Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Anglo Fail

13»

Comments

  • #62
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    You don't need a link to do basic maths. Check the cost of the bailout and divide it by the population.

    No, but you do need some justification. Tax is in no sense divided equally between all tax payers, and that cost is not levelled against someone getting their money back under the guarantee as was implied by the context.

    It's a nice throwaway line, but given the context (the 'little people' getting it in the neck) I'm afraid I have to say it smells quite a bit of the cattle shed. Contrary to the repetitive complaints on internet forums and Joe Duffy, it's not the little people who pay taxes - that's a myth. The little people, by and large, receive taxes.

    Also, I appreciate that you really hate paying out any money, but not everyone would accept that the extra taxes aren't preferable to a bank collapse.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • #63
    Laminations
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,693 ✭✭✭Laminations


    You really will go to any lengths to defend the banking strategy (the greens role particularly). Cuts in services will affect the little people, and even if the 18,000 a head debt is burdened by the better off, unless they were part of the decision making at these private banks, they shouldn't be paying for them, you consistently point to a banking collapse as the alternative to the route taken- newsflash, there were many alternatives. The government ballsed it up and you for some reason can't admit it.


  • #64
    recedite
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,989 ✭✭✭✭recedite


    Boskowski wrote: »
    I don't care what anyone says, call me a socialist, but the banks and the big businesses need to be put on the curb. And the political system needs a bloody cleanup operation as well.

    Drastic, is it? Yes, but I think it's necessary.

    Doesn't matter what country you look at, western democracies are all about letting the plebs thinks they run the show because the can vote in their representatives every - whatever it is - 4 or 5 years, but of course they're not our 'representatives' at all and in reality we couldn't be farther away from running the show unless we were actually living on the moon.

    Behind the curtains the real show happens and this is were big business fights over our money that is supposedly raised to fund things for our benefit like roads, hospitals, schools and stuff. Our 'representatives' are paid off by said big businesses it's so obvious it's actually nauseating. Just look who sits on what board and has shares in what bank and whatnot.

    Every state project has exploding costs in the area of trebling or quadroupling. They can't even build a bloody motorway from tax payers money without creating some scam scheme where the tax payer could afford 200 miles motorway but couldn't afford a 350m bridge so despite having paid for the entire thing already we also have to pay fees for the next 120 years so that someone can make a ginormous profit when the whole thing should have nothing to do with them in the first place. Just an example. The scam is everywhere and it's so obvious it's nauseating. Sorry I'm repeating myself.

    If the whole NAMA and Anglo scan is not tipping is over the edge I don't know what will.
    Ah hold on, no tipping over. We're too busy in the rat race paying our mortgage and numbing our minds with x-factor and premiership football instead of kicking ass where it's warranted.

    The whole thing is systemic and needs a rather dramatic cleanup. I'm not saying there should be no businesses and there should be no profits. No problem with that, but our current political and economical system makes a mockery of the term representative democracy and this bullsh1t needs to end. We, the plebs, need to take the power back.
    Well said, Botoxski. Viva la Revolution!


  • #65
    Liam Byrne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,163 ✭✭✭✭Liam Byrne


    Scofflaw wrote: »
    No, but you do need some justification. Tax is in no sense divided equally between all tax payers

    Oh, that's true for sure. Remind me again why your party supports a government that includes a corrupt individual who has no tax clearance cert ?
    Scofflaw wrote: »
    , and that cost is not levelled against someone getting their money back under the guarantee as was implied by the context.

    I have no idea what you are getting at here. If someone has €18,000 in the bank and they have to pay €18,000 in taxes to get back, then the bailout has gained them nothing.
    Scofflaw wrote: »
    It's a nice throwaway line, but given the context (the 'little people' getting it in the neck) I'm afraid I have to say it smells quite a bit of the cattle shed. Contrary to the repetitive complaints on internet forums and Joe Duffy, it's not the little people who pay taxes - that's a myth. The little people, by and large, receive taxes.

    Condescending bull, simular to what we've heard elsewhere. But since you love your links, I'll bite : where is your link to back up your claim that "the little people, by and large, receive taxes" ?

    And remember you're not allowed talk in generalisations or averages, because you wouldn't let me do so.

    How does someone who's, for example, not on social welfare, has no kids, and has forked out for their own house, etc, "receive taxes" ?

    These annoying "little people" as you call them don't have €18,000 in the bank. So they are completely losing the €18,000

    A typical person might have, say, €18,000 - €50,000 in the bank, so they might gain slightly.

    Someone with €1,800,000 in the bank would probably be happy enough that they were paying 10% extra to make sure they got their cash.

    So who's gaining more in that scenario ?

    You guessed it, and even if the averages aren't as "average", it sure ain't the "little people" that you so condescendingly refer to.
    Scofflaw wrote: »
    but not everyone would accept that the extra taxes aren't preferable to a bank collapse.

    Well if we were given the facts and a choice, I could make an objective decision as to what I wanted and accept a democratic decision.

    I don't appreciate being lied to with new revelations as to how much worse things really are every few weeks, and neither do the EU or the international markets.

    I also don't appreciate that Iceland and other countries are on their way out and have already gone after some of those responsible while Ireland's politicians have done feck-all worthwhile over the last 2 years other than ensure that vested interests and connected people get their pensions and payoffs and get to transfer their cash to their wives.


  • #66
    ei.sdraob
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭ei.sdraob


    Liam has a very good point

    instead of solving the Anglo problem there and then, liquidating the bank and recovering as much money in firesales and pushing the EUrozone to come up with a eurozone wide deposit guarantee (which will be required one way or another)

    We will pay larger amount that would be needed to pay depositors via reduced services (hello hospital closures) and more taxes for a very long time

    there is no free lunch


    Actually who said that depositors would have had to be paid back a cent in 2008? Moving all of the Anglo depositors (whoever they were) to the other banks and putting a gurantee (only for depositors none of this bondholder crap) and pushing the eurozone members for a larger eurizone backing/support would have solved the problem there and then


    instead after 2 years we have more uncertainty, more bull**** and still in a deep recession


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    Scarab80
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 802 ✭✭✭Scarab80


    BingoMingo wrote: »
    "given the broad similarities in the type and geography of their property-related lending, their common implicit reliance on the backing of the Irish State, and even name confusion."

    This Means, People of Ireland, you are all so stupid you can't tell the difference between AIB and Anglo. We had to bail Anglo out in case you got confused and thought we were talking about AIB. !!

    4FS.- It Means "We had to spend 29Bn cos our country is populated by idiots who can't spell".

    No it doesn't. It means international news agencies getting AIB and Anglo Irish Bank mixed up, which was still happening up to a few weeks ago.
    BingoMingo wrote: »
    This is,(according to Vincent Browne) Ireland's most powerful man talking. God Help Us.

    Sorry Scarab80 but you picked the wrong muppet there!! He is definitely on my No Fly List.

    With respect, Patrick Honohan is probably the most respected economist in the country and has also proved himself on the international stage as lead economist and senior financial sector adviser with the World Bank.

    Unless you have personally reviewed primary documentation in relation to Anglo and the bailout you are relying on someone elses interpretation of the figures.

    As an interest observer I'll go with the respected economist who has produced a detailed 180 page report on the crisis rather than a random internet poster who feels the need to use bold, italics and underline to get his point across, call me crazy!


  • #68
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    Liam Byrne wrote: »
    Oh, that's true for sure. Remind me again why your party supports a government that includes a corrupt individual who has no tax clearance cert ?



    I have no idea what you are getting at here. If someone has €18,000 in the bank and they have to pay €18,000 in taxes to get back, then the bailout has gained them nothing.



    Condescending bull, simular to what we've heard elsewhere. But since you love your links, I'll bite : where is your link to back up your claim that "the little people, by and large, receive taxes" ?

    And remember you're not allowed talk in generalisations or averages, because you wouldn't let me do so.

    How does someone who's, for example, not on social welfare, has no kids, and has forked out for their own house, etc, "receive taxes" ?

    These annoying "little people" as you call them don't have €18,000 in the bank. So they are completely losing the €18,000

    A typical person might have, say, €18,000 - €50,000 in the bank, so they might gain slightly.

    Someone with €1,800,000 in the bank would probably be happy enough that they were paying 10% extra to make sure they got their cash.

    So who's gaining more in that scenario ?

    You guessed it, and even if the averages aren't as "average", it sure ain't the "little people" that you so condescendingly refer to.



    Well if we were given the facts and a choice, I could make an objective decision as to what I wanted and accept a democratic decision.

    I don't appreciate being lied to with new revelations as to how much worse things really are every few weeks, and neither do the EU or the international markets.

    I also don't appreciate that Iceland and other countries are on their way out and have already gone after some of those responsible while Ireland's politicians have done feck-all worthwhile over the last 2 years other than ensure that vested interests and connected people get their pensions and payoffs and get to transfer their cash to their wives.

    The fact that the "little people" receive taxes rather than pay them has been dealt with at some length on the "Half don't pay taxes" thread. The difference in Ireland's Gini coefficient before and after taxes and transfers makes the difference visible in summary form. You can also refer to Ronan Lyon's post on the matter, which is linked there.

    The spread of tax payment is also geographic - I have a post summarising the difference in tax and transfers between the different counties - over the decade the bank bailout is expected to be spread over, I and other Dublin taxpayers will in any case have transferred that amount or more to rural taxpayers like yourself.

    If you're going to do the maths, you should really do all the maths, rather than trotting out simplistic headline-grabbers, although I appreciate the latter help fuel your apparent state of perpetual outrage.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • #69
    Liam Byrne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,163 ✭✭✭✭Liam Byrne


    Scofflaw wrote: »
    The fact that the "little people" receive taxes rather than pay them has been dealt with at some length on the "Half don't pay taxes" thread. The difference in Ireland's Gini coefficient before and after taxes and transfers makes the difference visible in summary form. You can also refer to Ronan Lyon's post on the matter, which is linked there.

    The spread of tax payment is also geographic - I have a post summarising the difference in tax and transfers between the different counties - over the decade the bank bailout is expected to be spread over, I and other Dublin taxpayers will in any case have transferred that amount or more to rural taxpayers like yourself.

    If you're going to do the maths, you should really do all the maths, rather than trotting out simplistic headline-grabbers, although I appreciate the latter help fuel your apparent state of perpetual outrage.

    Ah well, it was worth a try to get you to be consistent, but now you've gone from blankly blaming "little people" to blaming the bane of Greens existence : "rural" people....

    What about little people living in Dublin ?

    For someone who supposedly dislikes generalisations, you're making a lot of poor, generalised statements in order to support your objectionable stance.....actually let's make that stances, since you'd prefer if we'd all paid twice as much for crap housing in Dublin, making everyone worse off due to extra demand.

    And nice avoidance of the questions re Ahern's tax status.


Advertisement