General Election and Government Formation Megathread (see post #1)

blanch152 · 24-01-2020 11:53AM

droidus wrote: »

The fact that FF could bankrupt the country in an unprecedented orgy of greed, arrogance and bad planning and FG could implement a series of extreme right wing economic policies suggests that radical change is possible.

I don't think anyone has all the solutions, but pulling us back from the brink would be a start. There's another recession coming, it's going to be big and we're in a worse state than we were last time. When the economic impacts of the climate catastrophe hit on top of that it's going to be chaos. We need a Government whose first concern isn't always the welfare of developers, landlords, banks, corporations and their friends in the golf club.

Was it Seanie Fitzpatrick that Cowen used to meet in the golf club for a drink after a round?

Geuze · 24-01-2020 11:54AM

Whelo79 wrote: »

The article provides a lot of information and has costings re scraping USC under €30k and returning pension age to 65, all fully costed by the Department of Finance.

Scrapping USC under 30k is a bad move.

Broad-based taxes with low rates are a good idea.

seamus · 24-01-2020 11:57AM

droidus wrote: »

There's another recession coming, it's going to be big and we're in a worse state than we were last time.

I disagree that we're in a worse state than we were last time tbh. In terms of national debt we're still reeling a bit from the last recession. But household debt is lower now than it was in 2003, the tax base is better spread than it was at the last crash and the labour force is better spread. 12.7% of the labour force was in construction in 2007. Today that figure is 6.5%.

This is all means that any recession will have a more general effect (as opposed to completely crashing one big chunk of the labour market), individuals will be better able to handle the impact on their finances, and government takings will see a more general reduction rather than the sudden disappearance of tens of billions of euro from a single income stream.

On the topic of FF seats in trouble in Donegal, that's kind of interesting. Rural communities have for a long time been FF's stronghold, a vote they could nearly take for granted. But there has of late been talk about FF's potential alignments with the Greens, and that's causing some disquiet rurally, especially amongst farming communities.

I wonder will Micháel's focus on stealing FG seats result in him losing the seats he's not watching. McConalogue and Gallagher took 17% & 14% first prefs in 2016. They've both seen a huge drop in support going by the TG4 poll. Though even if traditional FF voters decide to not give them first prefs, they'll remain very transfer-friendly.

VinLieger · 24-01-2020 12:01PM

Whelo79 wrote: »

I'd like to see SF get in for this promise to cut TD and senator salaries and pensions alone.

The article provides a lot of information and has costings re scraping USC under €30k and returning pension age to 65, all fully costed by the Department of Finance.

Its nothing more than an optics move and just intended to make certain sections of society feel like they have gotten revenge or justice of some twisted kind, the money it will ultimately save is so minimal it wont substantially help pay for anything of worth

Geuze · 24-01-2020 12:04PM

droidus wrote: »

.. Quality of life for a significant portion of the population has plummeted because of austerity and a radical right wing ideology that seems determined to transfer as much wealth into private hands as possible.

What exactly do you mean by austerity?

I take it to mean cuts in public expenditure?

silver2020 · 24-01-2020 12:10PM

droidus wrote: »

Just watching Primetime there. The devastation FG and their FF partners have caused across society is astonishing, its not just housing and health, its childcare, transport, education, planning, disability services, criminal justice... Quality of life for a significant portion of the population has plummeted because of austerity and a radical right wing ideology that seems determined to transfer as much wealth into private hands as possible.

We desperately need a change of direction. Tweedledum replacing tweedledee wont do it.

That's great to say and it's very much what the left wing press harp on about and too many people believe this left wing rhetoric of the gutter press rather than do their own independent thinking

What do you suggest?

What is the alternative?

SF - Just look at NI. Same "problems" but worse in many cases.

This jealousy by many of people who have money is just annoying. Yes, a few are able to avoid some taxes, but the vast majority of well to do people pay an enormous amount of tax - and not just through paye.

They spend a lot more on luxuries and services - and vat and employment comes from that spend, They work a lot harder, they have private health insurance, they mostly send kids to semi private schools.

So they take very little from government, but contribute massively.

Then look at those in the lower bracket that complain so loudly -

Many eat unhealthily and live unhealthy lives - burden on health system.
A lot more smoke than the "wealthy" - burden on health system
A higher level of unemployment - burden on social welfare
and on and on and on and on.

So, those moaning about wanting everything and giving nothing won't be getting my vote.

Those less fortunate who try their best certainly deserve as much assistance as possible - but note the word "assistance" rather than "given".

droidus · 24-01-2020 12:16PM

seamus wrote: »

I disagree that we're in a worse state than we were last time tbh. In terms of national debt we're still reeling a bit from the last recession. But household debt is lower now than it was in 2003, the tax base is better spread than it was at the last crash and the labour force is better spread. 12.7% of the labour force was in construction in 2007. Today that figure is 6.5%.

This is all means that any recession will have a more general effect (as opposed to completely crashing one big chunk of the labour market), individuals will be better able to handle the impact on their finances, and government takings will see a more general reduction rather than the sudden disappearance of tens of billions of euro from a single income stream.

There's people earning 30,000 a year going to soup kitchens. People being forced into the commuter belt and facing 4hr commutes because of no public transport, crippling childcare fees combined with stratospheric rents pushing people into penury, workplace precarity is hiding the true extent of unemployment and health is on its knees.

The fact is that deprivation is much worse than it was in 2008. There's a s*it load of people barely surviving. One major shock will push them over the edge and we'll be left facing social problems of enormous magnitude.

Whelo79 · 24-01-2020 12:17PM

Geuze wrote: »

TD pay at 95k is not high.

Accountants in Dublin earn more.

If they want to earn 95k let them go and be an accountant so. I don't believe any politician should get 'rich' from doing the job. The same way as no nurse is every going to be rich. On one hand politicians are overpaid and nurses are underpaid.

When you take into account all the allowances they get and the pension it comes in way above 95k anyway.

Whelo79 · 24-01-2020 12:18PM

Geuze wrote: »

Scrapping USC under 30k is a bad move.

Broad-based taxes with low rates are a good idea.

I can't believe people actually just accept USC now. It was supposed to be a temporary measure during an extraordinary period. Over 10 years later now and it's still on every payslip.

droidus · 24-01-2020 12:19PM

Geuze wrote: »

What exactly do you mean by austerity?

I take it to mean cuts in public expenditure?

Yep, the choice to cut social expenditure and transfer public wealth into private hands. Policies condemned by such radical left wing organisations as the IMF.

“The benefits in terms of increased growth seem fairly difficult to establish when looking at a broad group of countries,” they said. “The costs in terms of increased inequality are prominent. Such costs epitomise the trade-off between the growth and equity effects of some aspects of the neoliberal agenda.

“Increased inequality in turn hurts the level and sustainability of growth. Even if growth is the sole or main purpose of the neoliberal agenda, advocates of that agenda still need to pay attention to the distributional effects.”

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/may/27/austerity-policies-do-more-harm-than-good-imf-study-concludes

droidus · 24-01-2020 12:21PM

silver2020 wrote: »

This jealousy by many of people who have money is just annoying. Yes, a few are able to avoid some taxes, but the vast majority of well to do people pay an enormous amount of tax - and not just through paye.

They spend a lot more on luxuries and services - and vat and employment comes from that spend, They work a lot harder, they have private health insurance, they mostly send kids to semi private schools...

Yeah, the enduring myth of the 'deserving and undeserving poor'. Beloved by right wing psychopaths of every stripe.

https://nonprofitquarterly.org/the-deserving-and-undeserving-poor-a-persistent-frame-with-consequences/

Wanderer78 · 24-01-2020 12:25PM

droidus wrote:

Yep, the choice to cut social expenditure and transfer public wealth into private hands. Policies condemned by such radical left wing organisations as the IMF.

The imf is left wing, WTF!

seamus · 24-01-2020 12:41PM

droidus wrote: »

The fact is that deprivation is much worse than it was in 2008.

It's actually not. The deprivation rate in 2018 was 15.1%, in 2008 it was 13.7%. That's not "much worse", and it was trending down by about 3% a year. So the deprivation rate in 2019 was probably lower than 2008. We won't know till that comes out.

At risk of poverty rates: 14.4% in 2008, 14% in 2018
Consistenty poverty rates: 4.2% (2008), 5.6% in 2018 (dropping by ~0.5% per year)

It's important not to allow the narratives from other countries taint our view of how things are going in our own. Stories of people working 3 jobs in the US, or overrun food banks in the UK, do not translate to the same things happening here.

The raw statistics don't back up any assertion that we're in an economic mess. More people are at work, poverty rates are almost better than the last boom (after a massive spike).

Yes, rents are gone ridiculous and health is a mess. But they're not necessarily economic factors that will hurt in a crash. Rents and homeless figures plumetted when the economy crashed the last time.

robman60 · 24-01-2020 01:11PM

I see Patrick Power has odds for every constituency now. I'm surprised to see Helen McEntee is "only" 1/3. I would have thought she was as dead a cert as they come.

Pedro K · 24-01-2020 01:35PM

Geuze wrote: »

TD pay at 95k is not high.

Accountants in Dublin earn more.

I don't even have a problem with the wage. It's the expenses that bug me. An accountant in Dublin earning 95k has to pay to clean their suit. Has to pay for parking. Has to pay to drive to work. If they have lunch in a local restaurant, they can't leave a tab of thousands unpaid.

Alan Farrell handed back over €4,000 in expenses that weren't claimed correctly. That's what he handed back. Losing that amount in one go would cripple many families.

There are politicians claiming expenses in multiples of what many can never even hope to earn.

markodaly · 24-01-2020 01:38PM

blanch152 wrote: »

Varadkar demolished the SSIA schemes in the debate last night, it could well be back to the drawing board for FF and Labour.

SSIA brings back memories of the boom and the bust. FF may well have called them the breakfast roll scheme.

markodaly · 24-01-2020 01:41PM

FF launching their manifesto today, except they are having 5 days launching their entire manifesto. Yes not one, not two....but FIVE!

FF trying to be the Cute Whore one time too many IMO>

Dytalus · 24-01-2020 01:58PM

Whelo79 wrote: »

I can't believe people actually just accept USC now. It was supposed to be a temporary measure during an extraordinary period. Over 10 years later now and it's still on every payslip.

It's a fairer tax for the average worker than Income tax, and it ensures more people contribute to public services with its broader tax base. Some absurd percentage (close to one-third) of people pay no income tax of any kind. While I'm fully understanding that we can't insist someone on €18,000 a year pay a 10-20% tax rate on all of it (it would pretty much incentivise them into quitting and going on welfare), having almost a million workers not contributing anything at all makes the burden much heavier for everyone else. Taxing a tiny (a la, the 0.5% rate currently in place. Could probably bring that up to 1% without drastically reducing quality of life for most people on it) percentage on the almost one million workers not currently paying income tax is better than suddenly jumping to 20% for the other two-thirds. Our exchequer would take in considerably more tax a year, and since USC only kicks in at €13,000 there's still a safety net for those earning below full-time minimum wage.

PLUS, a number of things which can be used to reduce your IT (or straight up do not count towards it) do not occur in USC. Most of those items favour the wealthier, higher-earning members of society. It's also fully possible to be earning just a bit higher than the average wage (which, given the rising cost of living in the state, is hardly 'loads of money') and be in the 52% tax bracket (between IT, USC, and PRSI). Get rid of IT and replace it with higher USC rates and we'd likely take in more tax while alleviating the squeeze on the average worker. We broaden the tax base, have more brackets to allow for the middle class to no longer be paying the same rates as millionaires, and remove a number of legal tools for reducing taxes which disproportionately help out the already wealthy at the expense of the average worker.

L1011 · 24-01-2020 02:51PM

Whelo79 wrote: »

If they want to earn 95k let them go and be an accountant so. I don't believe any politician should get 'rich' from doing the job. The same way as no nurse is every going to be rich. On one hand politicians are overpaid and nurses are underpaid.

When you take into account all the allowances they get and the pension it comes in way above 95k anyway.

Do you want to ensure that absolutely nobody but the personally wealthy go in to politics?

TDs salaries are probably around the right level. Seanad ones are not unless they officially make it part time. Huge number of careers where you'll make that salary a few years from graduation

Aspects of the expenses system are nuts and they shouldn't get a cent more for committee work though

is_that_so · 24-01-2020 02:52PM

robman60 wrote: »

I see Patrick Power has odds for every constituency now. I'm surprised to see Helen McEntee is "only" 1/3. I would have thought she was as dead a cert as they come.

Casey is predicted to do brilliantly in both his two constituencies! Fitzpatrick in the running in Louth is a surprise claim as he could barely poll with a party backing him!

L1011 · 24-01-2020 02:57PM

Small enough bets alter small markets heavily. A few Casey bros convinced he's going to win putting 50 on each would hugely distort it,

is_that_so · 24-01-2020 02:59PM

L1011 wrote: »

Small enough bets alter small markets heavily. A few Casey bros convinced he's going to win putting 50 on each would hugely distort it,

TG4 poll has him almost one of first eliminated and there's no reason to believe his numbers are not poor in the other one.

is_that_so · 24-01-2020 03:12PM

Whelo79 wrote: »

I can't believe people actually just accept USC now. It was supposed to be a temporary measure during an extraordinary period. Over 10 years later now and it's still on every payslip.

It's a perfect tax on income that very few can escape. People may not like it but it is a fair tax. The €4bn it takes in would be very hard to replace although SF have notions that higher tax on the "rich" and the MNCs will pay for it. All it does is put more pressure elsewhere, a lot more seeing at they also want to end the LPT as well.

Geuze · 24-01-2020 03:19PM

Whelo79 wrote: »

If they want to earn 95k let them go and be an accountant so. I don't believe any politician should get 'rich' from doing the job. The same way as no nurse is every going to be rich. On one hand politicians are overpaid and nurses are underpaid.

When you take into account all the allowances they get and the pension it comes in way above 95k anyway.

Irish nurses are well-paid relative to other countries.

TD wages are not high.

I accept that the expenses are too much.

And full service for the pension at 20 years is too low, yes, ok.

Geuze · 24-01-2020 03:19PM

Whelo79 wrote: »

I can't believe people actually just accept USC now. It was supposed to be a temporary measure during an extraordinary period. Over 10 years later now and it's still on every payslip.

It replaced two previous taxes, one of which had been around for a long time.

Geuze · 24-01-2020 03:23PM

droidus wrote: »

Yep, the choice to cut social expenditure and transfer public wealth into private hands.

Ok.

Social benefits expenditure has been rising since 2014.

Abel Ruiz · 24-01-2020 03:26PM

L1011 wrote: »

TDs salaries are probably around the right level.

Agree with you there.
But what about the expenses?
What about the pensions?

Geuze · 24-01-2020 03:27PM

droidus wrote: »

The fact is that deprivation is much worse than it was in 2008. There's a s*it load of people barely surviving. One major shock will push them over the edge and we'll be left facing social problems of enormous magnitude.

Let us check.

2008 SILC

https://www.cso.ie/en/media/csoie/releasespublications/documents/silc/2008/silc_2008.pdf

75% = not deprived
11.1% = 1 item
13.8% = 2+ items

2018 SILC

https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-silc/surveyonincomeandlivingconditionssilc2018/

70.9% = not deprived
13.9% = 1 item
15.1% = 2+ items

Yes, reported material deprivation is worse, although I wouldn't say "much worse".

Geuze · 24-01-2020 03:30PM

Abel Ruiz wrote: »

Agree with there.
But what about the expenses?
What about the pensions?

The pension is the exact same as any other PS pension,

except

that they only need 20 years service to accrue a full pension.

beggars_bush · 24-01-2020 03:46PM

Pay them a bit more and cut the expenses.
Especially unvouched.
I mean, what other public sector job has unvouched expenses?

General Election and Government Formation Megathread (see post #1)

Comments