My sympathies on the job loss. That's probably how it came to Ireland in the first place though.
Your case is a timely dose of reality for the blinkered socialists posting here.
"We must dismantle our culture of dependency"
- Thread starter Brendan Burgess
- Start date
Your case is a timely dose of reality for the blinkered socialists posting here.
Gerry Canning
Registered User
- Messages
- 2,504
PGF & Purple,
I hear you , think we have to get to a debate on what is work/value etc .
(pay increases are a good thing = nuts) , unless the lower paid get nuff to buy stuff we are going nowhere !
The USA has a massive internal market , but Europes is bigger and I would like to see all workers getting nuff to consume things.
You havn,t stated it , but I don,t think USA is a great community model ?
I hear you , think we have to get to a debate on what is work/value etc .
(pay increases are a good thing = nuts) , unless the lower paid get nuff to buy stuff we are going nowhere !
The USA has a massive internal market , but Europes is bigger and I would like to see all workers getting nuff to consume things.
You havn,t stated it , but I don,t think USA is a great community model ?
I don't see any lack of consumption in Ireland. I see over consumption or consumption of things that don't make us any happier (TVs, cars, gadgets etc.).
That's my opinion though and I'm sure most would disagree.
Yep, agreed. The market sets the rate. That's the only fair way.
I don't understand your point.
We are talking about Ireland, not Europe.
True but that's a different point.
Gerry Canning
Registered User
- Messages
- 2,504
Purple,
(I don,t understand your point)
Unless employees get nuff to spend on items above bare necessities like food etc and can reasonably look at things like home ownership/good renting ,we end up with a sour underclass and an insulated class and that's no good for anyone.
(we are talking about Irl not Europe)
Since we joined Eu 40 odd year ago , we are inexorably moving more and more to one market , quite like USA states.
(different point) true .
(I don,t understand your point)
Unless employees get nuff to spend on items above bare necessities like food etc and can reasonably look at things like home ownership/good renting ,we end up with a sour underclass and an insulated class and that's no good for anyone.
(we are talking about Irl not Europe)
Since we joined Eu 40 odd year ago , we are inexorably moving more and more to one market , quite like USA states.
(different point) true .
Do you think pay should be set on that basis or on the basis of the value the employee brings to the organisation?
The issue of a minimum standard of living is a social one and if we deem such a thing desirable it should be addressed by the state through the welfare system. It is unreasonable to force an employer to shoulder such a social responsibility directly. If employers are required to fund it then increase taxes but don't price low skilled employees out of the market.
Gerry Canning
Registered User
- Messages
- 2,504
It is easy to use (employee value to organisation) as a full benchmark, though I readily accept (value to employer)must make up a large %.
I don,t want my opinion to be viewed as a black/white /either /or view.
Employers benefit from the social costs of infrastructure and in things like prsi they contribute.
As an opinion ,
I worry about wages/reward being lowered to a minimalistic degree.
I worry that unscrupulous employers take advantage of this.
I worry that some lazy gits take advantage of our welfare system.
I worry mostly, that I see a drift to well paid V lowly paid staff, and that these lowly paid are left to endure their (place) in life !.
I don,t want my opinion to be viewed as a black/white /either /or view.
Employers benefit from the social costs of infrastructure and in things like prsi they contribute.
As an opinion ,
I worry about wages/reward being lowered to a minimalistic degree.
I worry that unscrupulous employers take advantage of this.
I worry that some lazy gits take advantage of our welfare system.
I worry mostly, that I see a drift to well paid V lowly paid staff, and that these lowly paid are left to endure their (place) in life !.
I agree Gerry but social engineering is not a long term substitute for self development.
The state should help people to become more skilled.
TheBigShort
Registered User
- Messages
- 2,789
Im minded of my previous post on the 22nd Aug.
Does this principle apply to pay cuts also? If you do the same job the same way shouldn't this rule out a pay cut?
As has been pointed out to you earlier, some people, far more qualified than me, would disagree.
Does this principle apply to pay cuts also? If you do the same job the same way shouldn't this rule out a pay cut?
As has been pointed out to you earlier, some people, far more qualified than me, would disagree.
They account for about 30% of our debt. The rest is the result of paying wages and welfare which the state can't afford so I'd be slow to go down that road if I was you.
Yes in general, though when your employer (the state) is bankrupt and your wages are being paid with borrowings then things are a bit different.
Where was that (in the context of Ireland)?
TheBigShort
Registered User
- Messages
- 2,789
What about in the instance where the employer (public or private) has returned to profitability ?
What if you are doing the same job the same way as last year and your employer has returned to profitability? Are things a bit different then also?
TheBigShort
Registered User
- Messages
- 2,789
Its in the context of general economic theory. Wages are inflationary. Central banks around the world are trying to stoke inflation. Their primary tool is QE which is failing. It is only creating greater divides between rich and poor.
This is why property prices are rising in affluent areas of capital cities around the world, but elsewhere they are stagnant. This is why debt burdens are increasing not reducing as all money issued today is on the basis of a loan taken out rather than the value of productivity
The quickest and fairest way to stoke inflation into developed economies is through increased wages. This will stoke inflation, reduce debt burdens, increase consumption.
But it will also mean a massive transfer of capital to labour. Something that monetarists cannot countenance right now.
Only 30%!! That makes it ok so - not.
Well I figure, some €64bn to bailout banks, €32bn for NAMA, plus the corporate tax avoidance schemes that are alleged at least €15bn (and counting).
I make that closer to 50% of our national debt is in the form of social welfare benefits to keep bankrupt bankers in business and to facilitate the increase in share price for US multinationals.
Interestingly our reputable 'leprechaun' economics, as its widely known now, that posted an increase of 26% GDP means the state is in hoc to the EU for a further €380m a year funding. This equates to about 5,500 jobs in Apple, paying some €70,000 a year on average.
So in other words, the value of all those Apple jobs can be written off to EU funding.
The 64bn to bailout the banks was the gross figure - a lot of this has been repaid. I think the net figure is about 40-45bn. What does the figure of 32bn for NAMA refer to?
TheBigShort
Registered User
- Messages
- 2,789
Repaid by who?
The 32bn was the figure NAMA gave to the banks to offload bad developer loans of some 60bn odd. NAMA is on a promise to make a profit for the state and may well do so, but it remains to be seen.
Who repaid the bank debt, and to whom?
I should have rephrased that - "some has been repaid and the states ownership in the banks now means the net figure is about 40-45nb"
From the IT http://www.irishtimes.com/business/...-31-of-bailout-funds-by-end-of-2015-1.2585690
"[broken link removed] and [broken link removed] had repaid 31 per cent of the bailout funds that they received from the Ireland Strategic Investment Fund by the end of last year, according to figures published yesterday."
"....the two banks had returned €6.4 billion in receipts to the State agency"
"..The Isif figures estimate that, in total, the remaining stakes in AIB and Bank of Ireland are worth €13.5 billion."
So we have 6.4 + 13.5 = 19.9bn. Take this from 64bn and we have a net of about 40bn
Anyways, we are way off topic
I would be happy to contribute to this if you wish to raise in another thread.
Same here but, no offense to thebigshort, we'd be discussing economics with a socialist which is like discussing evolution with a creationist.
TheBigShort
Registered User
- Messages
- 2,789
Ha! Not sure if seen this before, but im only picking up on that little dig.
Thats funny, considering what went before in this topic, and more so since then in other topics.
Thanks. I knew you wouldn't take it the wrong way