Do we pay too much tax for crappy services?

kippy · 02-07-2019 11:08pm

Topgear on Dave wrote: »

It wasn't though. The roads were crap. The bins were cheaper maybe because volume was much less and the council dug a hole, threw the stuff in and covered it over.

The education system at the time was bloody awful, I had kids with what I now know are special needs in my class and they were basically ignored.

Things were always better years ago, don't question it.

mandrake04 · 03-07-2019 11:33am

fliball123 wrote: »

Totally agree 30 years ago your tax covered all our roads (toll roads on the up) , our bins, our water, our property we had bought (although the stamp was ridiculously high) .. Were is all the money going that we are paying

National Debt is over €200billion that’s €42,000 for every man, woman and child or $90,000 per worker in the economy. I read it’s like 3rd highest per capita in the world.

The interest is €10billion per year before you pay anything off the loan, plus try to run the country.

It’s like people who suddenly have a huge personal loan on top of their everyday expenses which are rising such as rent, utilities bills, Petrol/Transport etc etc. They either have to increase their income or simply cut their cloth to suit, if that means living on pot noodles then that what it takes.

fliball123 · 03-07-2019 12:27pm

kippy wrote: »

The public accounts are public documents as far as I know.

That said there isn't a country in the world that are taking in or spending the same as they were 30 years ago

Your point being....that we just keep throwing good money after bad on antiquated out dated systems, work practices and public sector contracts...No thanks I want to see some bang for my buck

kippy · 03-07-2019 12:35pm

fliball123 wrote: »

Your point being....that we just keep throwing good money after bad on antiquated out dated systems, work practices and public sector contracts...No thanks I want to see some bang for my buck

Not at all,
Just pointing out that the public accounts are indeed public - so you can "see" where your money is going and that "our" situation of earning and spending more now rather than 30 years ago isn't a "Only in Ireland" type scenario.

I think we all want to see better value for the taxes we pay - that surely goes without saying.........

fliball123 · 03-07-2019 12:36pm

Topgear on Dave wrote: »

It wasn't though. The roads were crap. The bins were cheaper maybe because volume was much less and the council dug a hole, threw the stuff in and covered it over.

The education system at the time was bloody awful, I had kids with what I now know are special needs in my class and they were basically ignored.

Sorry roads are still crap even do there is a rake load of motor tax collected that should be used for it and yes bins where part of your return for paying tax there were no bin charges how they dealt with the rubbish was on them.

The education system is still awful (still reading peig sayers in some schools for irish) and any time a proposal to try and change is met with a firm NO give us more money from the unions involved. Sorry to hear about your kids but this is still happening people are still slipping through the cracks in education not to mention the people slipping through the cracks in health as in Cervical cancer checks, x-ray scandals and on and on it goes. Yet unions think throw more money at it when there should be more accountability before another penny is put in.

We pay a lot of cash for both sectors and we are not seeing the results in fairness education has come a bit but not where it should be for what we pay in tax for it.

fliball123 · 03-07-2019 12:42pm

mandrake04 wrote: »

National Debt is over €200billion that’s €42,000 for every man, woman and child or $90,000 per worker in the economy. I read it’s like 3rd highest per capita in the world.

The interest is €10billion per year before you pay anything off the loan, plus try to run the country.

It’s like people who suddenly have a huge personal loan on top of their everyday expenses which are rising such as rent, utilities bills, Petrol/Transport etc etc. They either have to increase their income or simply cut their cloth to suit, if that means living on pot noodles then that what it takes.

And the main reasons for the debt is public sector pay & pensions and welfare which was inflated before the bust (benchmarking) in 2007 during the downturn things like increments still going on and having the knock on effect for the ps pensions..your right do. Its been done to death or debt. The banks cost about 42 billion at this point out of that 200billion and if we sold what we own in the banks it could be significantly less.

kippy · 03-07-2019 2:29pm

fliball123 wrote: »

And the main reasons for the debt is public sector pay & pensions and welfare which was inflated before the bust (benchmarking) in 2007 during the downturn things like increments still going on and having the knock on effect for the ps pensions..your right do. Its been done to death or debt. The banks cost about 42 billion at this point out of that 200billion and if we sold what we own in the banks it could be significantly less.

What do you suggest the state does to bring spending and debt under control?

James Brown · 03-07-2019 2:36pm

kippy wrote: »

What do you suggest the state does to bring spending and debt under control?

Some form of accountability might dissuade any 'mistaken' wastes of tax payer monies. Checks and balances obviously need improving. Also a purely accountancy driven cost assessment of buying to use as social housing, renting privately as compared to building social/affordable housing. Basically find which is a better deal for the tax payer.
Be a start.

kippy · 03-07-2019 2:38pm

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Some form of accountability might dissuade any 'mistaken' wastes of tax payer monies. Checks and balances obviously need improving. Also a purely accountancy driven cost assessment of buying to use as social housing, renting privately as compared to building social/affordable housing. Basically find which is a better deal for the tax payer.
Be a start.

The electorate, as a whole, simply don't care from what I can see.

James Brown · 03-07-2019 3:29pm

kippy wrote: »

The electorate, as a whole, simply don't care from what I can see.

It would be nice if any elected government took such measures. We can hope.

Melanchthon · 03-07-2019 5:02pm

LeBash wrote: »

By the national debt and the money still being borrowed, I'd say we aren't paying enough tax.

Yeah the services suck as a whole when compared to some parts of continental Europe but I'd prefer to have them there than not to be honest.

Equally we are miles ahead of most countries in the word. Mexico for example doesnt have a postal service, or at least a mate told me that over a few pints and I believed him.

Ironically though for the region of mexico I saw it actually has a better coach and bus service than Ireland. Coaches in particular much nicer with the higher class ones having toilets and working air conditioning

I would honestly say that I would be happy for bus eirrean to be shut down, private sector taking over longer routes as they basically have already with customers using Gobus,City link, DublinCoach and Aircoach far more for Dublin-galway Dublin-Cork and Dublin-Belfast as busses are nicer, quicker and have toilets.

Subsidise regional networks with an emphasis on reliability and time tables that work for those in employment, while back was using a bus eireann would get into work half an hour early every single day as the correct bus for my working hours would not turn up 50% of time, drivers that consistently don't turn up should be pensioned off

James Brown · 03-07-2019 5:17pm

Melanchthon wrote: »

Ironically though for the region of mexico I saw it actually has a better coach and bus service than Ireland. Coaches in particular much nicer with the higher class ones having toilets and working air conditioning

I would honestly say that I would be happy for bus eirrean to be shut down, private sector taking over longer routes as they basically have already with customers using Gobus,City link, DublinCoach and Aircoach far more for Dublin-galway Dublin-Cork and Dublin-Belfast as busses are nicer, quicker and have toilets.

Subsidise regional networks with an emphasis on reliability and time tables that work for those in employment, while back was using a bus eireann would get into work half an hour early every single day as the correct bus for my working hours would not turn up 50% of time, drivers that consistently don't turn up should be pensioned off

How come any privatisation plans usually mean the tax payer part funds them? Private companies won't supply routes unless there's enough money in it. If they won't and we need subsidise them, we're better off running our own. We can regulate fares and 'subsidise' the public for lower fares.
We often look at something were improvement is needed as a bad idea. It's not always the case.

markodaly · 04-07-2019 1:12am

This is hilarious!!

When asked the following question:

What do you suggest the state does to bring spending and debt under control?

We get this

Matt Barrett wrote:

Some form of accountability might dissuade any 'mistaken' wastes of tax payer monies. Checks and balances obviously need improving. Also a purely accountancy driven cost assessment of buying to use as social housing, renting privately as compared to building social/affordable housing. Basically find which is a better deal for the tax payer.
Be a start.

So far so good....

Then, we get this when an idea on how to save some money, while delivering a service improvement, we get this.

Matt Barrett wrote: »

How come any privatisation plans usually mean the tax payer part funds them? Private companies won't supply routes unless there's enough money in it. If they won't and we need subsidise them, we're better off running our own. We can regulate fares and 'subsidise' the public for lower fares.
We often look at something were improvement is needed as a bad idea. It's not always the case.

A reversal of opinion within a few posts.

To be honest, this ties in with the OP. Why do we get crappy services with our tax money? Well, the answer is above, as exhibited by MattBarrett.

We, the electorate bemoan the government wasting money, but when ideas are thrown about which can save money, then the same people who bemoan the waste, are quick to give out about these ideas, without really examining them.

We accept the status quo of poor return for our tax money because that is the system we want. Hundreds of thousands of people rely on the system being inefficient and poorly run. These people have jobs because of this system and these people vote. Sure, they want efficiency's brought in elsewhere, which would not impact them.

Using the example above. Irish public transport is poor, really really poor. CIE as a semi-state needs serious reform and new blood running the show, but that means getting rid of people from their highly secure pensionable jobs. Sure the teacher or the HSE admin staff could agree with a reform of CIE. After all they would benefit from it...Until of course the barrel of the gun is aimed at their neck.

The HSE is unreformable because of this mindset. Everyone knows it needs reform, but is any politician really going to fire 20,000 admin staff to free up taxpayers money and implement a more technology-driven administered HSE?

So, yea we are a nation of spoofers and hypocrites. We want 'reform' and accountability when its someone else over there, but when it comes closer to home or if we may lose out in a way, then we don't and we want the status quo.

The classic case of all is child benefit. Millionaires can claim it, and its usually spent on fags and drink. A total waste of money giving no discernable benefit to the child but appeases the adults because they vote. The common sense approach would be to scrap it entirely and put it all and more into free full-time Early Childcare education. Makes sense right, but it will be a brave brave soul to run on that platform.

Melanchthon · 04-07-2019 7:37am

Matt Barrett wrote: »

How come any privatisation plans usually mean the tax payer part funds them? Private companies won't supply routes unless there's enough money in it. If they won't and we need subsidise them, we're better off running our own. We can regulate fares and 'subsidise' the public for lower fares.
We often look at something were improvement is needed as a bad idea. It's not always the case.

No I am saying regional routes could remain as semi-state agencies but no longer as part of bus eireann

Geuze · 04-07-2019 10:18am

Direct taxes on many earners are very low.

On income of 48-50k my parents pay 8-10% direct tax (PAYE/USC and PRSI).

In return for the 8-10%, they get:

two medical cards
two free travel passes
free TV licence
35 pm / 420 pa off their elec bill

I've said this many times before, but Ireland is very generous.

markodaly · 04-07-2019 12:03pm

Geuze wrote: »

Direct taxes on many earners are very low.

On income of 48-50k my parents pay 8-10% direct tax (PAYE/USC and PRSI).

In return for the 8-10%, they get:

two medical cards
two free travel passes
free TV licence
35 pm / 420 pa off their elec bill

I've said this many times before, but Ireland is very generous.

Agreed, but look at the types of provisions they get. It's more of subsidising their costs of living rather than providing state-funded services.

We do a lot of putting money back into peoples pockets rather than fund services.

fliball123 · 04-07-2019 12:29pm

kippy wrote: »

The electorate, as a whole, simply don't care from what I can see.

not true the fact is there is no one with any credibility looking to get elected they all look after their pockets first and foremost its very frustrating to look at an election and not have one credible option

Wanderer78 · 04-07-2019 12:32pm

60 billion interest on our(?) National debt is hardly causing issues, is it?

kippy · 04-07-2019 12:42pm

fliball123 wrote: »

not true the fact is there is no one with any credibility looking to get elected they all look after their pockets first and foremost its very frustrating to look at an election and not have one credible option

If there actually were a "DEMAND" within the electorate for actual change, surely people would run to meet this demand. The demand simply isn't there from what I can see outside of a minority of people.

fliball123 · 04-07-2019 12:45pm

kippy wrote: »

If there actually were a "DEMAND" within the electorate for actual change, surely people would run to meet this demand. The demand simply isn't there from what I can see outside of a minority of people.

Its not currently its like a vegetarian waking into a steakhouse looking at the menu and realising that its all meat. There is always at least 30% people who dont bother voting due to this and a lot of the people voting will tell you they are picking the best from a bad bunch. Why dont the cowards have the balls to put a none of the above option on the ballet and see how they go

fliball123 · 04-07-2019 12:46pm

Wanderer78 wrote: »

60 billion interest on our(?) National debt is hardly causing issues, is it?

the 60 billion was paid over the last 10 years ..You should research where and when that debt was built up a lot was pre crash and pre bankers bailout and even after bailing them out we were still borrowing.

kippy · 04-07-2019 2:03pm

fliball123 wrote: »

Its not currently its like a vegetarian waking into a steakhouse looking at the menu and realising that its all meat. There is always at least 30% people who dont bother voting due to this and a lot of the people voting will tell you they are picking the best from a bad bunch. Why dont the cowards have the balls to put a none of the above option on the ballet and see how they go

If only politics we are black and white as that analogy.

James Brown · 04-07-2019 2:08pm

kippy wrote: »

If there actually were a "DEMAND" within the electorate for actual change, surely people would run to meet this demand. The demand simply isn't there from what I can see outside of a minority of people.

People become jaded. Kenny offered 'real' change, 'change the way we do business' etc. A lot wanted that and voted for it. So the will is there, but as mentioned greed in many forms takes over.

fliball123 wrote: »

the 60 billion was paid over the last 10 years ..You should research where and when that debt was built up a lot was pre crash and pre bankers bailout and even after bailing them out we were still borrowing.

Sinn Féin's David Cullinane asked: "Before the crash came it was about €40bn and it is now €205bn. So the vast majority of it is crash or austerity-related, either through bank recapitalisation or through servicing state expenditure."

Mr O'Kelly said that this is correct.
https://www.rte.ie/news/politics/2019/0704/1060035-national-debt/

kippy · 04-07-2019 2:11pm

Matt Barrett wrote: »

People become jaded. Kenny offered 'real' change, 'change the way we do business' etc. A lot wanted that and voted for it. So the will is there, but as mentioned greed in many forms takes over.

(I am not sure Kenny is a good example)
But is it greed or is it a dose of reality?

There's plenty people with plenty ideas, but none with the will or support to put them in place.

I think once you do get into a position where you might want to try change things you get to see the bigger picture of how difficult and how much of a knock on effect that change is going to have.

James Brown · 04-07-2019 2:13pm

markodaly wrote: »

This is hilarious!!

When asked the following question:

We get this

So far so good....

Then, we get this when an idea on how to save some money, while delivering a service improvement, we get this.

A reversal of opinion within a few posts.

To be honest, this ties in with the OP. Why do we get crappy services with our tax money? Well, the answer is above, as exhibited by MattBarrett.
....

You either don't understand or are choosing not to.
If we are subsidising private industry, which seeks private profit, we are better off running it our selves as our goal is not to profit but to provide services in as cheap and an efficient manner as possible. Ergo, if we are losing money to provide a service it is preferable, IMO, to spending money so a private enterprise can provide the service and make a profit on top. It's very basic finance. You can disagree, but it's not a reversal as you put it. It's about value for money for the tax payer, but also providing services.

James Brown · 04-07-2019 2:17pm

kippy wrote: »

(I am not sure Kenny is a good example)
But is it greed or is it a dose of reality?

There's plenty people with plenty ideas, but none with the will or support to put them in place.

I think once you do get into a position where you might want to try change things you get to see the bigger picture of how difficult and how much of a knock on effect that change is going to have.

He's the perfect example because he had the biggest opportunity to do something for the Irish, but decided not to.
Changing the way we do business would mean less money to private concerns so they chose to continue as is. Greed comes into 'looking after our own' and inappropriate behaviour and sweet deals and the like.

fliball123 · 04-07-2019 2:18pm

kippy wrote: »

If only politics we are black and white as that analogy.

Show me the alternative so?

kippy · 04-07-2019 2:19pm

Matt Barrett wrote: »

He's the perfect example because he had the biggest opportunity to do something for the Irish, but decided not to.
Changing the way we do business would mean less money to private concerns so they chose to continue as is. Greed comes into 'looking after our own' and inappropriate behaviour and sweet deals and the like.

Did he decide not to or did he realise that certain things were simply not feasible/possible based on the actual set of circumstances he encountered?
(And again, I don't think Kenny is a good example here)

James Brown · 04-07-2019 2:21pm

kippy wrote: »

Did he decide not to or did he realise that certain things were simply not feasible/possible based on the actual set of circumstances he encountered?
(And again, I don't think Kenny is a good example here)

He decided not to. Nobody forced Reilly to set up clinics on his own personal whim. Nobody forced crony appointments to IW. Nobody forced the siteserv deal on Noonan, (still under investigation)...I could go on. That's fine examples of the way Fine Gael under Kenny did business.
Kenny is the greatest example of a political waster I know of. He had the chance to make branch and root changes and opted not to.

markodaly · 05-07-2019 12:06am

Matt Barrett wrote: »

You either don't understand or are choosing not to.
If we are subsidising private industry, which seeks private profit, we are better off running it our selves as our goal is not to profit but to provide services in as cheap and an efficient manner as possible. Ergo, if we are losing money to provide a service it is preferable, IMO, to spending money so a private enterprise can provide the service and make a profit on top. It's very basic finance. You can disagree, but it's not a reversal as you put it. It's about value for money for the tax payer, but also providing services.

I understand perfectly. You are a typical Irish voter.

On one hand, you want ' a purely accountancy driven cost assessment' when assesing the provision of services.

However, on the other hand, you state that 'we are better off running it our selves as our goal is not to profit'

These are two ideas are separate and contradict each other. Cognitive dissonance if you will.

Some services provided by the state are not run efficiently. Public Transport is one example of this. If an opportunity arose which meant that the Irish Taxpayer saved money but retained the same level of service, surely you would back and support this?

Wanderer78 · 05-07-2019 7:34am

markodaly wrote:

Some services provided by the state are not run efficiently. Public Transport is one example of this. If an opportunity arose which meant that the Irish Taxpayer saved money but retained the same level of service, surely you would back and support this?

Strangely enough, there's been plenty of work done on the 'inefficiency of the market' also, so....

markodaly · 05-07-2019 7:58am

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Strangely enough, there's been plenty of work done on the 'inefficiency of the market' also, so....

Can you elaborate on this point?

Wanderer78 · 05-07-2019 8:05am

markodaly wrote:

Can you elaborate on this point?

The age old debate, particularly by advocates of free market economics, would tell you the market is our savior, all knowing, and flawless, but reality tells us, this isn't exactly true, I'm just wondering, at what stage will we realise this, and how much damage will be done to humanity and our planet by the time that occurs. There's clearly something wrong with the neoliberal/neoclassical approach to life on this planet, but we re not reacting to it at all

Geuze · 05-07-2019 8:51am

Wanderer78 wrote: »

60 billion interest on our(?) National debt is hardly causing issues, is it?

Just to be clear, the annual interest bill is approx 5-6 bn.

James Brown · 05-07-2019 2:33pm

markodaly wrote: »

I understand perfectly. You are a typical Irish voter.

On one hand, you want ' a purely accountancy driven cost assessment' when assesing the provision of services.

However, on the other hand, you state that 'we are better off running it our selves as our goal is not to profit'

These are two ideas are separate and contradict each other. Cognitive dissonance if you will.

Some services provided by the state are not run efficiently. Public Transport is one example of this. If an opportunity arose which meant that the Irish Taxpayer saved money but retained the same level of service, surely you would back and support this?

No. If a private company can be efficient so can a public one. A system with problems needs the problems addressed. We can tackle costs for services or subsidise private concerns and their profits. In that scenario we are better off with public. I honestly can't see what your issue is, efficiency based on cost can and does happen everyday except with the public model value is a goal above gouging for profit.

Public: Cost to carry out service
Private: Cost to carry out service + profit

If we are subsidising private concerns it's possibly cheaper to remain public.

Geuze · 05-07-2019 2:49pm

Matt Barrett wrote: »

No. If a private company can be efficient so can a public one. A system with problems needs the problems addressed. We can tackle costs for services or subsidise private concerns and their profits. In that scenario we are better off with public. I honestly can't see what your issue is, efficiency based on cost can and does happen everyday except with the public model value is a goal above gouging for profit.

Public: Cost to carry out service
Private: Cost to carry out service + profit

If we are subsidising private concerns it's possibly cheaper to remain public.

This could also be written as:

Public: lower productivity / excessive wages / trade union power / no profit = costs per unit still higher then the private sector

Private: higher productivity / high wages more earned/deserved + yes, profits = lower costs than public sector

My local for-profit hosp does twice the procedures per session than my local public hosp.

This is due to trade union power and the profit motive.

Geuze · 05-07-2019 2:53pm

Matt Barrett wrote: »

No. If a private company can be efficient so can a public one.

Decades upon decades have shown this to be unlikely.

A public company could be productive and efficient, yes............

But in reality, trade unions prevent that.

Examples:

Two porters in Galway hosp watch Steptoe and Sons videos after 4:30, after their boss has left.

Consultants refuse to take more patients.

Would this happen in a non-public hosp?

James Brown · 05-07-2019 3:32pm

Geuze wrote: »

This could also be written as:

Public: lower productivity / excessive wages / trade union power / no profit = costs per unit still higher then the private sector

Private: higher productivity / high wages more earned/deserved + yes, profits = lower costs than public sector

My local for-profit hosp does twice the procedures per session than my local public hosp.

This is due to trade union power and the profit motive.

True. Commenting on the idea that subsidised private will automatically be an improvement and a better deal for the tax payer than bad public service, which may only need fixing.

James Brown · 05-07-2019 3:36pm

Geuze wrote: »

Decades upon decades have shown this to be unlikely.

A public company could be productive and efficient, yes............

But in reality, trade unions prevent that.

Examples:

Two porters in Galway hosp watch Steptoe and Sons videos after 4:30, after their boss has left.

Consultants refuse to take more patients.

Would this happen in a non-public hosp?

As with water infrastructure, decades upon decades of inaction until a way is figured out to make private concerns money off it. The will wasn't/isn't there.
I disagree, trade unions look out for their membership, that's their job. It's governments job to fight equally as hard for the tax payer.
Patient has a 6 month wait to be seen, same specialist will see them next week, privately. This is private business affecting public service.
Children's hospital over run, private contractor, substandard governance/management. Sweet deals, crony appointments. These are all issues that should be addressed not the way any business or service should be run.

markodaly · 07-07-2019 9:51am

Matt Barrett wrote: »

No. If a private company can be efficient so can a public one.

Can it really?
Why do the likes of Aircoach and Eireagle wipe the floor with Bus Eireann?

Public entities are tied down with union dominated work culture and entitlements.
Are you suggesting that we treat public employees like private ones, in order to attain efficiency? Quite right wing and Thatcherite of you.

A system with problems needs the problems addressed. We can tackle costs for services or subsidise private concerns and their profits. In that scenario we are better off with public. I honestly can't see what your issue is, efficiency based on cost can and does happen everyday except with the public model value is a goal above gouging for profit.

Can you give examples of this?

When are we going to get rid of the thousands of HSE admin staff that are surplus to requirement?

Public: Cost to carry out service
Private: Cost to carry out service + profit

If we are subsidising private concerns it's possibly cheaper to remain public.

Possibly but rarely it ever happens like that. The fact is usually the case is that a private company can provide a service cheaper and make a profit, shows us the amount of waste and gross inefficiency endemic in the public sector.

jimbobaloobob · 07-07-2019 9:56am

Wanderer78 wrote: »

The age old debate, particularly by advocates of free market economics, would tell you the market is our savior, all knowing, and flawless, but reality tells us, this isn't exactly true, I'm just wondering, at what stage will we realise this, and how much damage will be done to humanity and our planet by the time that occurs. There's clearly something wrong with the neoliberal/neoclassical approach to life on this planet, but we re not reacting to it at all

I would agree with this. Sure didn't the WHO declare a few years ago that subsistence farming was the only way to afford and sustain feeding world populations yet economies seem hell bent on large intensive food production programmes.

Wanderer78 · 07-07-2019 10:13am

markodaly wrote:

Possibly but rarely it ever happens like that. The fact is usually the case is that a private company can provide a service cheaper and make a profit, shows us the amount of waste and gross inefficiency endemic in the public sector.

I've only ever worked in the private sector, mainly factories, plenty of inefficiencies there, plenty of lads standing around doing nothing, playing with their phones, watching tv, smoking joints etc etc, and still these companies, large multi nationals, make astonishing profits. Its not just the public sector filled with inefficiencies!

Ul economist Stephen kinsella has shown how productivity has risen dramatically over the last couple of decades, but wealth inequality has also, him believing this is largely due to the demise of the union movement, I do suspect he's right.

markodaly · 07-07-2019 10:17am

Wanderer78 wrote: »

The age old debate, particularly by advocates of free market economics, would tell you the market is our savior, all knowing, and flawless, but reality tells us, this isn't exactly true, I'm just wondering, at what stage will we realise this, and how much damage will be done to humanity and our planet by the time that occurs. There's clearly something wrong with the neoliberal/neoclassical approach to life on this planet, but we re not reacting to it at all

Not sure people out there state that the market is infallible. In reality, we do not have a free market and the areas which cause us most grief, like health and housing, are some of the most regulated and legislated areas in the state.

I heard it said on RTE radio the other day on the SOR show, that the housing situation in Ireland is a classic case of market failure (it was in relation to rent control zones).

Of course, the person who made the comment never followed up on the fact that the housing sector has been meddled with for decades by local county councils and the government. More often than not, solutions dreamt up by well meaning politicians and bureaucrats have unintended consequences, which require more and more meddling to fix.

But that is why we elect TD's and councilors. It is more important for them to be seen doing something even if that something makes the situation worse.

markodaly · 07-07-2019 10:23am

Wanderer78 wrote: »

I've only ever worked in the private sector, mainly factories, plenty of inefficiencies there, plenty of lads standing around doing nothing, playing with their phones, watching tv, smoking joints etc etc, and still these companies, large multi nationals, make astonishing profits. Its not just the public sector filled with inefficiencies!

Ul economist Stephen kinsella has shown how productivity has risen dramatically over the last couple of decades, but wealth inequality has also, him believing this is largely due to the demise of the union movement, I do suspect he's right.

I am sure there are lots of inefficiencies in private businesses, I have seen them for myself. The crucial difference though, there is a constant drive to try and remove these inefficiencies otherwise bankruptcy looms, eventually.

In the public system, so long as the taxpayer pays the wages and the pension then the system can keep on going.

As per the last part, that would have more to do with Globalisation than anything. Wages in the west have stagnated since the late '70s and it has coincided with large numbers of women entering the workforce and globalisation. Wages in places like Poland, Vietnam, South Korea have increased hugely. Ireland can be included in this camp by the way.

machaseh · 09-07-2019 11:53am

markodaly wrote: »

I am sure there are lots of inefficiencies in private businesses, I have seen them for myself. The crucial difference though, there is a constant drive to try and remove these inefficiencies otherwise bankruptcy looms, eventually.

In the public system, so long as the taxpayer pays the wages and the pension then the system can keep on going.

As per the last part, that would have more to do with Globalisation than anything. Wages in the west have stagnated since the late '70s and it has coincided with large numbers of women entering the workforce and globalisation. Wages in places like Poland, Vietnam, South Korea have increased hugely. Ireland can be included in this camp by the way.

Yet there are many countries where public institutions do function properly.

And even if you work for the Government, if you mess things up you should be fired just as much as would happen in a private company. The Government itself will never cease to exist due to incompetency, but individual employees can.

awec · 09-07-2019 12:22pm

It would certainly be interesting to know how much money is spent by the public sector every year contracting in private sector companies to do the work.

kippy · 09-07-2019 1:51pm

awec wrote: »

It would certainly be interesting to know how much money is spent by the public sector every year contracting in private sector companies to do the work.

Figures for 2016 are in here:
https://ogp.gov.ie/wp-content/uploads/OGP-Public-Service-Spend-and-Tendering-Report-2016-WEB-PAGES.pdf

A bit more info here:
https://www.kildarestreet.com/wrans/?id=2018-10-02a.407

I don't know if this answers your question or not but pretty much anything needs to be tendered out now so that report would cover all instances of the "public" sector paying the "private" sector for specified goods and services.

This information is publicly available generally - might be a few years behind - but requires a bit of reading.

The Public sector could not exist without the private sector, or vice versa.

Ultimately what the public sector spends in the private sector makes its way back into the economy, generally.
The relationship is not generally as black and white as a straightforward financial transaction.

theguzman · 10-07-2019 11:43am

We waste €18bn per year on the HSE which is good not nothing. We need to abolish the HSE and privatise it and let Healthcare be provided by the private sector like in America.

kippy · 10-07-2019 12:10pm

theguzman wrote: »

We waste €18bn per year on the HSE which is good not nothing. We need to abolish the HSE and privatise it and let Healthcare be provided by the private sector like in America.

Yeah, that's an absolutely great idea........ healthcare costs much less to the individual citizen over there than it does here.......
That's the model we should be focused on mirroring......
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_the_United_States

theguzman · 10-07-2019 12:15pm

kippy wrote: »

Yeah, that's an absolutely great idea........ healthcare costs much less to the individual citizen over there than it does here.......
That's the model we should be focused on mirroring......
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_the_United_States

I hope for your own sake that you never have the misfortune for requiring the HSE. The HSE is an uter shambles, a corrupt, inept disgrace. If you gave someone a mandate on how to squander money and setup something so unfit for purpose they could not manage to create something as bad as the HSE.

4-5 year waiting lists, over paid useless staff. Scrap PRSI and privatise the HSE and let the private sector deliver it with insurance. We should be left to opt out of the HSE since it is worthless.

Do we pay too much tax for crappy services?

Comments