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
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Do we pay too much tax for crappy services?

1235

Comments

  • #202
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,013 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    Sir Guy who smiles wrote: »
    By that I didn't mean "Ireland isn't the worst, we don't need to get better".
    I meant "we have problems, which we should try to cure".

    The whole attitude of "Ireland is the worst country in the world and I won't get involved or try to help because one shower is as bad as the other" leads to people not getting involved, just moaning online and in the pub about how they would sort things out, but never getting up off their fat arse and implementing their wondrous solutions.

    Johnnyskeleton said " If people are too dismissive....nothing will change" and that is what I said "nail on the head" to.

    The trouble with 'it's not the worst' is it makes way for sub-par politicians and parties, who get voted in because they are deemed the lesser of two evils or a safer bet than the unknown. It has us in the boom and bust cycle with a liberal sprinkling of cronyism and sweet deals occasionally peppered with fraud.
    We waste an awful lot of money and we do shrug it off eventually once the lights stay on.


  • #203
    beggars_bush
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,647 ✭✭✭beggars_bush


    markodaly wrote: »
    Well, turning back to the OP's question then, do we pay too much tax for crappy services.

    Are you for example happy with the health service, and if not why not?
    What would you change?

    Anytime I've used the health service it's been perfectly fine
    Now, if I needed elective surgery for something I might find it different due to the ability of citizens with private health insured to skip queues to see specialists and access the hospital servicea


  • #204
    Old diesel
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,821 ✭✭✭Old diesel


    Matt Barrett wrote: »
    Sir Guy who smiles wrote: »
    By that I didn't mean "Ireland isn't the worst, we don't need to get better".
    I meant "we have problems, which we should try to cure".

    The whole attitude of "Ireland is the worst country in the world and I won't get involved or try to help because one shower is as bad as the other" leads to people not getting involved, just moaning online and in the pub about how they would sort things out, but never getting up off their fat arse and implementing their wondrous solutions.

    Johnnyskeleton said " If people are too dismissive....nothing will change" and that is what I said "nail on the head" to.

    The trouble with 'it's not the worst' is it makes way for sub-par politicians and parties, who get voted in because they are deemed the lesser of two evils or a safer bet than the unknown. It has us in the boom and bust cycle with a liberal sprinkling of cronyism and sweet deals occasionally peppered with fraud.
    We waste an awful lot of money and we do shrug it off eventually once the lights stay on.

    THIS - exactly this......

    We have a culture where we complain about but in terms of politics and how we view politics - we are not creating a pathway to create change.

    We get more upset over say the county GAA team underperforming then we do about the health minister underperforming.

    Literally the only thing keeping Leo in office at the moment is the strong public support for the backstop.


  • #205
    markodaly
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,863 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    Old diesel wrote: »
    THIS - exactly this......

    We have a culture where we complain about but in terms of politics and how we view politics - we are not creating a pathway to create change.

    We get more upset over say the county GAA team underperforming then we do about the health minister underperforming.

    Literally the only thing keeping Leo in office at the moment is the strong public support for the backstop.

    Only if you think the health minister actually runs the show in honesty? The Dept. of health is just one stakeholder of many who runs the Irish health service.

    If you want the health minister to actually run things, then give them carte blanche to fire and change things completely.


  • #206
    Sir Guy who smiles
    Registered Users Posts: 201 ✭✭Sir Guy who smiles


    Okay so Matt Bennet and Old Diesel, you both agree "someone" should do "something",
    what have you two done?


  • #207
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,013 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    Sir Guy who smiles wrote: »
    Okay so Matt Bennet and Old Diesel, you both agree "someone" should do "something",
    what have you two done?

    I vote every time I've the opportunity, I've marched on issues I felt strongly about and I was activate in local politics, but so what? I pay taxes and don't repeatedly vote for the same party despite any obvious failings.
    'What have you two done?' is apologist for the actual policy makers isn't it really? It's a step below, 'sure the others are worse' isn't it?
    We have poor professional policy makers paid well, who canvassed for the honour, who seem no more interested than giving a passing interest to major crises IMO for fear it may disrupt 'the way we do business'.


  • #208
    Old diesel
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,821 ✭✭✭Old diesel


    What you want is a wider cultural shift that'd far beyond what I as an individual can do...

    Just this morning a local radio newsreader specifically referred to Corks "subpar" performance against Kilkenny yesterday.

    He wasn't even quoting anyone - he literally just reporting the fact Cork are out of the hurling following the loss to Kilkenny.

    This reflects the fact we literally have higher expectations of GAA county players in Cork then we do of say Simon Coveney who is a minister.


  • #209
    McGiver
    Registered Users Posts: 4,450 ✭✭✭McGiver


    Folks, an outsider's view, just a constructive criticism, I strongly believe that outside POV is highly beneficial, especially for 'insular' circumstances. Apologies for a long-ish post.

    The notion of "we pay high taxes in Ireland" is a myth.

    Irish Tax-to-GDP ratio (incl social security payments) is the lowest in EU27 at 25% (see first attached screenshot - the red line).

    Now, as we know Irish GDP is grossly inflated due to institutionalised tax avoidance facilitated by Irish Governments and the Gov itself (as well as the EU and IMF) had to strop using GDP as a base indicator for measuring other economic indicators because of this, hence modified GNI (gross national income is used) is being used. Current GNI is roughly 33% lower than GDP i.e. Irish GDP is about 150% of Irish GNI. In all EU countries bar Luxembourg GDP is roughly (+-10%) the same as the GNI.

    So if we recalculate the ratio to Tax-to-GNI, this moves the figure to about 35% which is still about average in EU (see screenshot - green line).

    Just an example of direct taxation including social security and medical insurance, let's look at one example of a single earner, average salary, no special tax credits.

    Ireland - €45,000 gross, €33,500 net, total tax to employee is 26%; if I add decent private medical insurance to compare with other public/free of charge EU healthcare systems then we are at 28% total 'tax'

    That's not high in EU standards at all. In fact, it's still one of the lowest. See the attached Real Income Tax screenshot calculations which also estimates VAT impact - Ireland is 3rd lowest after Malta and Cyprus, two tiny economies of British descent and hence, surprise, surprise, low-tax, laissez-faire quasi-tax havens, so Ireland is clearly one of the lowest taxed. In the report they calculate the tax burden to be about 31% in Ireland, which is not far off from my estimate above, because they include VAT impact. Compare that with Germany at 52%, but they get superb public services incl free healthcare & education, infrastructure, public transport.

    The thing is that there is a lot of nonsensical talks in Ireland about Irish gov giving free money to unemployed etc, which is in large scheme of thing in terms of budget impact negligible. Ireland Gov is posing as a social democracy, but in fact isn't. It's a corporate tax haven organising large scale tax avoidance (estimated as the highest globally by some economists) and compensating that loss of revenue with average personal income taxes, higher VAT and other hidden stamp duties and/or taxes directed at individuals, and ending up with both quite low revenue/budget and below average public services for the tax payer. No, I don't say corporate tax should be higher and that it would yield higher tax revenues, just that Ireland isn't a social democracy and that corporate taxes should be fair i.e. all corporations should pay the same % rate, even if low, it's not OK for an SME to pay higher % effective tax rate than for an MNC.

    So the personal taxes are not high in EU comparison at all. The problem is governance and how they are used. For example, HSE is a total shame, second highest spending per capita in OECD and way below average in overall performance, in fact on the European Health Consumer Index (very decent assessment based on several criteria) Irish healthcare is on 22nd place amongst the Balkan countries. Corruption, mismanagement and inefficiencies are the core issues in Ireland, not income tax rate. These are in my opinion all due to socio-cultural issues and will take long time to fix. Transparency and overall e-Governnace approach is way behind Northern Europe at least.

    Overall, one could say that for what we pay we don't get much, but we don't really pay much in fact either, so one can't expect much, but on the other hand we get bad value even for what we pay overall. Some say "because government is wasteful with our taxes, it's better not to give them more and actually give them less so that they can't waste it" - but this "Reaganomics"/"Thatcherism" are also not a solution; "small state", very low-tax, deeply privatised, laissez-faire Ireland wouldn't work well and result in socio-economic breakdown in Ireland and it's not the way forward. The US and the UK were permanently damaged beyond repair by this attempt and I think Ireland should stay away from this concept. If you think Bus Eireann and government are bad in managing services then go to the UK and look at the mess and high prices in privatised public transport or higher prices in privatised water supply, and then compare with Germany.

    Moderate social democracy with reasonable market regulation and limited government intervention, with a balance between employee, employer and government in the labour market, with focus on transparency and efficient governance is the way forward for Ireland. That's what has been proven successul in Nothern and Central Europe. Thatcherism and ultra-neo-liberalism has failed.

    One exception of the otherwise generally low taxation is Capital Gains Tax (CGT), now this is totally highest in Europe and a total joke at 40% - that's short of robbery. Just to compare, Denmark 28% and tax heaven (not haven :)) France is 34.5% and Sweden 30%; UK is at 18%. The EU average must be around 25% or so. Irish CGT should be either reduced or be progressive with a lower rate capped for individual low scale investors (i.e. for people not for corporate funds).

    TLDR: You pay less, you get less. You vote in incompetent, corrupted people, you get mismanagement. Unless ingrained institutionalised political corruption is eliminated, evidence based approach and general efficient approach in governance is adopted, we are unlikely to get significantly better public services even if we pay more taxes. If people want better public services, it needs to start with a political culture reform, be directed at transparent governance, eliminating corruption & inefficiencies and then increase in personal and/or indirect taxes. Higher taxes without filling the holes in the budget and removing corruption won't work - that's my take on it. Also, I think RoI governance is too centralised and more autonomy, esp. budgetary, should be passed to local authorities.

    Disclaimer: I hold a degree in business and I'm a Social Democrats member. Just so that it's transparent.


  • #210
    McGiver
    Registered Users Posts: 4,450 ✭✭✭McGiver


    Old diesel wrote: »
    What you want is a wider cultural shift that'd far beyond what I as an individual can do...

    Just this morning a local radio newsreader specifically referred to Corks "subpar" performance against Kilkenny yesterday.

    He wasn't even quoting anyone - he literally just reporting the fact Cork are out of the hurling following the loss to Kilkenny.

    This reflects the fact we literally have higher expectations of GAA county players in Cork then we do of say Simon Coveney who is a minister.

    Very true. I think that some part of the "political fatalism" in Ireland as I call it i.e. ranting but then voting the two parties in again and again, is the direct result of the FG/FF duopoly itself. It leads to political apathy and disillusionment. Also, I think political engagement is generally low in Ireland, beyond participation in GE.


  • Advertisement
  • #211
    markodaly
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,863 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    McGiver wrote: »

    TLDR: You pay less, you get less. You vote in incompetent, corrupted people, you get mismanagement. Unless ingrained institutionalised political corruption is eliminated, evidence based approach and general efficient approach in governance is adopted, we are unlikely to get significantly better public services even if we pay more taxes. If people want better public services, it needs to start with a political culture reform, be directed at transparent governance, eliminating corruption & inefficiencies and then increase in personal and/or indirect taxes. Higher taxes without filling the holes in the budget and removing corruption won't work - that's my take on it. Also, I think RoI governance is too centralised and more autonomy, esp. budgetary, should be passed to local authorities.

    Disclaimer: I hold a degree in business and I'm a Social Democrats member. Just so that it's transparent.

    Seeing as you fairly and honestly state that you are a Social Democrats member, and the SD's favour Scandinavian services (from the last election), would they also favour Scandinavian taxes, especially income taxes and property taxes?
    It's a genuine question, as I do not want to pick fights about this.

    Ireland has a very odd and unbalanced income tax system. Almost 45% of workers do not pay any income tax, yet for earnings over €34,500 are taxed at the guts of 50%. It means that low-income people pay virtually no income tax and the income tax burden is worn especially by middle income and higher income people.

    If we are to follow a Swedish system as an example, everyone would be paying income tax and the lower income people would actually be worse off, than middle-income people.
    This is another example of finding an Irish solution to an Irish problem when you step back and look at it, it makes no sense at all. But no TD is going near it cause, votes....


  • #212
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,013 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    What I find odd is we are told the poor don't vote that's why parties that supposedly pander to them do so poorly.
    Then we are to believe FF/FG won't go for changes because they may hit the poor hard and they are fearful they'll lose votes.
    Then we have the popular parties, (FF/FG) overseeing societal crises anyway.

    I think everything is going great for FF/FG at the moment, otherwise they'd change they way we do business. It's obvious to me that they keep things as is because it suits them. I can't explain any other reason why they watch things get worse with the crises but stay with the same policies that exacerbate them.
    The tax payer is propping up a broken system that serves some and ignores others IMO.


  • #213
    markodaly
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,863 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    Its quite simple Matt.

    The government is there to manage the country and keep the show on the road while inflicting the least possible pain to the electorate.
    Housing, for example, could be fixed if the government crashed house prices, but that will destroy the wealth of the vast majority of Irish households while damaging the economy.
    They could CPO huge tracts of land in and around the cities, to create High-Density housing complexes, but that will annoy the hell out of the most important Irish voter, the property owner.

    We want to fix the problems, but no one wants to suffer any ill consequences of the fixes that are needed. So instead we take the long slow process as if the thing can be managed away.


  • #214
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,013 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    markodaly wrote: »
    Its quite simple Matt.

    The government is there to manage the country and keep the show on the road while inflicting the least possible pain to the electorate.
    Housing, for example, could be fixed if the government crashed house prices, but that will destroy the wealth of the vast majority of Irish households while damaging the economy.
    They could CPO huge tracts of land in and around the cities, to create High-Density housing complexes, but that will annoy the hell out of the most important Irish voter, the property owner.

    We want to fix the problems, but no one wants to suffer any ill consequences of the fixes that are needed. So instead we take the long slow process as if the thing can be managed away.

    There's a balance. They could cool the market rather than crash it.
    I'd counter that any drop in profits is being avoided and that's why we aren't cooling the market. The tax payer is one of the housing markets top financiers.

    I disagree, people are always happy to pay for quality. We are just so use to being bled for poor quality we don't want more of the same, that's one reason why politicians avoid any costly fixes and why they aren't popular, not to mention the likely associated wastes on poor deals for the tax payer, incompetence and cronyism that accompanies pretty much everything FF/FG do.


  • #215
    markodaly
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,863 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    Matt Barrett wrote: »
    There's a balance. They could cool the market rather than crash it.

    Yes, there is also another purist way of doing something, isn't there.
    There may well be, but of course these things time, money and political capital to execute.
    I'd counter that any drop in profits is being avoided and that's why we aren't cooling the market. The tax payer is one of the housing markets top financiers.

    Profits for whom exactly? The landlord? Haha. Yea right. They are leaving the sector in droves and being replaced by large funds.
    I disagree, people are always happy to pay for quality. .

    Can you cite one recent Irish example where the people were happy to pay for quality in regards to government policy or project? Because I think you are insane if you think that.


  • #216
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,013 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    markodaly wrote: »
    Yes, there is also another purist way of doing something, isn't there.
    There may well be, but of course these things time, money and political capital to execute.

    Sorry that excuse is tired, (see Sitserv deal, see Reilly's clinics, see laughing yoga and consultants, see children's hospital over run, see Varadkars department of spin, see buying houses for social housing instead of building, see selling to vulture funds and then buying back from vulture funds and on and on). Time? That recycled line you just spouted has been doing the rounds for several years. We didn't wake up to a crisis this morning.
    Also you're the one talked about the government crashing house prices as the other option.


    markodaly wrote: »
    Profits for whom exactly? The landlord? Haha. Yea right. They are leaving the sector in droves and being replaced by large funds.

    Any company that sells or rents property to the government/LA's as they struggle to meet the massive gap of us having no social housing stock in a housing crisis.

    markodaly wrote: »
    Can you cite one recent Irish example where the people were happy to pay for quality in regards to government policy or project? Because I think you are insane if you think that.

    No I can't because FF/FG don't do value for money. That's partially the point. People don't like paying more because, to paraphrase the OP, they generally get crappy services or crappy Noonanesque deals. I believe if people got quality services and results they'd happily pay for them.


  • Advertisement
  • #217
    FreudianSlippers
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,397 ✭✭✭✭FreudianSlippers


    kippy wrote: »
    The US healthcare system is not the model we should be looking to aspire to.
    There's a huge difference between the US healthcare system and the method of funding that system. The US has probably the best healthcare system in the world in terms of quality of service.


  • #218
    Geuze
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,729 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    awec wrote: »
    You'll pay 200 a month, but then you or someone in your family are unfortunate enough to become ill with something and your 200 a month premium suddenly triples to 600 a month next year because you're high risk.

    But you can't move insurer, because you have a pre-existing condition, and no other insurer will touch you, or they load your premium to account for your condition.

    Then next year, the insurance company decide that your condition is no longer covered on the payment plan you are on, you need to upgrade to a higher package. So it goes from 600 a month to 800 a month.

    You can't afford this, so you let your insurance lapse. Which means treatment stops. But then your son or daughter has a fall and breaks their leg, and you get a bill in the post for 30 grand that you now owe for the hospital fees and various consultant fees and use of equipment.

    The American system is rubbish. Big Pharma and insurance companies have been lobbying against reform of their system for years, because it'll end up hitting their profits if they move closer toward a semi-socialist health model.


    Plenty of countries have social health insurance:
    • community-rating
    • fixed premium
    • 100% of pop covered
    • competing insurers


    One idea is to leave the provision of healthcare to the private sector (GP, clinic, hosps), but guarantee everybody access via social health insurance.


  • #219
    markodaly
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,863 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    Matt Barrett wrote: »
    Sorry that excuse is tired, (see Sitserv deal, see Reilly's clinics, see laughing yoga and consultants, see children's hospital over run, see Varadkars department of spin, see buying houses for social housing instead of building, see selling to vulture funds and then buying back from vulture funds and on and on). Time? That recycled line you just spouted has been doing the rounds for several years. We didn't wake up to a crisis this morning.
    Also you're the one talked about the government crashing house prices as the other option.

    I said it was one option but one they will not take due to the pain it will cause the electorate at large. If you cannot see that there are a large cohort of people who are quite happy with the status quo, in regards housing and that these people represent the vast majority of the people of Ireland (i.e. property owners), then perhaps you should try and evaluate politics a little more with a dose of reality.

    One thing the government should do is increase property tax and also bring back rates, to every household in Ireland, even if you do not own property. Is that something you will stand by? Or is it too radical?
    Any company that sells or rents property to the government/LA's as they struggle to meet the massive gap of us having no social housing stock in a housing crisis.

    So you think the entire government housing policy and the dept. of the environment are beholden to these people only?

    No I can't because FF/FG don't do value for money. That's partially the point. People don't like paying more because, to paraphrase the OP, they generally get crappy services or crappy Noonanesque deals. I believe if people got quality services and results they'd happily pay for them.

    So, we get the literal u-turn from you within one post. Quite a turnaround.

    You can believe what you want, that does not make it so. The reason for crappy services and the causes behind them have been mentioned many times before. People speak in forked tongues when it comes to this topic all the time. You want 'Accounts driven, cost-effective' public services but won't be willing to take on the measures that go some way in achieving that. You are an example of the microcosm of why we have crappy public services that people 'want' to pay more for.


  • #220
    Podge_irl
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 27,270 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    FreudianSlippers wrote: »
    There's a huge difference between the US healthcare system and the method of funding that system. The US has probably the best healthcare system in the world in terms of quality of service.

    The US has probably also one of the worst healthcare systems in the world in terms of quality of service. It just depends who you are and how you are accessing it.

    You can't really divorce how it is funded from the quality of the system when the realities of how it is funded mean that many, many people can not properly access the high-quality parts of the system.


  • #221
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,013 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    markodaly wrote: »
    I said it was one option but one they will not take due to the pain it will cause the electorate at large. If you cannot see that there are a large cohort of people who are quite happy with the status quo, in regards housing and that these people represent the vast majority of the people of Ireland (i.e. property owners), then perhaps you should try and evaluate politics a little more with a dose of reality.

    You mean enough voters are happy to let it continue or worsen.
    What's needed is a dose of realty outside of a personal bubble for such people. There are tax paying workers suffering due to the housing crisis.
    markodaly wrote: »
    One thing the government should do is increase property tax and also bring back rates, to every household in Ireland, even if you do not own property. Is that something you will stand by? Or is it too radical?

    I'd rather they raised taxes for vulture funds and Russian oil companies carrying out their money laundering in Ireland. I'd rather they took the money for hotels and buying off the market to build social housing.
    markodaly wrote: »
    So you think the entire government housing policy and the dept. of the environment are beholden to these people only?

    I know for a fact that current housing policy benefits the housing industry over the tax payer. I know current government policy exacerbates the housing crisis.
    markodaly wrote: »
    So, we get the literal u-turn from you within one post. Quite a turnaround.

    You can believe what you want, that does not make it so. The reason for crappy services and the causes behind them have been mentioned many times before. People speak in forked tongues when it comes to this topic all the time. You want 'Accounts driven, cost-effective' public services but won't be willing to take on the measures that go some way in achieving that. You are an example of the microcosm of why we have crappy public services that people 'want' to pay more for.

    You seem to often infer a u-turn of sorts. Basically I make a point and you side step it and then query me on your side step and when I don't take the bait I'm doing a u-turn or dodging like you're some kind of Nancy Drew catching me out.
    To explain it simply, people don't like to pay more tax. Why? Because more tax doesn't equate to better services or better value for money. I believe if people thought or believed they would get a better bang for their buck, people would happily pay for quality. I've been quite clear on this from the get go. It's a simply concept to comprehend, one would think.


  • Advertisement
  • #222
    McGiver
    Registered Users Posts: 4,450 ✭✭✭McGiver


    Matt Barrett wrote:
    No I can't because FF/FG don't do value for money. That's partially the point. People don't like paying more because, to paraphrase the OP, they generally get crappy services or crappy Noonanesque deals. I believe if people got quality services and results they'd happily pay for them.
    Think there's been a recent survey on that which confirmed that. Let me see if I can find it. Generally, people are happy to chip in for the community / society to work well.


  • #223
    McGiver
    Registered Users Posts: 4,450 ✭✭✭McGiver


    Matt Barrett wrote:
    To explain it simply, people don't like to pay more tax. Why? Because more tax doesn't equate to better services or better value for money. I believe if people thought or believed they would get a better bang for their buck, people would happily pay for quality. I've been quite clear on this from the get go. It's a simply concept to comprehend, one would think.
    Spot on. And the only way to achieve that is this - transparency, no tolerance to corruption, evidence based approach in shaping policy. And to break the FF/FG duopoly is absolutely needed for this, it won't work without that. Radical cleanup is required and start from the basics, working way up.


  • #224
    McGiver
    Registered Users Posts: 4,450 ✭✭✭McGiver


    Geuze wrote:
    One idea is to leave the provision of healthcare to the private sector (GP, clinic, hosps), but guarantee everybody access via social health insurance.
    Name a model country where it works like that and what they're outcomes are, please.


  • #225
    McGiver
    Registered Users Posts: 4,450 ✭✭✭McGiver


    markodaly wrote:
    Seeing as you fairly and honestly state that you are a Social Democrats member, and the SD's favour Scandinavian services (from the last election), would they also favour Scandinavian taxes, especially income taxes and property taxes? It's a genuine question, as I do not want to pick fights about this.
    This is my personal opinion and not SD policy.

    It doesn't have to be necessarily Scandinavian services, just decent public services as in most of Europe (typically Northern, Western and Central). There is a long way to get there but you have to start somewhere. I don't thinks anybody is talking about making a huge sudden increase in tax rates, that's not on the agenda. It's clear that there are reserves in the current system and wastefulness, inefficiencies and eGovernance need to be looked at first, before any increase in spending and/or taxation. The point is to trying to fix what's broken and fix all leaks first, and there's many of them, I believe. There's little point pouring more water to a leaking barrel, right.

    Other than that my personal opinion is that Swedish property tax system is well designed and I wouldn't have issue with moving policy towards a similar direction provided the revenue is used by local authorities locally. System where local property taxes are raised locally but transfered out to the centre is wrong and unacceptable.
    markodaly wrote:
    Ireland has a very odd and unbalanced income tax system. Almost 45% of workers do not pay any income tax, yet for earnings over €34,500 are taxed at the guts of 50%. It means that low-income people pay virtually no income tax and the income tax burden is worn especially by middle income and higher income people.
    Unbalanced yes (especially with regards to the corporations vs SMEs), odd yes, but talking about 50% tax as "the guts" is simply not true. As I said average earner at 45k pa pays 26% total tax including social security payments (I count that as a tax). Even single earner at 65k pa doesn't pay 50%, but only 32%. Single earner at double the average salary 90k pa pays 37% total tax.

    Where did you get the 50% figure from?

    Also, just for correctness, your low full time minimum wage person pays 9% 'tax' as defined by me above (including usc and prsi).
    markodaly wrote:
    If we are to follow a Swedish system as an example, everyone would be paying income tax and the lower income people would actually be worse off, than middle-income people. This is another example of finding an Irish solution to an Irish problem when you step back and look at it, it makes no sense at all. But no TD is going near it cause, votes....
    Even if they paid more, hypothetically, I think most people would welcome better public services and would be wiling to contribute for their realisation.

    Other than that, what "Irish solution" would you suggest? Because so far, despite all the success of transforming a mostly agrarian country into a modern one in let's say 3 decades, the Irish solution has been facilitation of global tax avoidance, corruption of grand scale, crashing the economy at least once, crashing the property market, escalation of the housing crisis, property market destabilisation and inability to provide at least average European level of healthcare service. So I generally beg to differ, I think no magic Irish solution exists, because otherwise it would have been already in place.

    Furthermore, I don't think anyone advocates copying all policies exactly from Sweden, Denmark or Norway or whatever country, adjustments will always be needed, but it's a good idea to look at functional models and take it from there rather than trying to cook up something from scratch especially if Irish solutions don't seem to work, apart from inventing largest global tax avoidance system in the world.

    As for SD manifesto, if you read it, you would find that it suggests 'not eroding the tax base', 'maintaining current tax base with some minor adjustments'. Because as you know FF/FG are/will be pushing tax reduction, which is bad news for public services and bad idea when your government debt to real GDP ratio is 110% (as high as Italy's), if you count debt per capita then it's the highest in the EU. Tax cuts may lead to a higher government debt, and if it gets out of control it would be extremely dangerous, this time 'banking socialism' style bail out wouldn't be possible.

    The SD manifesto focuses much more on closing the gaps, fixing the leaks (inefficiencies, corruption, transparency) as I said, that's where lot of resources are lost. Also, it clearly mentions government's fiscal discipline. This sort of a manifesto would be called Blairite in the UK and wouldn't be really considered seriously leftist in Europe, by the way.


  • #226
    Podge_irl
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 27,270 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    Ireland does not have corruption on a grand scale and it is farcical to suggest otherwise. We have a lot of room for improvement no doubt and there needs to be more transparency in a number of areas, but we're not Italy or Greece (or indeed the many worse places that would properly earn the "grand scale" title). There is also pretty much nothing we can do to avoid suffering from global economic crashes given the openness and size of our economy.

    As to the FF/FG duopoly - they have less than 60% of the seats in the Dáil between them. The nature of Ireland's political system enables other parties and independents to easily gain seats (unlike, e.g. the UK). There are no nefarious forces at play, or even a system weighted particularly in their favour. People just keep voting for them and keep hammering other parties who get large enough to get into government with them.

    I don't think Ireland's services are particularly crap either. They are certainly not top notch but for the most part I would consider them reasonably middling. It is worth looking at examples such as the metro and bus projects ongoing at the moment to see how much people will demand better services and yet reject all efforts to bring them in in the face of the slightest inconvenience though.


  • #227
    Geuze
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,729 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    McGiver wrote: »
    Name a model country where it works like that and what they're outcomes are, please.

    France and Germany.


  • #228
    Geuze
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,729 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    McGiver wrote: »
    Name a model country where it works like that and what they're outcomes are, please.

    Outcomes? As in life expectancy?



    https://www.oecd.org/health/health-systems/health-care-quality-and-outcomes.htm


  • #229
    markodaly
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,863 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    Matt Barrett wrote: »
    You mean enough voters are happy to let it continue or worsen.
    What's needed is a dose of realty outside of a personal bubble for such people. There are tax paying workers suffering due to the housing crisis.

    Voters will, of course, say they want things to be fixed but presented to actual workable solutions, which could have a negative impact on them, they will be the first to lobby their TD or local councilor to stop, say a high rise apartment development or their local hospital closing.

    Such people say many things, but doing is another thing entirely.




    I'd rather they raised taxes for vulture funds and Russian oil companies carrying out their money laundering in Ireland. I'd rather they took the money for hotels and buying off the market to build social housing.

    The perfect response to prove the point I made above.

    I mentioned increasing property taxes because this state has used it before for building social houses. I presented this idea to you and we go off on a tangent about Russian oil companies.

    Rates and Property taxes have been used for centuries to build public works infrastructure and housing. It actually predates income taxes, yet we in Ireland have a weird aversion to it.

    We are the only country in the world, where Socialists are against property taxes. This encapsulates neatly the issues of the electorate saying one thing but wanting something else.

    "There is always someone or something out there that needs fixing or taxing first before someone taxes ME!"
    It's like the argument about TD's pay when talking about the national debt. A total strawman and a complete waste of time.


    I know for a fact that current housing policy benefits the housing industry over the tax payer. I know current government policy exacerbates the housing crisis.

    A fact? No, its an opinion.

    The government is beholden to every property owner in the state. That is everyone from a farmer, to an owner of a 3-bed semi, to a developer.

    You seem to often infer a u-turn of sorts. Basically I make a point and you side step it and then query me on your side step and when I don't take the bait I'm doing a u-turn or dodging like you're some kind of Nancy Drew catching me out.
    To explain it simply, people don't like to pay more tax. Why? Because more tax doesn't equate to better services or better value for money. I believe if people thought or believed they would get a better bang for their buck, people would happily pay for quality. I've been quite clear on this from the get go. It's a simply concept to comprehend, one would think.

    I infer it because you u-turn so often when pressed, you could be halfway to the south pole by now.

    I press you hard on this, because your posts are all of the same generic fluff, that is endemic when Irish public policy is discussed. No detail or figures, no factoring in of the hard decisions to be made, just populist notions and airy-fairy 'why cant things be perfect' soliloquies.

    You change your tune so often I cannot keep up.
    One minute you want 'Cost-effective, accounts driven' public services.
    The next you reject any reform or even the notion that a service could be privatised, even if that saved the taxpayer money while providing the same level of service.

    As to your last point, its pure nonsense. People will pay the least amount for a service that they deem acceptable. The fact you can't even mention one example of this speaks for the truth of your own view.


  • #230
    voluntary
    Registered Users Posts: 871 ✭✭✭voluntary


    johnnyskeleton wrote: »
    I think everyone who lives in a social democracy believes that they pay too much tax and dont get enough services! Even the huge multinationals corporations who pay very little corporation tax in Ireland probably believe they pay too much in tax and dont get enough for it.

    That's why we should always compare with our (european) peers + add some premium to the costs considering the island location and small size (only 4.5M people).


  • #231
    Chips Lovell
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,269 Mod ✭✭✭✭Chips Lovell


    In my experience, I think it's more common for people in other countries (in this case Spain, France, and Germany) to link the amount of tax they pay to the public services they receive and to treat that with acceptance (and in some cases pride).

    That's not to say there isn't a decent constituency in any of those countries who think they pay too much tax for what they receive. You're always going to get that wherever you go. It's just that it seems a bit more common in Ireland to think that we pay a relatively high amount of tax and that we're being jipped in the services we receive in return.


  • Advertisement
  • #232
    The Bishop Basher
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,279 ✭✭✭The Bishop Basher


    Chips Lovell wrote: »
    It's just that it seems a bit more common in Ireland to think that we pay a relatively high amount of tax and that we're being jipped in the services we receive in return.

    That’s probably because we do and we are.


  • #233
    FreudianSlippers
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,397 ✭✭✭✭FreudianSlippers


    Podge_irl wrote: »
    The US has probably also one of the worst healthcare systems in the world in terms of quality of service. It just depends who you are and how you are accessing it.

    You can't really divorce how it is funded from the quality of the system when the realities of how it is funded mean that many, many people can not properly access the high-quality parts of the system.
    Except it's untrue. Plenty of US hospitals will treat people regardless of their insurance situation as if they were insured; the issue there is the massive bill that they will issue at the end. There are a number of hospitals with Catholic-ethos who engage in a lot of debt forgiveness.

    You can't be seriously alleging that there are any hospitals in the US that are significantly worse than in Ireland?


  • #234
    voluntary
    Registered Users Posts: 871 ✭✭✭voluntary


    Geuze wrote: »
    France and Germany.

    Would Irish people accept a level of property taxes the Germans are paying?


  • #235
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    We pay too little tax but live in a relatively high cost country so taking more tax will stretch a lot of people.

    Our services are shockingly poor, for that tax take, however. Any increase in tax take is used to buy votes by increasing pay as opposed to investing long term.
    Public service workers should NEVER be paid the same as their private sector equivalents. They get pension, leave, security that the private sector will never get. Instead we have governments benchmarking and often paying more than the equivalent.

    Disclaimer: Both incomes from my house come from the public purses.


  • #236
    Geuze
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,729 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    voluntary wrote: »
    Would Irish people accept a level of property taxes the Germans are paying?

    I don't know about German property taxes.

    German PRSI is 20% vs 4% here, yes they pay much higher direct taxes.


  • #237
    Geuze
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,729 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    voluntary wrote: »
    Would Irish people accept a level of property taxes the Germans are paying?

    I like German-style social insurance, where benefits are linked to contributions.

    If a workers loses their job, the ST un payment is much higher than the LT un payment.

    More benefits for workers, lower for non-workers.

    Here, after 45 years paying PRSI, you get 11 euro a week more in pension than somebody who never worked.


  • #238
    Geuze
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,729 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    Chips Lovell wrote: »
    In my experience, I think it's more common for people in other countries (in this case Spain, France, and Germany) to link the amount of tax they pay to the public services they receive and to treat that with acceptance (and in some cases pride).

    That's not to say there isn't a decent constituency in any of those countries who think they pay too much tax for what they receive. You're always going to get that wherever you go. It's just that it seems a bit more common in Ireland to think that we pay a relatively high amount of tax and that we're being jipped in the services we receive in return.

    Even though the overall level of taxes in Irl is not high, and even though many earners pay zero or very low income taxes, workers focus on the 50% approx MTR that kicks in at a very low point.

    You can't really blame workers for focussing on the 50% MTR after 35k approx.


  • #239
    voluntary
    Registered Users Posts: 871 ✭✭✭voluntary


    Geuze wrote: »
    I don't know about German property taxes.

    German PRSI is 20% vs 4% here, yes they pay much higher direct taxes.

    LPT in Germany is near 2% while only 0,18% in Ireland.


  • #240
    Geuze
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,729 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    voluntary wrote: »
    LPT in Germany is near 2% while only 0,18% in Ireland.

    Are you referring to an annual property tax?

    Like the Grundsteuern in Germany?

    As the rate is decided locally by each local Govt, then there isn't one single rate.

    I am seeing example of, e.g. 300 pa in Duisburg.


  • Advertisement
  • #241
    voluntary
    Registered Users Posts: 871 ✭✭✭voluntary


    Geuze wrote: »
    Are you referring to an annual property tax?

    Like the Grundsteuern in Germany?

    As the rate is decided locally by each local Govt, then there isn't one single rate.

    I am seeing example of, e.g. 300 pa in Duisburg.

    Here's an example for Hamburg:

    property value: 200,000 euros
    tax rate: 3.5 ‰
    Property tax base value: 700 EUR
    Lifting Rate: 540%
    Annual property tax: 3,780 euros

    they do some complex calculations in Germany but the LPT isn't cheap.

    https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grundsteuer_(Deutschland)


  • #242
    markodaly
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,863 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    McGiver wrote: »

    It doesn't have to be necessarily Scandinavian services, just decent public services as in most of Europe (typically Northern, Western and Central). There is a long way to get there but you have to start somewhere. I don't thinks anybody is talking about making a huge sudden increase in tax rates, that's not on the agenda. It's clear that there are reserves in the current system and wastefulness, inefficiencies and eGovernance need to be looked at first, before any increase in spending and/or taxation. The point is to trying to fix what's broken and fix all leaks first, and there's many of them, I believe. There's little point pouring more water to a leaking barrel, right.

    I couldn't agree more, but you know what my next question would be. How do we actually fix those leaks, and how do we get Unions on board to change their outdated work practices and if needed get rid of the deadwood?
    Do you think the SD and the electorate at large would go for such a radical program of public sector reform?
    Other than that my personal opinion is that Swedish property tax system is well designed and I wouldn't have issue with moving policy towards a similar direction provided the revenue is used by local authorities locally. System where local property taxes are raised locally but transfered out to the centre is wrong and unacceptable.

    I can agree there too, property taxes and rates should be collected or held by the LA's. I am a firm believer in strong local government, who are accountable to the people on the ground level of the state.
    Going towards the Swedish taxation system will mean the lower income earners will be punished the most. I can't ever see any party advocating this.

    Unbalanced yes (especially with regards to the corporations vs SMEs), odd yes, but talking about 50% tax as "the guts" is simply not true. As I said average earner at 45k pa pays 26% total tax including social security payments (I count that as a tax). Even single earner at 65k pa doesn't pay 50%, but only 32%. Single earner at double the average salary 90k pa pays 37% total tax.

    Yes, there is a different between the headline rate and the net tax, but that just shows how punitive the rate is for middle-income earners and how 45% of the working population pay no tax.
    Where did you get the 50% figure from?

    Income tax, 40%
    USC 5%
    PRSI 4%

    For every euro earned for a single person over €34,500 a year
    Also, just for correctness, your low full time minimum wage person pays 9% 'tax' as defined by me above (including usc and prsi).

    If your income is less that €13,000 you do not may USC
    If you earn under €352 a week (€18,304 a year) you are PRSI exempt

    A person on the min wage, say working a 40 hour week, will earn
    €20,384 a year

    They Pay
    €777 income tax
    €538 PRSI
    €240 USC

    Total deductions €1,555
    A little over 7% of total income

    Compare to Finland, you will be taxed on the same wage a total of €4,368.
    That is 21.4% of total income, a 3 fold increase in tax paid in Finland than Ireland.

    For someone on €10,000

    In Finland they pay 9.8% of their income in tax (€976)
    In Ireland they pay 0% of their income in tax (€0)


    For someone on €50,000

    In Finland they pay 36.1% of their income in tax (€18,026)
    In Ireland they pay 26.4% of their income in tax (€13,213)

    For someone on €100,000

    In Finland they pay 43.8% of their income in tax (€43,884)
    In Ireland they pay 38.5% of their income in tax (€38,511)

    For someone on €200,000

    In Finland they pay 49.2% of their income in tax (€98,312)
    In Ireland they pay 45.2% of their income in tax (€90,511)


    The discrepancy is the largest for those at the lowest income earners. Comparatively, the middle and especially the higher income earners will pay income tax that is very comparable to those Northern and Western European neighbours, but our lower-income earners are the clear outliers here.

    Even if they paid more, hypothetically, I think most people would welcome better public services and would be willing to contribute to their realisation.

    They might if they got value for money, but Irish public services are not run at the behest of the public, but for the employees.
    Other than that, what "Irish solution" would you suggest? Because so far, despite all the success of transforming a mostly agrarian country into a modern one in let's say 3 decades, the Irish solution has been facilitation of global tax avoidance, corruption of grand scale, crashing the economy at least once, crashing the property market, escalation of the housing crisis, property market destabilisation and inability to provide at least average European level of healthcare service. So I generally beg to differ, I think no magic Irish solution exists, because otherwise it would have been already in place.

    I never said an 'Irish' solution exists. That is exactly what we do not need.
    The first step is with the electorate and we the Irish people. If we really want to improve the state of the public sector and the provisioning of social services, we must be able to take hard decisions when needed to.

    Even a simple thing like BusConnects gets dragged down into the gutter of local politics, NIMBYism and every blowhard available thinking they know better than the experts appointed to look at the problem.
    If we cannot even sort out a bus lane from one end of the city to another, how in gods name can we expect to run a multi Billion euro health service to a modern.

    This is where political leadership comes into it, as the political class caves into this type of thinking again and again.
    Furthermore, I don't think anyone advocates copying all policies exactly from Sweden, Denmark or Norway or whatever country, adjustments will always be needed, but it's a good idea to look at functional models and take it from there rather than trying to cook up something from scratch especially if Irish solutions don't seem to work, apart from inventing largest global tax avoidance system in the world.

    The last part is a bit disingenuous to be fair and is skirting the issue. It is also a populist line to take.

    I agree however that Ireland can learn from other countries. This is one of the reason why I like the Greens to some respect. I dont like a lot of their politics to be fair, BUT when it comes to things like transport in the city, they are usually right and will (most of the time) be prepared to stand up to the blowhards and argue the case for a good plan. The SD's could learn from them in this regards.

    As for SD manifesto, if you read it, you would find that it suggests 'not eroding the tax base', 'maintaining current tax base with some minor adjustments'. Because as you know FF/FG are/will be pushing tax reduction, which is bad news for public services and bad idea when your government debt to real GDP ratio is 110% (as high as Italy's), if you count debt per capita then it's the highest in the EU. Tax cuts may lead to a higher government debt, and if it gets out of control it would be extremely dangerous, this time 'banking socialism' style bail out wouldn't be possible.

    Ireland's debt to GDP is under 65%
    https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2019/0423/1045108-eu-debt-gdp/

    OK, we know that the GDP figures from Ireland need to be taken with a grain of salt, but where are your 'real' figures coming from.
    I would agree in part with the tax cuts not happening. The country needs massive infrastructure investment and this has to be paid for. But we should also be looking at value for money in the PS as well and to be fair we have gotten little reform in many departments or sectors over the past 10 years.
    The SD manifesto focuses much more on closing the gaps, fixing the leaks (inefficiencies, corruption, transparency) as I said, that's where lot of resources are lost. Also, it clearly mentions government's fiscal discipline. This sort of a manifesto would be called Blairite in the UK and wouldn't be really considered seriously leftist in Europe, by the way.

    That is welcome, but as I said, would the SD be prepared to take a knife to say, CIE and tender out routes via the NTA and be prepared for the eventual blowback.


  • #243
    markodaly
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,863 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    voluntary wrote: »
    Here's an example for Hamburg:

    property value: 200,000 euros
    tax rate: 3.5 ‰
    Property tax base value: 700 EUR
    Lifting Rate: 540%
    Annual property tax: 3,780 euros

    they do some complex calculations in Germany but the LPT isn't cheap.

    https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grundsteuer_(Deutschland)

    And for anyone who has lived or been in Germany the amenities and level of services available to the people there are heads above anything we offer here.


  • #244
    voluntary
    Registered Users Posts: 871 ✭✭✭voluntary


    markodaly wrote: »
    And for anyone who has lived or been in Germany the amenities and level of services available to the people there are heads above anything we offer here.

    Yes and living is also significantly cheaper.


  • #245
    Chips Lovell
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,269 Mod ✭✭✭✭Chips Lovell


    The Bishop Basher wrote: »
    That’s probably because we do and we are.

    Well no actually. We pay relatively little.


  • #246
    kippy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,781 ✭✭✭✭kippy


    markodaly wrote: »
    And for anyone who has lived or been in Germany the amenities and level of services available to the people there are heads above anything we offer here.

    They pay a lot more taxes though - don't they?


  • Advertisement
  • #247
    markodaly
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,863 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    kippy wrote: »
    They pay a lot more taxes though - don't they?

    It depends on who 'they' are.

    The lower-income earners, most definitely.

    The higher-income earners, possibly a bit more.


  • #248
    kippy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,781 ✭✭✭✭kippy


    markodaly wrote: »
    It depends on who 'they' are.

    The lower-income earners, most definitely.

    The higher-income earners, possibly a bit more.

    Surely there are also economies of scale at work there too.
    Aren't there far more "low income" earners and far more "high income" earners there also?


  • #249
    voluntary
    Registered Users Posts: 871 ✭✭✭voluntary


    kippy wrote: »
    They pay a lot more taxes though - don't they?

    A lot of things are way cheaper in Germany like motor tax, car insurance is cheap, childcare is almost free, housing for most people is cheap, food is cheaper, alcohol is cheaper, cigarettes. Name anything and there's a very high chance it's cheaper in Germany.

    Plus an average German person would have plenty of savings. An average Irish person has plenty of debt.


  • #250
    markodaly
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,863 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    kippy wrote: »
    Surely there are also economies of scale at work there too.
    Aren't there far more "low income" earners and far more "high income" earners there also?

    How do you come to that assertion?


  • #251
    Franz Von Peppercorn II
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,398 ✭✭✭Franz Von Peppercorn II


    Chips Lovell wrote: »
    Well no actually. We pay relatively little.

    It’s totally disengenuous to add employer contributions there.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement