Donna Hartnett's letter to the Indo, rejecting taxation & taking back her family

ThunbergsAreGo · 12-11-2014 12:20PM

smash wrote: »

Renting is bloody expensive and in order to buy a house they needed 2 incomes. In order to work they needed childcare. They both worked and they paid childcare and they could afford it. Now the cost of living has increased, taxes have risen and wages have fallen. That's not their fault.

I guess it's at the point now where she's working to live and that's it. She's coasting through life just to pay bills and her family is suffering. She's had enough so she's leaving work to provide her children with the care and attention they deserve.

So this is about her saying one parent shouldnt work so she can "provide her children with the care and attention they deserve"?

iDave · 12-11-2014 12:20PM

So as usual we have people picking holes in the financially stricken civilians argument, for what purpose, to prove the politian's right?

Larbre34 · 12-11-2014 12:20PM

Give me 18% on 18,000 over 4.45% on 400,000 any day.

Anyone who suggests this responsible woman or others like her are guilty of avarice to aspire to own a house and bear a couple of children to love and carry on their family, is a troll.

pookiesboo · 12-11-2014 12:22PM

smoking_kills wrote: »

We had to look at a photo of the picture in the neighbours.

at least your neighbours photo was in colour. Our neighbours photo of wexford was in black and white

Grayson · 12-11-2014 12:23PM

daUbiq wrote: »

I'm presuming you didn't live through the eighties?

If your parents were unemployed in the eighties (most peoples mother didn't work), they were significantly less well off than similarly unemployed or disadvantaged people now. I was born in in the mid seventies and lived through the eighties with my father unemployed for some time... My parents struggled to feed us, clothe us and keep our home in good shape. We did not have a car. We never had the latest toys and very rarely went on holidays. Most of my clothes were hand downs from my cousins.. compare and contrast with disadvantaged families today with their large flat screen TV, regular holidays, sky TV, games consoles, car, etc'.. Am I imagining this?

Same here. One holiday to a caravan that a friend of my parents owned. that was the only holiday i had till I has 16. At the same time I grew up with at least one of my parents working abroad, generally in the UK because of the lack of work here.

We did have a car though. Thanks to living in the middle of the country we had to. It was always some battered old banger which would probably never pass a NCT.

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

Women really were sold a pup,yes go out an have careers as well as bringing up children but the bankers and the financiers copped on to this and just jacked up the prices so that extra income just evaporated

Interests rates were low during the boom and banks had very little control of house prices. they are to blame for lessening control on certain things, but realistically it was due to a lack of oversight from government. banks just took advantage of a situation the government created. And to be fair, if any bank didn't it was going to lose a feck load of business.

Remember in 2007 the government had 60% of it's tax come from the construction industry. When someone pointed out how dangerous that was, especially since a downturn was likely Bertie said they should commit suicide.

FF are a shower of cnuts and I can't see how anyone can ever consider voting for them again.

ThunbergsAreGo · 12-11-2014 12:24PM

Larbre34 wrote: »

Give me 18% on 18,000 over 4.45% on 400,000 any day.

I was talking to my parents on this the other day

"We had to pay 18%"
"Poor you"
"But the house was 21,000"
"Ye feckers"

Percentage of average income is a better way to look at things

batman_oh · 12-11-2014 12:25PM

Caliden wrote: »

Here come the begrudgers....

"oh she over extended herself..." "why did they buy it when they couldn't afford it..."

All from people who are most likely renting or purchased recently when house prices were deflated.

She isn't one of these people who refused to pay her mortgage and skip bills. She took responsibility for her choices and up until now she did nothing about it.

Like many others in similar positions to her family, enough is enough.

Some people replying here are on some seriously high horses and need to have some bloody compassion for their fellow man. How can you sleep at night being so self-centered?

You need to open your eyes to realise that while you might not be affected right now, your time will come and then you'll be screaming for support.

The message conveyed in this quote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_...

applies here. Just because it doesn't affected you directly doesn't mean you should do nothing about it. Think about 20/40/60 years down the line and stop focusing on the next 5-10.

Begrudgers? The default word that is used for nonsense arguments all over Ireland!

Caliden · 12-11-2014 12:26PM

Grayson wrote: »

Remember in 2007 the government had 60% of it's tax come from the construction industry. When someone pointed out how dangerous that was, especially since a downturn was likely Bertie said they should commit suicide.

FF are a shower of cnuts and I can't see how anyone can ever consider voting for them again.

Well it's seems FG are no better and I predict the next bunch will be the same.

If politicians pay was based on GDP we'd have a fighting chance but when they're getting paid to keep their seat they will say whatever it takes and favour the voters with the most power.

batman_oh wrote: »

Begrudgers? The default word that is used for nonsense arguments all over Ireland!

She's middle class with 2 kids and a house paying her bills and yet people think she's some sort of free loader.

By any standards she has a normal family and yet people like you are ignoring her message.

We're all bloody sick and tired of it.

Shiraz 4.99 · 12-11-2014 12:26PM

Larbre34 wrote: »

Give me 18% on 18,000 over 4.45% on 400,000 any day.

Anyone who suggests this responsible woman or others like her are guilty of avarice to aspire to own a house and bear a couple of children to love and carry on their family, is a troll.

Everything about this post depends on what the word "avarice" means.
I have already thanked it cause I think we're on the same wavelength.

smash · 12-11-2014 12:27PM

daUbiq wrote: »

I'm presuming you didn't live through the eighties?

I did live through the 80's. My parents weren't unemployed but I knew a lot of people who's were. I still stand by the argument that you can not compare today's world to back then. Flat screen tv's and all that other non sense that's spouted is just that.. non sense. It's all very cheap these days so it's not like people are spending a fortune on it.

Any working class person in this day and age who doesn't live in a council house is going to be pushing it financially. Rents are higher than mortgages and mortgages are hard to get because deposits are hard to save. If a couple renting in Dublin in their early 20's earning 70k between them wanted a house and kids, it's almost impossible to achieve.

Average house, say 350k means a deposit of 35k. That's a full years salary before tax for one person. If they're spending 1k a month on rent (which is low) then how are they supposed to even save a deposit? If they did save it and wanted kids, childcare is around 1k a month on top of their mortgage. At this point, renting or paying a mortgage becomes very stressful. Is the only option to not have children?

Spudmonkey · 12-11-2014 12:27PM

smoking_kills wrote: »

We had to look at a photo of the picture in the neighbours.

*shakes head* There's always someone worse off than yourself!

Shiraz 4.99 · 12-11-2014 12:28PM

pookiesboo wrote: »

at least your neighbours photo was in colour. Our neighbours photo of wexford was in black and white

Ooooo look at you with your photo, all we had was a pencil drawing of a beach, I say a drawing, more a wavey line in the middle of a page, never knew if it was upsidedown.

mikemac1 · 12-11-2014 12:30PM

Shiraz 4.99 wrote: »

Our parents generation could always survive on the fathers income, service the mortgage, raise 4 or 5 kids, have a holiday every year & run a family car.

Holidays? There was nobody bagging cheap deals and going to Spain in the 80's OP.

A day out to Leisureland in Salthill or a few days in a caravan park would be a good holiday to a lot of Irish families. And a lot didn't even have that. Or a car. Don't you remember thumbing for lifts at the local crossroads? I don't see that anymore

hfallada · 12-11-2014 12:31PM

Im sorry but those forgot what Ireland like pre-2000? There was mass emigration in the 1950s, we had a bit of growth 1960-1973. Then from 1973 to mid 1990s, we had mass emigration, unemployment around 18% and Debt to GDP peaked at 129% in 1987. Even now our unemployment is 11% and we have the fastest growing economy in Europe

I dont know were this sense entitlement comes from. But had nothing until the mid 1990s. Unless we cut the deficit, the only thing that this generation is leaving for the next is a **** ton of debt.

anncoates · 12-11-2014 12:33PM

To be fair, only the wealthy are immune from the inherent financial risk of home ownership, raising a family etc. It's hard to be completely prepared for any number of variables like ill health, economic changes, and arbitrary taxes. If everybody were prudent to that maniacal degree, hardly anybody would buy a house or have children.

Personally I don't mind water charges per se (although as usual, I disagree with the incompetence and cronyism of the setup as ever) and I actually agree that the Irish electorate love the strange concept of low income taxes yet excellent services.

I'd willingly pay higher direct taxes for guaranteed better services like transport, health subsidized childcare etc but what we get here is a punishing cost of living coupled with a raft of arbitrary taxes and charges that see middle earners as an endless piggy bank to be raided in order to plug up the wasteful and incompetent economic management of the country.

Grayson · 12-11-2014 12:33PM

smash wrote: »

Renting is bloody expensive and in order to buy a house they needed 2 incomes. In order to work they needed childcare. They both worked and they paid childcare and they could afford it. Now the cost of living has increased, taxes have risen and wages have fallen. That's not their fault.

I guess it's at the point now where she's working to live and that's it. She's coasting through life just to pay bills and her family is suffering. She's had enough so she's leaving work to provide her children with the care and attention they deserve.

they got a mortgage they thought they could afford. A brief look at history will show the last 100 years littered with depressions, recessions and house market collapses. I wouldn't consider myself to be too financially conservative but I was amazed at how much people were willing to spend on crappy houses and apts that were made from plasterboard. And no-one thought that it was a risk.

I'm not saying that the buyers shoulder all the blame. There's a lot the government avoided doing, but I think buyers have to shoulder part of it.

Caliden · 12-11-2014 12:37PM

Grayson wrote: »

they got a mortgage they thought they could afford. A brief look at history will show the last 100 years littered with depressions, recessions and house market collapses. I wouldn't consider myself to be too financially conservative but I was amazed at how much people were willing to spend on crappy houses and apts that were made from plasterboard. And no-one thought that it was a risk.

I'm not saying that the buyers shoulder all the blame. There's a lot the government avoided doing, but I think buyers have to shoulder part of it.

She is....

But what happens when there is yet another tax (tax increase) to pay?

Take into account fuel, motor, property and USC. Would you actually factor those costs into buying a home? How could you have the foresight to even imagine those?
Maybe fuel/motor but the other 2 were pulled out of thin air and given a name in order to take in more money.

smash · 12-11-2014 12:39PM

Grayson wrote: »

they got a mortgage they thought they could afford. A brief look at history will show the last 100 years littered with depressions, recessions and house market collapses.

Would you ever give over! Like I said already, renting is as expensive if not more than a mortgage so it's a catch 22. If they didn't buy they'd still be paying through the roof. Probably more so than they are.

If there's a cycle there, then the banks and regulators are responsible for ensuring that things don't get out of hand. But they never do that.

Grayson wrote: »

I wouldn't consider myself to be too financially conservative but I was amazed at how much people were willing to spend on crappy houses and apts that were made from plasterboard. And no-one thought that it was a risk.

It's how they're built these days. That's not going to change unless you build your own house, and good luck with that anywhere in Dublin.

valoren · 12-11-2014 12:41PM

There's a lot to be said for having a stiff upper lip.

You'd swear we're living in the Gulag's reading that letter.

Alf Veedersane · 12-11-2014 12:42PM

Grayson wrote: »

FF are a shower of cnuts and I can't see how anyone can ever consider voting for them again.

You'd think so. But they will.

And this is doing the rounds on Facebook and people are talking about ousting the government as soon as they can...but the alternatives are as depressing.

Shiraz 4.99 · 12-11-2014 12:42PM

Grayson wrote: »

FF are a shower of cnuts and I can't see how anyone can ever consider voting for them again.

Herein lies the problem for the squeezed middle classes.
FF - No, cause they haven't learned yet
FG - No, cause they've heaped pain on the coping class
Labour - No, why would I vote for socialists, I'm middle class ffs
Shinners - No, economic policy lol[shakes head] & the guns & the kiddy fiddling but mostly the economics stupid
Greens - No, stag hunting bills are just what we needed when the Troika were at our doors
Lucinda New Party - No, that's all we need, another bunch of conservative christians

So who do we vote for ? ? ? ?
The next Dail is going to be 50% Indepenents, bring back King Ming to rule them all.

dark crystal · 12-11-2014 12:42PM

Caliden wrote: »

She is....

But what happens when there is yet another tax (tax increase) to pay?

Take into account fuel, motor, property and USC. Would you actually factor those costs into buying a home?

Don't forget the rising cost of health insurance, education fees and energy bills.

Also, since this couple bought their house, the government have been kind enough to add property tax and water tax to their outgoings.

Grayson · 12-11-2014 12:43PM

Caliden wrote: »

Well it's seems FG are no better and I predict the next bunch will be the same.

If politicians pay was based on GDP we'd have a fighting chance but when they're getting paid to keep their seat they will say whatever it takes and favour the voters with the most power.

FG inherited a sh1tstorm. Thousands were leaving the country every week. Tax receipts accounted for just over half of expenditure. FG made cutbacks on expenditure but we were, and still are, at a point where government expenditure outstrips income. To make up the difference the government needed the bailout money and the terms that came with it (although once again it was FF who signed up to that).

FG have had to make cutbacks and that has made them unpopular but it was FF who instigated the mess.

The one thing about FG is that they have feck all charisma and they have made some almighty fcuk ups. Take Irish water. Metering is not a bad idea. If people who were on a low income and ppl like pensioners were exempt, along with a fair price for water, then it would have been more acceptable. It might not have been liked but it could have been sold as a fair tax.
That along with the cluster fcuk that is Irish water and Dennis O'Brien have made the whole thing a fiasco.

However from an economic point of view, FG have been far more sensible than FF and we are in a recovery because of them. It's just that it will take a few more years for it to become concrete and for your average joe to feel it.

smash · 12-11-2014 12:46PM

dark crystal wrote: »

Don't forget the rising cost of health insurance, education fees and energy bills.

While people talk about taxes they forget all of this. There was a great article a while back and I can't remember where it was but it looked at the costs of average bills now compared to 2007 and they've more than doubled in some cases.

Caliden · 12-11-2014 12:46PM

dark crystal wrote: »

Don't forget the rising cost of health insurance, education fees and energy bills.

Also, since this couple bought their house, the government have been kind enough to add property tax and water tax to their outgoings.

Which is why the protests have such a following.

It's yet another tax and just given a name because it's political suicide to just say "we're adding a new tax simply called 'slush fund' and it's 400 euro a year".

Normal people are living to work. There's more to life than that.

The Backwards Man · 12-11-2014 12:47PM

valoren wrote: »

There's a lot to be said for having a stiff upper lip.

You'd swear we're living in the Gulag's reading that letter.

Childcare was free under Stalin. Maybe Ms Hartnett would like to see a move in that direction.

valoren · 12-11-2014 12:51PM

In the fell clutch of circumstance
I have not winced nor cried aloud.
Under the bludgeonings of chance
My head is bloody, but unbowed.

It matters not how tough life can be
A letter to the government will make them see.
That we're all in the sh1tter
But still everything should be free.

smash · 12-11-2014 12:52PM

Grayson wrote: »

However from an economic point of view, FG have been far more sensible than FF and we are in a recovery because of them. It's just that it will take a few more years for it to become concrete and for your average joe to feel it.

We are in a 'recovery' not because of FG but because of the rules set out in the bailout plan. Any government would have had to follow those rules. What FG have done, is they have gone beyond the rules and cut funding for areas such as special needs, medical cards etc. all areas that were not in the plan and didn't need to be done, but were done because they still spend too much on crap such as the IW set up which was insane. There's no doubt that FG have damaged the country more than they needed to.

Recovery my arse, I don't know one person benefiting from it.

BoJack Horseman · 12-11-2014 12:55PM

If the government were smart, they would axe the water charge & also repeal the income tax reduction coming in january.

It would benefit the state coffers more than water charges would, and keep Mrs Hartnett happy.

BoJack Horseman · 12-11-2014 12:57PM

smash wrote: »

We are in a 'recovery' not because of FG but because of the rules set out in the bailout plan. Any government would have had to follow those rules. What FG have done, is they have gone beyond the rules and cut funding for areas such as special needs, medical cards etc. all areas that were not in the plan and didn't need to be done, but were done because they still spend too much on crap such as the IW set up which was insane. There's no doubt that FG have damaged the country more than they needed to.

If you have an alternate solution to fixing a €12bn primary deficit in 4 years we'd love to hear it.

Donna Hartnett's letter to the Indo, rejecting taxation & taking back her family

Comments