Cut the dole to cut higher tax rates

[Leo]

It's no more of a disincentive than motor tax is to discourage people from having cars, motorbikes etc. (i.e. almost zero disincentive !)

It has proven to be a disincentive in every jurisdiction in which licensing of cyclists has been trialed, has cost more to implement and administer than it's taken in and only left motorists more frustrated with extra traffic volumes. If traffic keeps going the way it is in Dublin, I might have to start cycling my commute.

Lets not forget many cyclists also got a tax break through the bike to work scheme (which let me add was daft and did little other than to create massive inflation in the average cost of a bike, with the taxpayer footing the bill).

It certainly did increase the price of bikes here, though not massively as you suggest, but most if not all costs to the state have been recouped through additional employment, tax on significantly increased sales of accessories, clothing and servicing. It's predicted that the increased activity levels will also save the health service money over the longer term, but that's harder to put numbers on.

If they are using the roads, traffic lights, having special bicycle lanes made etc. then let them contribute towards the cost of providing and maintaing those services.

Every tax payer contributes towards those costs, there is no special fund that motorists pay into, so that argument is moot. I don't have kids, yet my tax goes to pay for their schools, their free GP care, etc., I've never been unemployed, but my taxes also contribute towards those who are. I've always paid my own way in terms of accommodation, but again my taxes those in receipt of state aid. That's just how the tax system works, you don't get to pick and choose.

So what, if you have a car and a motorbike then you've to pay for both as I understand it, if I've a car and a truck I've to pay for both, it's all the same principal. All we are talking about here is equal treatment, nothing more.

So to introduce equal treatment just for users of the various transport methods, as our motor tax system is emissions based, cyclists would pay zero, or such a token amount that the regulation and administration costs would far exceed the revenue taken in. It could even be argued that bikes have such a positive impact on the environment that cyclists should be incentivised. In fact, incentives are already in use or being trialed in other countries as a means of addressing worsening urban pollution due to the increasing populatiry of small diesel engines. France pay cyclists 25c per km cycled on their commutes following a successful 6 months trial there resulted in fewer cars on the road. Zero emmissions cars also get a €5,000 credit from the taxpayer here. Perhaps we should offer a level playing field there and extend similar credits to bikes? Extending the logic of funding road infrastructure only by those using it, those taking trains or buses should surely pay a lot more as overall, those are heavily state subsidised.

 

[Firefly]

So there might not be unprofitable lines then?
In any case you assume the purpose of irish rail is to generate profit for the taxpayer. The purpose of a public transport system is to provide an efficient sustainable means of transport for the population. If that turns out a paper loss, then that loss needs to be weighed against the economic and social impact of providing public transport in the first place.

That's exactly what's NOT happening though. If it's losing money the "solution" is always to throw more money at it. Alternatives should be considered and if that means replacing something which is losing money with something that breaks even or even makes money it should be considered.

I dont think the taxi service was ever a public service.

Taxis do provide a transport service available to be public just like buses, trains and car ownership, they just happen to be privately owned. Remember all the fuss when they were being de-regulated? Look at it now. I use Hailo and can get a cab in minutes. As for the buses, all we have (at some bus stops mind) is a display telling us how many minutes away the bus is. Last Saturday this increased as I was watching it from 8 minutes to 11 minutes. Was the bus driver reversing or something! Why not put the buses on a map like Hailo where we can see where they are...that way I can judge when to leave the house instead of getting the info when I get to the bus stop. Easy, simple idea but try getting that past the unions!

If its de-regulation you are in favour of, I could easily point to de-regulation of bank lending to show how sometimes it doesnt work too well.

The banks WERE being regulated! Did you not hear the ads for the last 10 years "Regulated by the Financial Regulator / Central Bank"? Those institutions just didn't do their jobs

Yes, I now participate in the annual charade of changing my electricity provider every twelve months to which ever provider is offering the best 'new customer' deal. In the end, my bill stays the same or in-line with increases/decreases as determined by...erm...the energy regulator. Only the suckers who fail to change plans get fleeced. Although admittedly, the supply of electricity from energia this year was so much better than sseairtricity (im being sarcastic here).

At least you have the choice and as you said yourself, buy not choosing to switch you pay higher. How much would you be paying if you didn't have a choice? Remember those Aer Lingus flights to London before Ryanair came on the scene? Remember the opposition to opening up the airways?

Yes, especially as the sale of Telecom Eireann was front-loaded onto Irish citizens in the form of shares that crashed and burned, before being scooped up at rock bottom by whatever conglomerate has it now.

It didn't work out well for most (I sold my shares the day after the floatation and made 19% btw), but that's not the point. Can you imagine the offering of mobile options if all we had was good ole Telecom Eireann?

Lastly, what do you make of my suggestion for teachers to work during the summer and give each other courses over Skype to improve their teaching standards?

 

[Firefly]

These show that many went to the protests (we all know that) - there's nothing about their backgrounds and in particular whether they are 'working people' which is what you said.

Exactly. A decent source please.

 

[Firefly]

It has been proven that austerity does NOT work.

Since 2008 (and before actually) we have been running a budget deficit in this country. This means we are borrowing money as our income is less than our expenditure. How is this austerity? If you are earning 30k a year but spending 35k a year by going to the Credit Union, would you classify that as austerity?

And, if that we DO have austerity and it's not meant to work, then how come we have the fastest growing economy in Europe with falling unemployment?

 

[Firefly]

.

 

[Purple]

If its de-regulation you are in favour of, I could easily point to de-regulation of bank lending to show how sometimes it doesnt work too well.

Please point it out. I missed it.

It could, or it could be viewed as wealth being sucked out of the country unnecessarily.

It could be viewed as wealth being sucked out of the country unnecessarily but only if you are xenophobic.

It has been proven that austerity does NOT work. Wealth does not trickle down from the top, instead, the rich get richer and the poor get poorer and the middle class shrink in size.

Can you back any of that up? Can you point to where any of that has been proven?

 

[Toledo]

Purple, read " The Austerity Delusion " by Paul Krugman and revert, then look to the U.S.A., it printed it's way out of recession, with dollars.

 

[Purple]

Purple, read " The Austerity Delusion " by Paul Krugman and revert, then look to the U.S.A., it printed it's way out of recession, with dollars.

"leprechaun economics" Paul Krugman?
"People in Ireland should just hand the keys of their houses back to the banks" Paul Krugman?

I know he won the Nobel Prize for Economics but David Trimble and Yasser Arafat won the Nobel Peace Prize.

 

[TheBigShort]

That's exactly what's NOT happening though. If it's losing money the "solution" is always to throw more money at it. Alternatives should be considered and if that means replacing something which is losing money with something that breaks even or even makes money it should be considered.

If the public transport system is losing money, the reasons for the losses need to be factored in.
For instance, if a bus and rail system are generating losses in a high density area, is it because people dont use the system because of high prices, or are the fares affordable but the system unreliable? If its the latter, competition would be useful. If the former, taxpayer subsidies to reduce prices, increase passengers, reducing gridlock would be useful - still making a loss, but the economic benefit in reducing gridlock would outweigh the loss.
In any case, is Irish rail making a loss? Is Dublin Bus making a loss?

Taxis do provide a transport service available to be public just like buses, trains and car ownership,

I was talking about public/state ownership.

Why not put the buses on a map like Hailo where we can see where they are...that way I can judge when to leave the house instead of getting the info when I get to the bus stop.

Great idea, the assumption is the unions wouldnt allow it, doubt it. I would put it down to poor management.

The banks WERE being regulated!

What do call a regulated sector where the regulators turn a blind eye? I'll give you a clue, it starts with u, ends with d, and has -nregulate- in the middle.
For sure, it was never official or legislated for, but it amounted to the same thing. Check out those bank balance sheets, or the value of shares wiped out.
If they were State run there would be a clamour of calls to privatise it for 'market efficiencies'.

At least you have the choice and as you said yourself, buy not choosing to switch you pay higher

No I don't have a choice. Upon my contract expiring, my existing provider refused to match the offer of the other providers. Citing that there discount offers were for new customers only!
So in order not to lose money, I have to change provider. This is not free market, the regulator imposes minimum charges that the providers must charges, with the exception of discount offers for new customers.
Profits are not being driven by market efficiencies but by consumer inefficiencies.
Its a circus and a nonsense.

 

[TheBigShort]

Please point it out. I missed it

For sure it was never official or legislated for, but a blind eye was turned. Ask Firefly.

It could be viewed as wealth being sucked out of the country unnecessarily but only if you are xenophobic.

I suppose, in the same way you always mention how we need to compete with other countries could be construed as xenophobic, but only if you were desperate to make a cheap point.

 

[Purple]

What do call a regulated sector where the regulators turn a blind eye? I'll give you a clue, it starts with u, ends with d, and has -nregulate- in the middle.

Eh no, that's not what it's called.

Profits are not being driven by market efficiencies but by consumer inefficiencies.

Wow, that says it all.

 

[Purple]

For sure it was never official or legislated for, but a blind eye was turned. Ask Firefly.

Not following the rules or the State appointed regulator and Department of Finance being incompetent does not mean the rules were not there.

I suppose, in the same way you always mention how we need to compete with other countries could be construed as xenophobic, but only if you were desperate to make a cheap point.

No, that's not the same thing at all.

 

[TheBigShort]

Not following the rules or the State appointed regulator and Department of Finance being incompetent does not mean the rules were not there.

That was the point I made. The bank balance sheets, the increase in lending, the absence of central bank directions post 2005 (in fact the CB was quite regular pre-2005 in public commentary warning of an over-heating property market, after 2005 it went quiet) all point to a system that had de-regulated and by-passed its own rules.

No, that's not the same thing at all.

No of course not, saying 'profits unnecessarily sucked out of the country' could be xenophobic! But competing against other countries is not.
Like I said, desperate to score a point.

 

[TheBigShort]

Eh no, that's not what it's called.

There are other words for it, but without wanting to get into any legal difficulties I leave as is.

 

[Purple]

That was the point I made. The bank balance sheets, the increase in lending, the absence of central bank directions post 2005 (in fact the CB was quite regular pre-2005 in public commentary warning of an over-heating property market, after 2005 it went quiet) all point to a system that had de-regulated and by-passed its own rules.

There were rules (regulations) so it was not deregulated.

No of course not, saying 'profits unnecessarily sucked out of the country' could be xenophobic! But competing against other countries is not.

Exactly.

 

[Purple]

There are other words for it, but without wanting to get into any legal difficulties I leave as is.

Sure, but none of them are "deregulation".

 

[TheBigShort]

There were rules (regulations) so it was not deregulated.



Exactly.

Really, it is down to this, dictionary definitions of the word xenophobic? Talk about desperation.

 

[Firefly]

If the public transport system is losing money, the reasons for the losses need to be factored in.
For instance, if a bus and rail system are generating losses in a high density area, is it because people dont use the system because of high prices, or are the fares affordable but the system unreliable? If its the latter, competition would be useful. If the former, taxpayer subsidies to reduce prices, increase passengers, reducing gridlock would be useful - still making a loss, but the economic benefit in reducing gridlock would outweigh the loss.

I have never heard of anyone who didn't take the bus or train do so because it was too expensive. Actually, I did years ago, before the Cork-Dublin motorway was completed and the trains were very expensive (because they could be). Most of the complaints I've heard have to do with punctuality and frequency

In any case, is Irish rail making a loss? Is Dublin Bus making a loss?

Do you mean before or after any subventions are taken into account?

I was talking about public/state ownership.

Why the distinction between public and private sectors? Do you think the customer would care?

Great idea, the assumption is the unions wouldnt allow it, doubt it. I would put it down to poor management.

We might never know, but my money would be on the unions

What do call a regulated sector where the regulators turn a blind eye? I'll give you a clue, it starts with u, ends with d, and has -nregulate- in the middle. For sure, it was never official or legislated for, but it amounted to the same thing. Check out those bank balance sheets, or the value of shares wiped out.

That's my point. The regulator (civil servants) turned a blind eye!

If they were State run there would be a clamour of calls to privatise it for 'market efficiencies'.

And rightly so. A state owned back would be open to all sorts of interference by politicians.

This is not free market, the regulator imposes minimum charges that the providers must charges, with the exception of discount offers for new customers.

You're getting there!




Third time....what do you make of my suggestion for teachers to work during the summer and give each other courses over Skype to improve their teaching standards?

 

[TheBigShort]

Lastly, what do you make of my suggestion for teachers to work during the summer and give each other courses over Skype to improve their teaching standards?

I think its a good idea. But I think you are deluded if you think it wont cost money. The notion that 'highly regarded' teachers will offer up six weeks holidays for free is a nonsense. Dont you watch the news?
And what will all the other less regarded teachers do? Go on holidays?
By the way, when you have your Skype sessions, do you do them when you are on holidays?

 

[TheBigShort]

I have never heard of anyone who didn't take the bus or train do so because it was too expensive.

I did. Plenty. Far outweighing complaints about punctuality. In fact if you read any social media about the recent Bus/Luas strikes, the prominent anti-striker complaint was about fares increasing.

That's my point. The regulator (civil servants) turned a blind eye!

No I dont get your point. You want to de-regulate the regulators?

You're getting there!

Its pity that you are not. You really do believe it when it says free-market competition on the tin that it must be so.
Its a sector dressed up as a free-market with 'competitors', fuzzy warm advertising, 'exclusive discounts' (to 'new customers') and shiny logo's and marketing.
Behind it all is the Wizard of Oz in the form of the regulator determing maximum and minimum pricing to elicit profit for shareholders. Controlled by executive boardrooms who invariably will slice and dice the profits disproportionately in their own favour.