more. If it had been left in the hands of the local council and the money went directly to them. I think the vast majority would have paid it. Handing it over to a for profit company was the real disaster.

CMOTDibbler · 30-03-2017 10:43AM

Erik Shin wrote: »

In effect, we've been triple taxed for water...Firstly it was rates...Then a water and sewerage charge...And then Irish water....But we still had to pay the same amount of the other 2 levys as it was....It's frankly laughable that any government or created body thought that was going to work....And yet we are now in a position where the majority of TF's realise it's morally wrong and don't want to implement it...But we are breaking European law if we don't have a separate water charge levy.... it's going to get very interesting indeed over the coming months

The EU only require a usage charge to encourage conservation. The people protesting don't even want metering which imo is just crazy. I know it's all "thin end of the wedge" type resistance, but how the hell are we going to know where the water losses are coming from without some sort of metering?

Zzippy · 30-03-2017 10:43AM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

+1

Basically we were landed with bad economics based on a paper that was debunked by a masters student (see excelgate) and we never had so much as the slightest hint of an apology, even worse, people still think its true. Unfortunately the biggest problem with the EU/ECB is that its run by the type of people who will make the exact same mistake the next time.

Except the same people recently bailed out the Italian banks and insisted on bondholders being burned. We in Ireland are the only patsies who got landed with an economic crash and having to pay the banks' debts in full.

Erik Shin wrote: »

In effect, we've been triple taxed for water...Firstly it was rates...Then a water and sewerage charge...And then Irish water....But we still had to pay the same amount of the other 2 levys as it was....It's frankly laughable that any government or created body thought that was going to work....And yet we are now in a position where the majority of TF's realise it's morally wrong and don't want to implement it...But we are breaking European law if we don't have a separate water charge levy.... it's going to get very interesting indeed over the coming months

Rates have been gone since 1977. I never heard of a water and sewage charge. Irish Water was formed about 25 years after rates were abolished. I don't see how you think we could be paying both at the same time, never mind the charge I've never heard of.

mfceiling · 30-03-2017 10:44AM

A big problem with taxation in this country is the idea of taking people out of the tax net.

If you earn anything you should be contributing. If you earn €10k a year you should be paying something. Even those on social welfare should make a contribution. Even if it was 50 cents a week it would be something. It's laughable to think that people who are earning should be outside the tax take even though they avail of the services that everyone else uses?

Podge_irl · 30-03-2017 10:46AM

stephen_n wrote: »

I don't object to paying for water, I just object to lining Dennis O'Brien's pockets more. If it had been left in the hands of the local council and the money went directly to them. I think the vast majority would have paid it. Handing it over to a for profit company was the real disaster.

Disagree that it should be left in the hands of the local council. Water infrastructure should absolutely be handled by a national body.

mfceiling · 30-03-2017 10:47AM

Cork lads in work went to the local pub quiz last night.

Giving out hell this morning that they came last.

"It's not fair, last week he gave us all the answers"

"Oh so you won it last week?"

"No....We were third"

irishbucsfan · 30-03-2017 10:49AM

mfceiling wrote: »

A big problem with taxation in this country is the idea of taking people out of the tax net.

If you earn anything you should be contributing. If you earn €10k a year you should be paying something. Even those on social welfare should make a contribution. Even if it was 50 cents a week it would be something. It's laughable to think that people who are earning should be outside the tax take even though they avail of the services that everyone else uses?

It's not always worth it. A lot of the times its better for the economy that someone earning that amount to be keeping (IE spending) all of that money rather than some of it going back into taxation.

The concept of progressive taxation is hundreds of years old, at the very least since Adam Smith realised the whole point of the state is to protect the better off from the ne'er do wells.

CMOTDibbler · 30-03-2017 10:57AM

Podge_irl wrote: »

Disagree that it should be left in the hands of the local council. Water infrastructure should absolutely be handled by a national body.

I'm assuming he means installing the meters. Denis O'Brien's company was one of the installers selected.

I doubt very much if the local councils would have had either the staff or the resources to do this anyway. It's the kind of thing that you absolutely have to go out to tender for, the same as building roads or schools.

Zzippy · 30-03-2017 11:15AM

mfceiling wrote: »

A big problem with taxation in this country is the idea of taking people out of the tax net.

If you earn anything you should be contributing. If you earn €10k a year you should be paying something. Even those on social welfare should make a contribution. Even if it was 50 cents a week it would be something. It's laughable to think that people who are earning should be outside the tax take even though they avail of the services that everyone else uses?

Low-earning people actually pay tax all the time in VAT - a disproportionately higher percentage of their income goes on VAT as they don't have the means to save, avail of tax breaks on pension contributions, etc. In other words, they are literally having to spend everything they earn to survive, pretty much everything they spend it on is taxed at 13.5-23%. Plus the money they spend goes into the economy and supports jobs and further taxpayers.

Erik Shin · 30-03-2017 12:30PM

Zzippy wrote: »

Except the same people recently bailed out the Italian banks and insisted on bondholders being burned. We in Ireland are the only patsies who got landed with an economic crash and having to pay the banks' debts in full.

Rates have been gone since 1977. I never heard of a water and sewage charge. Irish Water was formed about 25 years after rates were abolished. I don't see how you think we could be paying both at the same time, never mind the charge I've never heard of.

You think Rates are gone? That's incredible shall I send you my bills from KCC that i have to pay regularly

Stheno · 30-03-2017 12:30PM

Erik Shin wrote: »

You think Rates are gone? That's incredible shall I send you my bills from KCC that i have to pay regularly

Are they rates for a business premises?

CMOTDibbler · 30-03-2017 12:31PM

Erik Shin wrote: »

You think Rates are gone? That's incredible shall I send you my bills from KCC that i have to pay regularly

Are you the owner of a business premises? Rates for businesses were never abolished.

stephen_n · 30-03-2017 12:35PM

Podge_irl wrote: »

Disagree that it should be left in the hands of the local council. Water infrastructure should absolutely be handled by a national body.

So you are going to ask people in areas with unusable water to contribute, even though the money isn't going to benefit their local area? The for profit model is the main issue, any national authority should not be a private, profit driven entity. Especially one that then incorporates all the council staff anyway.

Erik Shin · 30-03-2017 01:16PM

Stheno wrote: »

Are they rates for a business premises?

Yes! I've been talking about business all the time...Some didn't read my posts i guess

CMOTDibbler · 30-03-2017 01:17PM

stephen_n wrote: »

So you are going to ask people in areas with unusable water to contribute, even though the money isn't going to benefit their local area? The for profit model is the main issue, any national authority should not be a private, profit driven entity. Especially one that then incorporates all the council staff anyway.

Aren't all semi-state bodies profit driven? The profits pay for investment, otherwise they're just revenue collectors.

Erik Shin · 30-03-2017 01:18PM

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

Are you the owner of a business premises? Rates for businesses were never abolished.

Don't I fckin know it!

CMOTDibbler · 30-03-2017 01:20PM

Erik Shin wrote: »

Yes! I've been talking about business all the time...Some didn't read my posts i guess

One post. But then you moved on to talking about 'the people'. Easy to see how confusion set in. :pac:

CMOTDibbler · 30-03-2017 01:21PM

Erik Shin wrote: »

Don't I fckin know it!

Businesses basically had to take the brunt of the disastrous household rates abolition back in 1977. Councils had very few trunips left to draw blood from and businesses were it. :rolleyes:

Erik Shin · 30-03-2017 01:24PM

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

One post. But then you moved on to talking about 'the people'. Easy to see how confusion set in. :pac:

You're actually confusing yourself now I'd say

Podge_irl · 30-03-2017 01:25PM

stephen_n wrote: »

So you are going to ask people in areas with unusable water to contribute, even though the money isn't going to benefit their local area? The for profit model is the main issue, any national authority should not be a private, profit driven entity. Especially one that then incorporates all the council staff anyway.

eh...no. That's what is happening at the moment. With metered rates if your water is unusable you won't be using any.

I just mean that the local councils are not the correct bodies to be looking after water infrastructure - the issue needs to be treated on a national level. What is the fundamental difference between water and electricity? I just don't see why they should be treated differently.

Zzippy · 30-03-2017 01:38PM

Erik Shin wrote: »

Yes! I've been talking about business all the time...Some didn't read my posts i guess

Everyone else was talking about private use of water - are you complaining that you have to pay commercial rates on a business premises and for water you use at home? If you were trying to claim that is double taxation, that's just ridiculous, and totally disingenuous, as you well know.

Synode · 30-03-2017 01:40PM

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

Businesses basically had to take the brunt of the disastrous household rates abolition back in 1977. Councils had very few trunips left to draw blood from and businesses were it. :rolleyes:

Currently in a spat with SDCC, specifically the planning enforcement department. They've been rendered completely useless these days because of lack of funding. No appetite from them to pursue developers who are breaching their planning conditions because they're relying on the income from development levies and contributions. Makes a complete mockery of the whole system.

We'll continue to pay in ways like this for the foreseeable future. All because of FF and their buying of elections.

Erik Shin · 30-03-2017 01:45PM

Zzippy wrote: »

Everyone else was talking about private use of water - are you complaining that you have to pay commercial rates on a business premises and for water you use at home? If you were trying to claim that is double taxation, that's just ridiculous, and totally disingenuous, as you well know.

Nope, ...I'll make it simple.
Rates pays for water and sewerage.
Then....Water and sewerage charge comes along....Pay that... But no drop in rates...Then Irish water comes along...And rates stay the same

stephen_n · 30-03-2017 01:53PM

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

Aren't all semi-state bodies profit driven? The profits pay for investment, otherwise they're just revenue collectors.

If the money is being invested then it's not really for profit though.

Podge_irl wrote: »

eh...no. That's what is happening at the moment. With metered rates if your water is unusable you won't be using any.

I just mean that the local councils are not the correct bodies to be looking after water infrastructure - the issue needs to be treated on a national level. What is the fundamental difference between water and electricity? I just don't see why they should be treated differently.

Water is useable but not drinkable, though in some areas of the West I'm not actually sure it's useable. There are huge areas of this country that have been on boil notices indefinitely, for most of the last 10 years.

Electricity is handled both locally and nationally, having an overarching body working above the councils would be ok, just not a private entity, or one that draws in the funding and reallocates it. The leaks are generally a local issue, not a national one.

Stheno · 30-03-2017 02:32PM

Any of you guys use groups on linkedin?

I don't know wtf they have done with their layout now but it's rotten.

Off Topic Thread 3.0

Comments