Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

The Anti-Austerity Crowd

12467…14

Comments

  • #92
    NIMAN
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,344 ✭✭✭✭NIMAN


    For me the anti-austerity crowd talk the talk that the man in the street wants to hear, but in reality they never seem to give an idea that would work in the real world. Its very easy to say "the common man can't take any more taxes or cuts", but none of them would succeed in any way if handed the power to sort it out.

    The movement for me was summed up recently listening to a People Before Profit candidate on local radio up here in Donegal. He was on chatting about how unfair the water charges were and with it being a rainy day he said "look at it, its pissing down outside, why do they have to charge for water?" Total nonsense. Of course the useless interviewer let this comment go unchallenged.

    Thing is, its hard to be a voice in favour of any charges, as people think you are just some sort of fascist. Our property charges are a lot smaller than NI, yet listen to the moaning (and don't believe the hype that they get a lot of services for their money). Other countries charge for water, but you'd think it only existed in Ireland.

    As soon as I hear a realistic option from one of these folk, other than 'tax the rich', then I might consider taking them more seriously.


  • #93
    KyussBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭KyussBishop


    Bongalongherb wrote: »
    Will do. Sh!t, it almost had me there watching it.
    If you find economists you can identify as Post-Keynesian, they are leading the way in rewriting/reforming economics, to take the monetary system into account. A particularly good one is Steve Keen.

    There are a lot of different views on how the monetary system should be reformed (even among Post-Keynesians), and there are other authors who favour public banking (a very powerful idea, which Ireland could also greatly benefit from), such as Ellen Brown - she's very good at forming an understandable narrative on the topic.

    There are also yet more flavours of monetary reformists, like the Positive Money crowd in the UK (there's an Irish 'Sensible Money' site inspired from them), and one of the most important mainstream writers on it, is Martin Wolf - some important articles from him here:
    http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/46a1ce84-bf2a-11e3-a4af-00144feabdc0.html?siteedition=intl
    http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/7f000b18-ca44-11e3-bb92-00144feabdc0.html?siteedition=intl


  • #94
    mickydoomsux
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,287 ✭✭✭mickydoomsux


    NIMAN wrote: »
    For me the anti-austerity crowd talk the talk that the man in the street wants to hear, but in reality they never seem to give an idea that would work in the real world. Its very easy to say "the common man can't take any more taxes or cuts", but none of them would succeed in any way if handed the power to sort it out.

    The movement for me was summed up recently listening to a People Before Profit candidate on local radio up here in Donegal. He was on chatting about how unfair the water charges were and with it being a rainy day he said "look at it, its pissing down outside, why do they have to charge for water?" Total nonsense. Of course the useless interviewer let this comment go unchallenged.

    Thing is, its hard to be a voice in favour of any charges, as people think you are just some sort of fascist. Our property charges are a lot smaller than NI, yet listen to the moaning (and don't believe the hype that they get a lot of services for their money). Other countries charge for water, but you'd think it only existed in Ireland.

    As soon as I hear a realistic option from one of these folk, other than 'tax the rich', then I might consider taking them more seriously.

    We're very used to not paying for certain things and just take them for granted.

    People go nuts when they are asked to foot the bill for a "free" service.


  • #95
    Bongalongherb
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,766 ✭✭✭Bongalongherb


    NIMAN wrote: »
    For me the anti-austerity crowd talk the talk that the man in the street wants to hear, but in reality they never seem to give an idea that would work in the real world. Its very easy to say "the common man can't take any more taxes or cuts", but none of them would succeed in any way if handed the power to sort it out.

    The movement for me was summed up recently listening to a People Before Profit candidate on local radio up here in Donegal. He was on chatting about how unfair the water charges were and with it being a rainy day he said "look at it, its pissing down outside, why do they have to charge for water?" Total nonsense. Of course the useless interviewer let this comment go unchallenged.

    Thing is, its hard to be a voice in favour of any charges, as people think you are just some sort of fascist. Our property charges are a lot smaller than NI, yet listen to the moaning (and don't believe the hype that they get a lot of services for their money). Other countries charge for water, but you'd think it only existed in Ireland.

    As soon as I hear a realistic option from one of these folk, other than 'tax the rich', then I might consider taking them more seriously.

    I just don't have any spare cash left to pay for it, so how in the name of money-trees can I pay for something that I don't have ? the juice is dry, there's no more juice.


  • #96
    NIMAN
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,344 ✭✭✭✭NIMAN


    Perhaps some can't pay, but plenty can and simply jump on the 'won't pay' bandwagon.

    A couple of years ago we had the anti-crowd telling people not to pay their property tax. Many didn't. Now these folk are getting hit with back charges, fines, interest, penalties etc. I heard a member of the public on the radio recently saying "those guys told me not to pay and now they are going to take it out of my wages, where are they now that I am getting hit with interest".

    Good point, and more reason not to listen to them I say.


  • Advertisement
  • #97
    Bongalongherb
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,766 ✭✭✭Bongalongherb


    NIMAN wrote: »
    Perhaps some can't pay, but plenty can and simply jump on the 'won't pay' bandwagon.

    A couple of years ago we had the anti-crowd telling people not to pay their property tax. Many didn't. Now these folk are getting hit with back charges, fines, interest, penalties etc. I heard a member of the public on the radio recently saying "those guys told me not to pay and now they are going to take it out of my wages, where are they now that I am getting hit with interest".

    Good point, and more reason not to listen to them I say.

    Yes, I remember that one taken from wages, but this water charge coming up will not be taken from wages or pensions as far as I know at this time. But seriously, if a genuine persons income is all sold out with rent and all the bills and basically €20 left to last the week for food, how can this person pay this charge/charges. I know folk that earn a good wage can afford to pay, but a person that has little left, how can they pay ? when they have basically nothing left.


  • #98
    alb
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,259 ✭✭✭alb


    mickydoomsux wrote: »
    So all money is basically Bitcoins? :D

    You're joking because Bitcoins and most of our euros are both digital, this is true. The difference is that Bitcoins can't just be created on a whim by a central authority, there's an upper limit on them, and a schedule for the creation of them.

    When centrals banks print lots more money it's effectively a stealth tax on savings or on salaries that don't rise, as it devalues every existing unit of that currency.


  • #99
    KyussBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭KyussBishop


    alb wrote: »
    You're joking because Bitcoins and most of our euros are both digital, this is true. The difference is that Bitcoins can't just be created on a whim by a central authority, there's an upper limit on them, and a schedule for the creation of them.

    When centrals banks print lots more money it's effectively a stealth tax on savings or on salaries that don't rise, as it devalues every existing unit of that currency.
    It doesn't devalue/tax anything - taxation, devaluation and inflation are all very different things and shouldn't be mixed up - a limited rate of inflation is perfectly normal.


  • #100
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,798 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    Cazzoenorme wrote: »
    Banks don't actually creat money, they create promises to pay back money.

    And where does that money to pay it back come from in the first place? ;)


  • #101
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,798 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    alb wrote: »
    You're joking because Bitcoins and most of our euros are both digital, this is true. The difference is that Bitcoins can't just be created on a whim by a central authority, there's an upper limit on them, and a schedule for the creation of them.

    When centrals banks print lots more money it's effectively a stealth tax on savings or on salaries that don't rise, as it devalues every existing unit of that currency.

    The other fundamental thing about bitcoin is that it's created without having a larger debt on it. It's just created, without interest, so it doesn't require more lending to pay back the existing debt, as ordinary money does.

    I'm not saying bitcoin is well designed, that's for another thread, but I am saying that its proof of concept - money doesn't have to be created with interest bearing debt attached to it in order to function. The only reason it does is because each person chooses to accept that currency as a form of payment and hardly anyone seems to question how it works.
    If more people did, I'd be astonished if the conversation didn't turn from "reform", or adjusting the existing system, to fundamentally "this system is bollocks, lets go back to the drawing board and rethink the whole thing from scratch".


  • Advertisement
  • #102
    Bruthal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,370 ✭✭✭✭Bruthal


    bluewolf wrote: »
    I hate when they have more things than I do and someone should take their things away from them because it's just like so unfair

    Or..... Look at them, they dont have much, serves them right, I worked harder than them for my millions. Lets take more off them.


  • #103
    Bruthal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,370 ✭✭✭✭Bruthal


    hfallada wrote: »
    They believe rich should pay more, but dont realise they pretty much pay all the taxes in society
    Is that because they are so heavily taxed, or because they are so rich?

    and get very little in return

    Its likely on the way to getting rich, they benefited from the educated skills of others, paid for by all tax payers. They also likely have more influence in society than someone who has nothing.


  • #104
    L'Enfer du Nord
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 587 ✭✭✭L'Enfer du Nord


    beardy_murphy wrote: »
    the " rich " will - should pay

    thats where their arguement starts and ends , their isnt anything more to it
    it actually not as sophisticated as that, it's actually "someone else should pay, but not me"

    "Fairness" is usually also invoked also "fault" or the lack there of,"through no fault of their own". Unfortunately the world's not fair, however it seems fair to me that people should pay to use water.


  • #105
    AnonoBoy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,559 ✭✭✭✭AnonoBoy


    Like most sane people I believe that everyone except for me should pay a fair amount of tax.

    Where's my candidate?


  • #106
    KyussBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭KyussBishop


    The whole 'who to tax' line of argument really is a distraction. The problem, is the ways that wealth can be redistributed upward (from the rest of society to some of the wealthy), and this happens through fraud/corruption and legal means of gaining unearned income (such as by promoting and speculating upon, economic bubbles in various forms - among many other ways).

    I don't get why people focus on the tax issue so much. Right now we're seeing a new chain of events, Property Bubble 2.0, which is probably going to lead to another upward redistribution of wealth, to the well-off folk who get rich through being involved in that - yet nobody gives at toss about that, even though it's a far more important problem than any taxes.


  • #107
    L'Enfer du Nord
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 587 ✭✭✭L'Enfer du Nord


    AnonoBoy wrote: »
    Like most sane people I believe that everyone except for me should pay a fair amount of tax.

    Where's my candidate?

    Why waste time with a candidate openly arguing your case, they may get elected but the are unlikely to be in a position of power, if they do see power real politik will dictate that they won't actually go thru with there promise to tax you less.

    What you need to do is what the rich do, butter up politicians behind the scenes convince them that you are no ordinary person and that every time you take a piss it has a trickle down and has a positive effect on the rest on the economy and the govt.'s chances of reelection. in return they'll introduce tax breaks to help you, 'stimulus' packages to act as price supports for your shoddy produce, they'll even make it easier for you to be a tax exile.

    The anti-austerity crowd are mostly a bunch of retail politics opportunists their only saving grace is they are a bit more out in the open than vested interest lobby groups. Also they'll probably ultimately fail, unlike the developer class who despite losing billions have still mostly managed to keep their mansions etc.


  • #108
    SafeSurfer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,182 ✭✭✭SafeSurfer


    mickydoomsux wrote: »
    We're very used to not paying for certain things and just take them for granted.

    People go nuts when they are asked to foot the bill for a "free" service.

    A "free service" like owning a home?

    Multo autem ad rem magis pertinet quallis tibi vide aris quam allis



  • #109
    Cazzoenorme
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 137 ✭✭Cazzoenorme


    hatrickpatrick wrote: »
    And where does that money to pay it back come from in the first place? ;)

    The cash that customers deposit. The money is just moved around. No new money is actually created.


  • #110
    Cazzoenorme
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 137 ✭✭Cazzoenorme


    KyussBishop wrote: »
    The whole 'who to tax' line of argument really is a distraction. The problem, is the ways that wealth can be redistributed upward (from the rest of society to some of the wealthy), and this happens through fraud/corruption and legal means of gaining unearned income (such as by promoting and speculating upon, economic bubbles in various forms - among many other ways).

    I don't get why people focus on the tax issue so much. Right now we're seeing a new chain of events, Property Bubble 2.0, which is probably going to lead to another upward redistribution of wealth, to the well-off folk who get rich through being involved in that - yet nobody gives at toss about that, even though it's a far more important problem than any taxes.

    If someone takes a risk and invests in an asset to earn profit then they have earned that income imo. What is wrong with speculative trading?


  • #111
    KyussBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭KyussBishop


    Cazzoenorme wrote: »
    The cash that customers deposit. The money is just moved around. No new money is actually created.
    If that were true, the money supply would be the same size as 14 years ago, yet it isn't.

    Since the money supply has grown, where has the new money been introduced to the economy? (what is the point of entry?)


  • Advertisement
  • #112
    KyussBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭KyussBishop


    Cazzoenorme wrote: »
    If someone takes a risk and invests in an asset to earn profit then they have earned that income imo. What is wrong with speculative trading?
    If they're helping to blow up an asset bubble - one which affects all of society negatively, such as the property bubble (helping actively, which includes lobbying, banking and government connections, not just through investing) - in order to either profit from or speculate on that, that is not earned, that is exploiting the property market to enrich a small subset of people, who can afford to speculate in it.


  • #113
    Mr. Incognito
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,798 ✭✭✭Mr. Incognito


    KyussBishop wrote: »
    If that were true, the money supply would be the same size as 14 years ago, yet it isn't.

    Since the money supply has grown, where has the new money been introduced to the economy? (what is the point of entry?)

    It's called quantative easing. I.e the central bank prints more money hoping to inflate the debt away


  • #114
    KyussBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭KyussBishop


    Mr. Incognito wrote: »
    It's called quantative easing. I.e the central bank prints more money hoping to inflate the debt away
    I'm talking about money in nominal terms (i.e. not involving changes in the value of money, but in the quantity of money): Where does the new money come from, if not through bank loans? (debt wasn't even mentioned I don't think)


  • #115
    Cazzoenorme
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 137 ✭✭Cazzoenorme


    KyussBishop wrote: »
    If that were true, the money supply would be the same size as 14 years ago, yet it isn't.

    Since the money supply has grown, where has the new money been introduced to the economy? (what is the point of entry?)

    The central bank prints more money.


  • #116
    Cazzoenorme
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 137 ✭✭Cazzoenorme


    KyussBishop wrote: »
    If they're helping to blow up an asset bubble - one which affects all of society negatively, such as the property bubble (helping actively, which includes lobbying, banking and government connections, not just through investing) - in order to either profit from or speculate on that, that is not earned, that is exploiting the property market to enrich a small subset of people, who can afford to speculate in it.

    Or they could make losses like many have.


  • #117
    KyussBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭KyussBishop


    Cazzoenorme wrote: »
    The central bank prints more money.
    Aaannd...where does it come into the economy?

    Just a reminder as well: You're in disagreement with the Bank of England.


  • #118
    KyussBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭KyussBishop


    Cazzoenorme wrote: »
    Or they could make losses like many have.
    Right so you're justifying deliberately creating an asset bubble that exploits society (like a property bubble), right - nice.

    Not just investing in one, but creating one.


  • #119
    Cazzoenorme
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 137 ✭✭Cazzoenorme


    KyussBishop wrote: »
    Right so you're justifying deliberately creating an asset bubble that exploits society (like a property bubble), right - nice.

    Not just investing in one, but creating one.

    No, I'm advocating people being allowed to invest in assets if they want. If some people want to pay stupid amounts for property or some other asset then that should simply be there problem. With education people can learn when a house is ridiculously overpriced.

    Just because people are free to invest in assets doean't mean you are deliberately creating bubbles or that bubbles will be created.


  • #120
    KyussBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭KyussBishop


    Cazzoenorme wrote: »
    No, I'm advocating people being allowed to invest in assets if they want. If some people want to pay stupid amounts for property or some other asset then that should simply be there problem. With education people can learn when a house is ridiculously overpriced.
    Now you're pretending I made a different argument, to the one I made, and you're attacking a straw-man.

    I have a problem with people creating asset bubbles, that harm society, and using them to speculate and profit from - not merely with speculating.


  • Advertisement
  • #121
    Cazzoenorme
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 137 ✭✭Cazzoenorme


    KyussBishop wrote: »
    Now you're pretending I made a different argument, to the one I made, and you're attacking a straw-man.

    I have a problem with people creating asset bubbles, that harm society, and using them to speculate and profit from - not merely with speculating.

    I never justified "deliberately creating a bubble that exploits society". I believe you are strawmanning me.


Advertisement
Advertisement