Labour want to tax workers to pay for social welfare

jonniebgood1 · 01-07-2012 08:25PM #1

Joan Burton wants to raise PRSI payments on workers.
Gilmore has defended her right to this opinion, hence I would conclude he supports the idea.
Source- http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0701/tanaiste-defends-burtons-prsi-comments.html

This follows soon after the suppressed report by the ERSI that said "a high proportion of Irish people with children would be better off on the dole than in employment". Source- http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2012/0613/1224317818878.html

Are labour trying to bring about a situation where we are all better off on social welfare- what the hell are they at? Surely at this time they should be encouraging people to work rather than this type of rhetoric which does the opposite. If people get more money on social welfare than if they get a job then they will not look for work. I believe its known as 'incentive to work', something these labour politicians should show some appreciation of.
I find this mind blowingly stupid and it will colour how people vote next time around.

Pat D. Almighty · 01-07-2012 11:53PM

An extra euro per week from both employee and employer wouldn't be such a bad idea, provided we got guarantees that the money would go directly to job creation.

nacimroc · 01-07-2012 11:56PM

After the next election, they will be about as popular as the greens!

They should be sued for calling themselves "Labour" when they should be renamed "welfare".

Its like that jobbridge bull$hit they came up with! Took all the normal paying jobs and made them non-paying! Tesco etc. laughing all the way to the bank everyday!

SMASH THE UNIONS · 02-07-2012 12:01AM

A while back I would have said that this move is Labour playing to its core voters, the working class and the dole underclass (excuse the term, but it refers to that small section of society that chooses to leech off the dole and didn't work even during the boom years). But this block of voters has drifted to Sinn Fein in recent years, giving that party a boost in the polls while Labour's vote share is falling.

Labour has now become the party of choice for the middle class bourgeouis, mainly public sector workers. This explains why Labour is strongest in Dublin, where most of the civil servants live. This also explains why Labour is so protective of the Croke Park Agreement. Without the CPA as a bargaining chip, Labour would lose its entire voter base. Champagne socialists, pseudo intellectuals, and chancers on 6 figure salaries, like Micheal D. Higgins, do the party's image no favour either. They merely highlight how out of touch they are with the blue collar worker, traditional Labour voters.

Joan Burton's latest comments are possibly an attempt to regain the "dole class" vote with unfeasible populist promises of maintaining the current high rate of welfare payments. I'm blue in the face repeating the figures of our budget deficit, but I think we can all acknowledge that the state is spending way more money than it takes in. Instead of taking the sensible option of reducing welfare payments, Labour decides to squeeze even more tax from our over-burdened workers, thereby disincentivising employment. Madness. The name "Labour" has become darkly ironic as the party seems to have no interest in job creation.

I hope current trends continue and that Labour will go the way of the Greens after the next General Election.

Monty Burnz · 02-07-2012 12:05AM

Pat D. Almighty wrote: »

An extra euro per week from both employee and employer wouldn't be such a bad idea, provided we got guarantees that the money would go directly to job creation.

How would the money be spent on 'job creation'? Hire more civil servants?

Good loser · 02-07-2012 12:53AM

She's trying to weasel out of her responsibilities again - as she did last year when she 'reduced' social welfare spending by only two thirds of what was promised.

Hope the Troika forces her to deliver this year.

jank · 02-07-2012 03:48AM

Bizarre statement by Labour. Why tax workers when the dole is one of the highest in Europe? They should be looking to cut spending rather then looking to raise revenue to match their current spending. FG must be pissing themselves. Whatever you think about them, they are by far the most sanest party in the asylum.

Kinski · 02-07-2012 07:15AM

What exactly did she say? The news article linked states "Ms Burton said the benefits that are paid far exceed the contributions and said something has to give."

That sounds like she's saying that either PRSI contributions have to rise to reflect the level of payment one will receive if made unemployed, or else the level of payment has to be reduced.

jonniebgood1 · 02-07-2012 07:32AM

Kinski wrote: »

What exactly did she say? The news article linked states "Ms Burton said the benefits that are paid far exceed the contributions and said something has to give."

That sounds like she's saying that either PRSI contributions have to rise to reflect the level of payment one will receive if made unemployed, or else the level of payment has to be reduced.

The Labour leader stood over remarks by Joan Burton, the social protection minister, that PRSI contributions for the social insurance fund needed to be increased.
.....
She said social security contributions in Ireland were "meagre" compared to our EU counterparts. In Ireland, they represented 5.8% of GDP compared to an EU27 average of 10.9%, she said. http://www.irishexaminer.com/archives/2012/0702/ireland/gilmore-backs-burton-over-higher-prsi-199436.html

While she is making her comparisons with the EU27 she should look for average welfare rates and maybe the number of countries that use things such as decreasing welfare to incentivise work. She seems to be talking about all that PRSI covers and as such that needs comparison to see what the 10.9% EU27 figure covers.

antoobrien · 02-07-2012 10:24AM

Pat D. Almighty wrote: »

An extra euro per week from both employee and employer wouldn't be such a bad idea

If we see all welfare allowances cut but €1/week as well grand. There has to be give and take, not just take.

I wonder is Joan forgetting that (according to the latest available income distribution stats) published by the revenue commissioners, of the 2.1m people in the labour market 60% earn less than the average wage?

Or maybe she's remembering that they only contribute abut 6% of PAYE and wants to tap them for some income, without caring that it's making welfare more attractive and ultimately going to make it cost more.

plasmaguy · 02-07-2012 06:51PM

Unfortunately tax rises are inevitable if we are to bridge the gap between what we spend and what we take in which at the moment is about 15 billion a year (nothing to do with bank debts before anyone starts, it's the structural deficit).

tayto lover · 02-07-2012 07:05PM

If they reduce wages by taking more tax or PRSI then it is coming to the stage where it won't be worthwhile working anymore. Surely they can see that. There are far too many deductions from wages already.

gandalf · 02-07-2012 08:22PM

I posted this response elsewhere today.

They should be looking at getting the cost of government under control first and foremost before they cripple both the business and general community with more taxes.

It’s becoming more apparent that all our politicians no matter what hue or leaning they have are living in a different reality to the rest of us.

jonniebgood1 · 03-07-2012 07:08AM

plasmaguy wrote: »

Unfortunately tax rises are inevitable if we are to bridge the gap between what we spend and what we take in which at the moment is about 15 billion a year (nothing to do with bank debts before anyone starts, it's the structural deficit).

They should sort out the waste first- higher grade civil servants for example in planning authorities that were busy 5 years ago but are not now, maybe politicians pensions also- it is hard to take that someone like Martin 'I had nothing to do with those voting machines' Cullen gets a big pension as reward for his mistakes.

Count Dooku · 03-07-2012 07:41AM

nacimroc wrote: »

After the next election, they will be about as popular as the greens!

not if they will do everything to preserve their public sector core voters from real reforms

NinjaK · 03-07-2012 08:33AM

tax is too low for the rich, the dole needs to stay the same.

antoobrien · 03-07-2012 08:57AM

NinjaK wrote: »

tax is too low for the rich, the dole needs to stay the same.

Considering 60% of the labour force pay about 6% of PAYE how do you calculate that?

bonzos · 03-07-2012 10:59AM

Joan should have a look in any betting shop on any work day to see how the SW money is being spent!

Spudmonkey · 03-07-2012 11:22AM

In the remarks Ms Burton said the benefits that are paid far exceed the contributions and said something has to give.

I'm confused by her comments. If she thinks that benefits paid are far too high relative to payments made, would it not make more sense to reduce payments to a level on par with contributions? Why increase contributions?

Smells like a ploy of going after a section of the electorate who they have lost to SF and the ULA.

rasper · 03-07-2012 12:07PM

sounds like another increase tax and then "having to decrease" sw rates to balance out, imagine most workers at this stage are paying more in PRSI and USC than PAYE tax so PRSI is the target.
All sounds like disaster to me no reform just real money sucked out of the economy, who voted for these clowns?

Markcheese · 03-07-2012 02:15PM

"tax the rich " and "dole gets spent in the bookies / pub " are just rhetoric .... The rich are always someone else, ironically for low paid with families the " rich " now include social welfare and pension recipients .
The undeniably rich will just move their homes or a portion of their income out of the state if you over tax ... Lower down the scale don't have that option ....

Something's got to give .....

john47 · 03-07-2012 03:52PM

In an attepmt to stay away form rethoric...

The country is spending too much money and not taking in enough taxes to pay for it.

FF + PD's + Greens created the problems not FG or Labour.

But FG & Labour have to fix it. So what do we suggest...

Reduce taxes - even more of a deficit.
Increase taxes - more unhappy workers.
Reduce S/W - more unhappy doel collectors.
Increase S/W - more unhappy workers.

There's no easy solution but the money has to be either added in or taken away. So SF/ULA answer - dont pay your taxes, your household charge or NPPR. We (the elected officials) will also use tax payers money to go around the country advising people NOT to pay their taxes. Hypocritical me thinks...If everyone takes SF/ULA advice there will be not enough taxes paid increasing the deficit even more...

JR

jonniebgood1 · 03-07-2012 03:59PM

john47 wrote: »

FF + PD's + Greens created the problems not FG or Labour.

But FG & Labour have to fix it. So what do we suggest...

Reduce taxes - even more of a deficit.
Increase taxes - more unhappy workers.
Reduce S/W - more unhappy doel collectors.
Increase S/W - more unhappy workers.

A decent analysis but I would point out that the greens came to power in 2007, I would not blame them for our problems which were created long before this. Our main problem being over reliance on unsustainable taxes.

john47 · 03-07-2012 04:02PM

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

A decent analysis but I would point out that the greens came to power in 2007, I would not blame them for our problems .

I blame them as they helped keep FF in power & they voted with FF for the bank bailout which most people would now agree was a huge mistake. (Then again Labour were the only party to vote no to it!)

John Ryan

Count Dooku · 03-07-2012 06:15PM

john47 wrote: »

The country is spending too much money and not taking in enough taxes to pay for it.

Ireland in top 10 to income tax rates, main reasons for lower tax take are low corporate tax and small taxes for low paid workers

john47 wrote: »

FF + PD's + Greens created the problems not FG or Labour.

FG and Labour didn't do anything to stop it and they were competing in populism with FF

john47 wrote: »

Increase taxes - more unhappy workers.

Increase taxes = reduced tax take
In 2011 income tax take + USC + VAT was less than 2010 income tax take + health levy + VAT mostly due reduced spending
All increases for tax take came from corporate tax
You taking money through income taxes as result people spend less, you get less VAT and you have to pay more for welfare for redundant retail workers

Monty Burnz · 03-07-2012 06:25PM

Count Dooku wrote: »

FG and Labour didn't do anything to stop it and they were competing in populism with FF

I've asked this many times but who is to blame for forcing Labour and FG into competing on populist ground? FF or the electorate?

I blame the electorate.

DarkJager · 03-07-2012 06:27PM

Would somebody please remind what this extortionate amount on my wage slip called USC is contributing towards??

Sierra Oscar · 03-07-2012 06:40PM

gandalf wrote: »

I posted this response elsewhere today.

They should be looking at getting the cost of government under control first and foremost before they cripple both the business and general community with more taxes.

It’s becoming more apparent that all our politicians no matter what hue or leaning they have are living in a different reality to the rest of us.

I totally agree with you that we need to cut the cost of our Oireachtas - but you are in a different reality yourself if you think that will even put a dent in our current budget deficit.

In order to tackle the budget deficit in a meaningful manner then either the budget for the Department of Social Protection will have to be reduced, or else we must resort to raising tax rates and broadening the tax base in order to cover the cost of our generous social welfare system.

Hopefully we will have a sensible compromise between the two options.

tayto lover · 03-07-2012 07:26PM

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

I totally agree with you that we need to cut the cost of our Oireachtas - but you are in a different reality yourself if you think that will even put a dent in our current budget deficit.

In order to tackle the budget deficit in a meaningful manner then either the budget for the Department of Social Protection will have to be reduced, or else we must resort to raising tax rates and broadening the tax base in order to cover the cost of our generous social welfare system.

Hopefully we will have a sensible compromise between the two options.

AND not a word about creating jobs and getting money into the economy to make it flourish. Just cut cut cut.

christmas2012 · 03-07-2012 07:29PM

want to cut the cost of welfare? get rid of jobbridge and fas,for a start,as they are a quango that creates unemployment by hogging up what could have been paid jobs advertised..kill two birds with one stone..

DublinWriter · 03-07-2012 07:38PM

This would be the same Joan Burton with the 'special advisor' on €128,000 a year?

Oh God...

I'm self-employed and I pay 5% PRSI for nothing, nada, zip, I'm not entitled to social welfare should my work dry up. I'm paying €2,500 for health insurance for my family with Aviva - and that doesn't even cover our GP or Dentist bills.

I've seen too many examples of people in this country who know how to milk the system. Social welfare is meant to be a safety net, not a bouncy castle.

Labour want to tax workers to pay for social welfare

Comments