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

Government Spending [See post 106]

Options
12467

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    Mad Benny
    Registered Users Posts: 579 ✭✭✭Mad Benny


    ted1 wrote: »

    1.) the 3 bn on rural broadband despite all advice against it.

    2.) the cancellation of metro south despite the FG lite minister being from south Dublin

    The only people I've heard complain about the rural broadband cost are those that have high speed broadband. Try submitting a tax return from rural Ireland with no internet access.

    Metro south was cancelled because of local opposition. South Dublin is, similar to broadband availability, relatively well served by public transport.

    Who will you vote for that will serve you better?


  • Options
    #93
    is_that_so
    Registered Users Posts: 32,136 ✭✭✭✭is_that_so


    Matt Barrett wrote: »
    They are single handily responsible for either the housing crisis or not taking the FG government to task, depending on which Fine Gael supporter, or 'better the devil you know' Fine Gael voter you're talking to.



    It's an inside look at the caliber of the party members, despite supposed party no nonsense claim/fiscal conservatism spin. A party is the sum of it's membership.



    Councils are they only democratic alternative to state government. The Seanad is a joke and should be dismantled. Do we think, 'seagulls losing the run of themselves' and 'ice cream trucks being too loud' are the quality people we need looking after issues?
    The councils, like many other things need to be fit for purpose and in some areas re-designed as such. We would need replace them with same. We could not function without them. Look at Irish Water, we took responsibility off the LA's only to have a quango use the LA's to carry out the same works they had been doing. The same would happen across the board if we dispensed with councils.
    Councils are mostly peopled by individuals filled with their own self-importance or loud-mouthed cretins. They have no useful powers and often degenerate into bad-tempered spats about nothing. The only thing many offer the world is an annual crowd-pleasing vote to reduce on LPT, which shafts their own budgets!
    Their remit is housing people and they have done as much as decades of successive governments to shrink the national supply, Even with a huge wad of cash, building now has to be sub-contracted out because they can't do it!


  • Options
    #94
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,015 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    is_that_so wrote: »
    Councils are mostly peopled by individuals filled with their own self-importance or loud-mouthed cretins. They have no useful powers and often degenerate into bad-tempered spats about nothing. The only thing many offer the world is an annual crowd-pleasing vote to reduce on LPT, which shafts their own budgets!
    Their remit is housing people and they have done as much as decades of successive governments to shrink the national supply, Even with a huge wad of cash, building now has to be sub-contracted out because they can't do it!

    Yeah, not my point. We weren't talking about councils, we were talking about rural dwellers being left out of national decisions. Are you suggesting each council have it's own national local broadband plan? Has Dinny signed off on this?

    Are you suggesting the councils hire hundreds of brickies? That's nuts quiet frankly.
    The politics of division is tired and gets us no where. You can complain about government without supporting ever decision every council makes/made. Life is more complicated.


  • Options
    #95
    blanch152
    Registered Users Posts: 27,194 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    Matt Barrett wrote: »
    What ever about costing, every person is supposed to be equal and that's as it should be. Of course we have to make allowances based on practicalities, but Some lad in the middle of nowhere who paid tax all his life deserves consideration. One of the worse things about government is ignoring or dismissing sections of society because they don't have the numbers to upset their political aspirations.
    This is how we have the Healy-Raes, a symptom of that disease if you will.


    In what way is everyone supposed to be equal?

    Should we all get the same exact subsidy for providing broadband which would mean that a rural person has to pay €50k to get the same service as a suburban dweller? That is one version of equality.

    Maybe, we should only allow people to live where there are already existing services. That is another form of equality.

    We can all spout a slogan of equality, but all have completely different versions of it.


  • Options
    #96
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,015 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    blanch152 wrote: »
    In what way is everyone supposed to be equal?

    Should we all get the same exact subsidy for providing broadband which would mean that a rural person has to pay €50k to get the same service as a suburban dweller? That is one version of equality.

    Maybe, we should only allow people to live where there are already existing services. That is another form of equality.

    We can all spout a slogan of equality, but all have completely different versions of it.

    Treated the same where practical and possible.
    You disagree? This isn't North Korea Blanch.
    You citing some examples were it might not be practical is just looking to stir quite frankly. Do you never get tired?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    blanch152
    Registered Users Posts: 27,194 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    Matt Barrett wrote: »
    Treated the same where practical and possible.
    You disagree? This isn't North Korea Blanch.
    You citing some examples were it might not be practical is just looking to stir quite frankly. Do you never get tired?

    No, Matt, I am just explaining that two people's version of equality may be quite different and any poster that blandly states a slogan of equality, needs to explain exactly what they mean.


  • Options
    #98
    xl500
    Registered Users Posts: 863 ✭✭✭xl500


    Why do you have to pay to bring water and Electricty to your site but not broadband its crazy


  • Options
    #99
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,015 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    blanch152 wrote: »
    No, Matt, I am just explaining that two people's version of equality may be quite different and any poster that blandly states a slogan of equality, needs to explain exactly what they mean.

    That's Sesame Street stuff to be fair and poor justification.
    t'was no slogan English, but t'was a fine comment.

    What part of:
    What ever about costing, every person is supposed to be equal and that's as it should be. Of course we have to make allowances based on practicalities, but Some lad in the middle of nowhere who paid tax all his life deserves consideration.

    ..did you feel the need to attack and why? Just curious.


  • Options
    #100
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,015 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    xl500 wrote: »
    Why do you have to pay to bring water and Electricty to your site but not broadband its crazy

    As I understand it, it's about access and affordability. Broadband won't be free. I mean Denis O'Brien, c'mon.


  • Options
    #101
    Scoundrel
    Registered Users Posts: 1,435 ✭✭✭Scoundrel


    This shouldn't be about a Rural vs urban thing rural people are just as entitled to broadband as urban people the issue here is the scandalous nature of the proposal 3 billion and we won't even own the infrastructure. This is a best gross incompetence from FG and at worst an act of ideological sabotage against the Irish taxpayer.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    blanch152
    Registered Users Posts: 27,194 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    Matt Barrett wrote: »
    That's Sesame Street stuff to be fair and poor justification.
    t'was no slogan English, but t'was a fine comment.

    What part of:



    ..did you feel the need to attack and why? Just curious.

    I am not attacking it.

    It is a meaningless statement.

    "What ever about costing" - what does this mean? Are you saying disregard costing, temporarily ignore costing, what exactly are you proposing? And if you do mean ignore costing for the sake of equality, doesn't that render the rest of the sentence meaningless, because what if an Irish person took up residence on Rockall, and demanded the same broadband, postal, gas and electricity supply that the rest of the country has on equality grounds, should he be entitled as well?

    "every person is supposed to be equal and that's as it should be." - Equal how? Equality of opportunity? Equality of outcome? Equality in terms of free from illegal discrimination? Equality as in a communist state? There are so many different forms of equality, not just the ones I list, that this phrase is similarly meaningless.

    "Of course we have to make allowances based on practicalities" - now I'm getting confused. Are we disregarding costing, or did you mean something else?

    "Some lad in the middle of nowhere who paid tax all his life deserves consideration" Consideration of what? It costs more to provide him with broadband so should he pay more taxes as a result? Should he have a greater subsidy because he has the health benefits of a rural life? Should be also get school transport subsidised, electricity supply subsidised, a petrol subsidy because it takes him longer to get to work? Where does it end? Should every urban dweller pay more to heavily subsidise a rural dweller? This is meaningless without explanation, context and elaboration.


  • Options
    #103
    johnnyskeleton
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 14,465 Mod ✭✭✭✭johnnyskeleton


    blanch152 wrote: »
    We can all spout a slogan of equality, but all have completely different versions of it.
    Matt Barrett wrote: »
    You citing some examples were it might not be practical is just looking to stir quite frankly. Do you never get tired?

    Mod note:

    Whatever the cost of rural broadband, one thing that is free and in unlimited supply is boards.ie moderator sanctions for posters who keep trying to needle each other and derail every thread.


  • Options
    #104
    reg114
    Registered Users Posts: 687 ✭✭✭reg114


    Scoundrel wrote: »
    This shouldn't be about a Rural vs urban thing rural people are just as entitled to broadband as urban people the issue here is the scandalous nature of the proposal 3 billion and we won't even own the infrastructure. This is a best gross incompetence from FG and at worst an act of ideological sabotage against the Irish taxpayer.

    Nope. The gov's refusal to take the massive climate change threat seriously is arguably a much bigger example of FG's total lack of moral competence, than any facile argument about failure to roll out broadband across the country.

    The initial poster referenced the failure to follow through on the planned metro south as a reason for their frustration with FG. Folks to build the metro in Dublin when predicted sea levels globally are set to rise 2 metres in the coming decades, would be lunacy. In fact any mention of building a metro at all is pure headline grabbing nonsense, look how long it took an irish government to build the luas and how much that cost. Dublin will never have a metro.


  • Options
    #105
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,015 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    Scoundrel wrote: »
    This shouldn't be about a Rural vs urban thing rural people are just as entitled to broadband as urban people the issue here is the scandalous nature of the proposal 3 billion and we won't even own the infrastructure. This is a best gross incompetence from FG and at worst an act of ideological sabotage against the Irish taxpayer.

    IMO, giving Denis O'Brien's consortium the contract was more important than any other factors. I base this on the relationship Fine Gael have had with Mr. O'Brien in the past. Not knocking Mr. O'Brien, he's a business man and not given the remit to look after the Irish tax payer.


  • Options
    #106
    johnnyskeleton
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 14,465 Mod ✭✭✭✭johnnyskeleton


    Mod Note:

    Ok there have been a lot of threads opened recently that all cover the same ground. So they have been merged into three threads. The general is a catch all for Irish Government business, bar particular gripes about spending schemes etc.

    This present thread is for specific issues relating to government spending on particular schemes e.g. rural broadband, housing schemes, the dreaded water infrastructure etc:

    https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057983142

    The threads on the Dail voting scandal, politicians being in it for the money (or the interesting discussion on how the current system traps people in capitalist representative democracy) and electoral reform have also been merged into one mega thread on, basically, politican's behaviour as opposed to their policies:

    https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2058025402

    So basically there are now three threads instead of 10 where you can complain criticise or lionise your government:
    1. A general thread for general gripes, policies and actions;
    2. A spending thread for wasted money, brilliant public works, or anything in between; or
    3. A thread about the politicians themselves, and the system that gets them into power.

    There will obviously be some overlap, but try to keep it on topic.

    The bielection (and indeed any other general election thread) will be separate, and any unusual or particular social policies (e.g. the hate crime thread) are also sufficiently discrete as to get their own threads (for the moment)

    Also, please try to keep things civil.


  • Options
    #107
    thomas 123
    Registered Users Posts: 2,506 ✭✭✭thomas 123


    xl500 wrote: »
    Why do you have to pay to bring water and Electricty to your site but not broadband its crazy


    Doesn’t take much to install broadband on the household end, in fact nothing. Linking up water or electric is a little more complex.

    The infrastructure for broadband is also a lot easier to install/maintain than electric cables or water pipes.


  • Options
    #108
    McGiver
    Registered Users Posts: 4,366 ✭✭✭McGiver


    Dytalus wrote: »
    Denmark: 6,635 homeless per the most recent figures. 5.8 million population. 0.11% ratio.
    Austria: 14,603 homeless. 8.86 million population. 0.16% ratio.
    Norway: 3,909 homeless. 5.3 million population. 0.07% ratio.

    Ireland: 10,388 homeless. 4.9 million population. 0.21% ratio.

    Only Austria has more homeless total than us per the most recently available statistics, and it's still below us in terms of population ratio.

    Cheers for that. Knew it wouldn't be true. Any figure for Scotland?


  • Options
    #109
    stefanovich
    Registered Users Posts: 5,490 ✭✭✭stefanovich


    McGiver wrote: »
    Cheers for that. Knew it wouldn't be true. Any figure for Scotland?

    Do they all define homeless the same way?


  • Options
    #110
    Dytalus
    Registered Users Posts: 459 ✭✭Dytalus


    McGiver wrote: »
    Cheers for that. Knew it wouldn't be true. Any figure for Scotland?

    It's not easy to find for Scotland - much easier to find an all-UK rate, but I think I managed to find some tables here.

    UK: 307,000 homeless. Population of 65.6 million. Ratio of 0.46%
    Scotland: 36,465 homeless. Population of 5.4 million. Ratio of 0.68%
    stefanovich wrote: »
    Do they all define homeless the same way?
    That is an excellent question. Did some digging and got the following (heavily summarised, but with links to information sources).
    • Ireland: Living rough, or staying somewhere temporarily because you have nowhere else to go. From the wording of the legislation, I don’t think this includes staying with parents (“who might reasonably be expected to live with you”) but would include staying with friends or more distant family members. scratch that, see below edit. Ireland does not count people sleeping on friends couches as homeless in official statistics.
    • UK: This is more complex, since it differs between Scotland and the rest of the UK (which may explain Scotland’s higher rate). Wiki has a good summary but to sum up the UK classes you as homeless if: you do not have a permanent home, you have a local connection, you have become so unintentionally (ie, not because of not paying rent – arguably this is not regularly intentional), and you have ‘priority need’. Scotland lacks the priority need requirement, so (for example) being over 21 doesn’t remove you from the statutory homeless list as it does in England, Wales, or NI. The UK also has a non-statutory classification, but it’s unclear whether these are included in official numbers. Scotland’s data, for example, includes those who made applications as homeless. Non-statutory homeless cannot make such applications, as I understand it, and so wouldn’t be included in the numbers.
    • Norway/Denmark: Sourced from here, Norway classifies a homeless person defined as a person who does not own or rent a home, and left with coincidental or temporary housing arrangements, who temporarily stay with close relatives, friends or acquaintances, or is under the care of the correctional services or an institution, due for release within two months and without a home. People without arranged accommodation for the next night also considered as homeless. Apparently, so does Denmark – so I’ve included them in this point.

    EDIT:
    Seems this point (the differing categorisations of homelessness) has been discussed at an EU level. Both Focus Ireland and the Journal have fact checked Ireland's homelessness rates with other EU member states.

    The ETHOS Light system is an attempt by Feantsa (the EU wide homeless NGO) to come up with a list of criteria to be used across all member states to compare homeless rates using a standardised system. It includes:
    • People living rough
    • People in emergency accommodation
    • People living in accommodation for the homeless
    • People living in institutions (and due to be released with no home to go to)
    • People living in non-conventional dwellings due to a lack of housing
    • Homeless people living temporarily in conventional housing with family and friends (due to a lack of housing)
    Ireland, apparently, only counts the first three. Denmark applies all six.


  • Options
    #111
    CrabRevolution
    Registered Users Posts: 2,801 ✭✭✭CrabRevolution


    jm08 wrote: »
    Rural Ireland feeds you. Farms of necessity tend to be in remote spots. They need broadband so that they can keep on top of all the rules and regs of providing safe food. The reason why farmers don't contribute more tax is because their incomes are so low.

    Edit: Just so you know, Ireland South EU Parliament constituency (mainly Munster) has the 3rd highest GDP per person in Europe (after London and Luxembourg). Dublin (Leinster) is 5th.

    https://www.irishtimes.com/business/southern-part-of-ireland-third-richest-in-eu-but-west-lags-behind-1.3811364?mode=sample&auth-failed=1&pw-origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.irishtimes.com%2Fbusiness%2Fsouthern-part-of-ireland-third-richest-in-eu-but-west-lags-behind-1.3811364

    The vast majority of people in one off houses in rural Ireland aren't farmers. They have nothing to do with food production but still cost a fortune to supply the broadband infrastructure to.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #112
    Scoundrel
    Registered Users Posts: 1,435 ✭✭✭Scoundrel


    Matt Barrett wrote: »
    IMO, giving Denis O'Brien's consortium the contract was more important than any other factors. I base this on the relationship Fine Gael have had with Mr. O'Brien in the past. Not knocking Mr. O'Brien, he's a business man and not given the remit to look after the Irish tax payer.

    Oh for sure FG have been in Dinnys pocket for a very long time it's no coincidence that when FF were in power 1997-2011 you never heard of Denis O Brien and then once FG were back he was getting government contacts left right and centre.


  • Options
    #113
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,015 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    Scoundrel wrote: »
    Oh for sure FG have been in Dinnys pocket for a very long time it's no coincidence that when FF were in power 1997-2011 you never heard of Denis O Brien and then once FG were back he was getting government contacts left right and centre.

    One would think after Lowry and the Noonan siteserv deal still under investigation he'd be maybe suspended from applying for state contracts pending the outcome, as it's obvious Fine Gael have zero issues? Be nice if someone was looking out or the tax payer to ensure we get the best deal.


  • Options
    #114
    McGiver
    Registered Users Posts: 4,366 ✭✭✭McGiver


    Dytalus wrote:
    Ireland, apparently, only counts the first three. Denmark applies all six.

    Excellent. That means that using the same methodology Ireland has several times more homeless people as a % of population than its peers comparable peers. As I originally posited would be the tight benchmark to use while assessing Ireland's issues.
    Do you agree?


  • Options
    #115
    Dytalus
    Registered Users Posts: 459 ✭✭Dytalus


    McGiver wrote: »
    Excellent. That means that using the same methodology Ireland has several times more homeless people as a % of population than its peers comparable peers. As I originally posited would be the tight benchmark to use while assessing Ireland's issues.
    Do you agree?

    Yes. We should be comparing ourselves to other, well-developed states within the EU (EEA, for Norway). And comparably, we don't do marvelously. That's not to say what they do to alleviate it would necessarily work for us, only that by whatever method used we should be getting that number down through both short-term fixes (to get people into homes, and almost invariably will be expensive) and long-term (to ensure this doesn't happen again).


  • Options
    #116
    McGiver
    Registered Users Posts: 4,366 ✭✭✭McGiver


    Dytalus wrote:
    Yes. We should be comparing ourselves to other, well-developed states within the EU (EEA, for Norway). And comparably, we don't do marvelously. That's not to say what they do to alleviate it would necessarily work for us, only that by whatever method used we should be getting that number down through both short-term fixes (to get people into homes, and almost invariably will be expensive) and long-term (to ensure this doesn't happen again).
    Yes but I see the following issues in RoI (with my experience from abroad, couple of countries, so can compare).

    1. Systemic mismanagement
    2. C&AG weakness
    3. Lack of public anti-corruption watchdog
    4. Systemic underfunding
    5. Low tax economy

    Basically, it's down to low tax - which means insufficient budget, combined with lack of transparency and chronic mismanagement which means people are unwilling to pay higher taxes because of fear of taxes collected would be wasted / mismanaged due to experience of poor "return on the investment" on taxes paid. It's hard to build a cohesive society with quality comprehensive public services in a low tax economy. However, I think that even with current amount of tax collected the "return on investment" could be much improved.


  • Options
    #117
    Geuze
    Registered Users Posts: 13,068 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    I do not agree that we are a low-tax economy.

    Middle-tax, I would say.

    Many low earners, and middle-earners over 65, pay low amounts of income tax, yes.


  • Options
    #118
    Liberta Per Gli Ultra
    Registered Users Posts: 258 ✭✭Liberta Per Gli Ultra


    Geuze wrote: »
    I do not agree that we are a low-tax economy.

    Middle-tax, I would say.

    Many low earners, and middle-earners over 65, pay low amounts of income tax, yes.

    The bottom decile of households in Ireland pay 27.7% of their total gross income in direct and indirect taxation. They are the 2nd highest contributors of tax in percentage terms.

    You give an opinion of our economy in relation to tax but only mention one type of tax and two of the groups who pay it, superb.


  • Options
    #119
    Geuze
    Registered Users Posts: 13,068 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    Yes, fair enough, our VAT rates are a touch higher than typical, and our excise duties are higher than the EU averages (mostly), so yes you may be right.

    https://www.nerinstitute.net/download/pdf/household_tax_contributions_neri_wp18.pdf


    Your 27.7% seems to indirect tax only.

    Note the massive difference between income and expenditure of the lowest decile............???


  • Options
    #120
    Liberta Per Gli Ultra
    Registered Users Posts: 258 ✭✭Liberta Per Gli Ultra


    Geuze wrote: »
    Yes, fair enough, our VAT rates are a touch higher than typical, and our excise duties are higher than the EU averages (mostly), so yes you may be right.

    https://www.nerinstitute.net/download/pdf/household_tax_contributions_neri_wp18.pdf


    Your 27.7% seems to indirect tax only.

    Note the massive difference between income and expenditure of the lowest decile............???

    The figure of 27.7% that I gave is taken from a different source and is backed up and explained by your source. It is almost totally made up of indirect tax (0.3% direct plus 27.4% indirect) which highlights the point I was making about including every type of tax in the conversation.

    As page 17 of your source shows, the poorest households in Ireland contribute the 2nd highest amount of tax as a percentage of gross income.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #121
    Liberta Per Gli Ultra
    Registered Users Posts: 258 ✭✭Liberta Per Gli Ultra


    On the subject of tax:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leprechaun_economics

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporation_tax_in_the_Republic_of_Ireland


Advertisement