# Nation in denial



## Teatime (23 Feb 2009)

It seems to me that we as a nation are completely in denial.
It was our own fault that we got into this financial mess and I mean the massive Budget deficit. We are all to blame some more than others.
The government did not help matters and some of the bankers should be jailed but it is our own fault at the end of the day.
In the last 10 years we have become unfriendly, ignorant and irresponsible money grabbers...
Nobody forced us to elect the same bunch for 10 years+
Nobody forced the opposition to be so poor and to criticise expansive budgets for not going further.
Nobody forced us to build houses with more than 3 bathrooms
Nobody made us build houses greater than 3000 sq foot for 4/5 people max. 2000 sq ft even.
Nobody forced us to buy brand new 4WD jeeps and people carrier gas guzzlers and develop our ability for ultra-impatient 'road rage'
Nobody forces us to talk about money money money and house prices and salaries constantly
Everybody encouraged everybody else to buy into the great pyramid scheme
Where are those people who screamed at those that tried to warn us - I was bitterly accused of 'talking down the economy' a year ago when
I started to fear the worst. All for the Greedier good.
Nobody forced us to treat the eastern european workers badly to increase profits.
Nobody forced us to buy badly built semi-detached houses in obscure parts of the country for 300k+
Nobody forced us to buy second homes, third homes,....
Nobody forced us to take foreign holidays 2/3 times a year
We were too cocky and voted No to Lisbon - next time we will be all over Lisbon like a rash and begging for more EU grants...

And so 120,000 marched. I am not sure why they did exactly - What is the alternative solution? Its everyone for themselves now and the unions
know that better than anyone. We need to come with a solution fast or it will changes from marches to riots. 1980s, 1950s will seem like a blip in
comparison.

Facts are; 40% of our economy was based on a pyramid scheme in construction. That's now gone. We need to cut public spending costs
in line with that. Stark but simple and we will all suffer. We also need to reclaim our souls along the way.


----------



## DerKaiser (23 Feb 2009)

I'd have agreed 100% up to a couple of weeks ago.  We were all a little bit foolish and greedy.

Where I'd differ, however, is that I believe most of us were honest in our jobs and do not now deserve to be footing the bill for hundreds of millions of euros arising from very suspect banking deals


----------



## tosh100 (23 Feb 2009)

Agree totally with DerKaiser. Most ordinary working people feel that they will now be left to foot the bill of others. Many people did not but into what Teatime has outlined.


----------



## z103 (23 Feb 2009)

> It was our own fault that we got into this financial mess and I mean the massive Budget deficit. We are all to blame some more than others.
> The government did not help matters and some of the bankers should be jailed but it is our own fault at the end of the day.


We were certainly encouraged by the government and media to do various things in the above list.
Why did the government provide section 23 and other tax breaks at the peak of a property bubble for example? The media was full of examples of lovely property, the value of which would only increase. Why did the government swell the size of the public sector, create useless quangos and award huge pay increases? They certainly added fuel to the fire.

I would say the government are largely to blame for the mess we are now in. Oh, and I didn't elect them. I didn't vote for them so I'm not to blame.


----------



## orka (23 Feb 2009)

DerKaiser said:


> most of us were honest in our jobs and do not now deserve to be footing the bill for hundreds of millions of euros arising from very suspect banking deals


 


tosh100 said:


> Most ordinary working people feel that they will now be left to foot the bill of others


 
I think this is where the denial is creeping in. It is true that very few people are red-handedly 'to blame' for the current crisis. But pretty much everybody has benefited in some way from the things that caused the crisis. More than they should have been - salaries were increased, taxes were reduced and social welfare payments were increased. What now needs to be done (amongst many other things...) is an unwinding of these benefits that none of us should have had in the first place. And while it is unpalatable because nobody wants a reduction in income/standard of living, people need to ask themselves honestly 'where would I be/what would my income/standard of living be if some of the 'bad stuff, nothing to do with me, bankers/developers run amok' things had NOT happened. If the government had kept a firm hand on things, if banks didn't lend to developers etc etc - what would your net income be today? If it would be lower, you are part of the problem if you refuse to be flexible in sharing the pain.

I find the stubborn 'nothing to do with me but I'm not handing back what I gained' attitude really troubling - because if we can't get past that, it is difficult to see a way out of this without either a very prolonged recession or external management of our economy.


----------



## Purple (23 Feb 2009)

orka said:


> I think this is where the denial is creeping in. It is true that very few people are red-handedly 'to blame' for the current crisis. But pretty much everybody has benefited in some way from the things that caused the crisis. More than they should have been - salaries were increased, taxes were reduced and social welfare payments were increased. What now needs to be done (amongst many other things...) is an unwinding of these benefits that none of us should have had in the first place. And while it is unpalatable because nobody wants a reduction in income/standard of living, people need to ask themselves honestly 'where would I be/what would my income/standard of living be if some of the 'bad stuff, nothing to do with me, bankers/developers run amok' things had NOT happened. If the government had kept a firm hand on things, if banks didn't lend to developers etc etc - what would your net income be today? If it would be lower, you are part of the problem if you refuse to be flexible in sharing the pain.
> 
> I find the stubborn 'nothing to do with me but I'm not handing back what I gained' attitude really troubling - because if we can't get past that, it is difficult to see a way out of this without either a very prolonged recession or external management of our economy.


I agree completely with that.


----------



## bamboozle (23 Feb 2009)

what scares me most is this agenda to put as much blame on the bankers & the property developers, and i am neither.

yes some bankers broke the law, yes huge loans were given out, yes property developers made millions, but lets stop for a second and think who is responsible for monitoring the financial industry in this country....

The financial regulator.  thats where the buck should stop...but what happens he gets a payoff.

If we had proper corporate governance & proper regulation of the financial industry the bankers would never have been in a position to create any of the mess they did.


----------



## Teatime (23 Feb 2009)

orka said:


> I think this is where the denial is creeping in. It is true that very few people are red-handedly 'to blame' for the current crisis. But pretty much everybody has benefited in some way from the things that caused the crisis. More than they should have been - salaries were increased, taxes were reduced and social welfare payments were increased. What now needs to be done (amongst many other things...) is an unwinding of these benefits that none of us should have had in the first place. And while it is unpalatable because nobody wants a reduction in income/standard of living, people need to ask themselves honestly 'where would I be/what would my income/standard of living be if some of the 'bad stuff, nothing to do with me, bankers/developers run amok' things had NOT happened. If the government had kept a firm hand on things, if banks didn't lend to developers etc etc - what would your net income be today? If it would be lower, you are part of the problem if you refuse to be flexible in sharing the pain.
> 
> I find the stubborn 'nothing to do with me but I'm not handing back what I gained' attitude really troubling - because if we can't get past that, it is difficult to see a way out of this without either a very prolonged recession or external management of our economy.


 
Agree 100%. Well said.


----------



## Teatime (23 Feb 2009)

bamboozle said:


> what scares me most is this agenda to put as much blame on the bankers & the property developers, and i am neither.
> 
> yes some bankers broke the law, yes huge loans were given out, yes property developers made millions, but lets stop for a second and think who is responsible for monitoring the financial industry in this country....
> 
> ...


 
Agreed and I think the EU will impose regulations so that this never happens again but I dont think we can continue to blamestorm - we need to act now (today) to save the economy and hope that the financial 'criminals' get the justice they deserve . I am not sure what power the regulator has and even if he got guillotined tomorrow morning, we'd still be in the same financial mess. 

We need to look to the future rather than criticise the past.


----------



## thedaras (23 Feb 2009)

We are all to blame some more than others.
The government did not help matters and some of the bankers should be jailed but it is our own fault at the end of the day.
In the last 10 years we have become unfriendly, ignorant and irresponsible money grabbers...

*Speak for yourself please!!*


----------



## DerKaiser (23 Feb 2009)

orka said:


> I think this is where the denial is creeping in. It is true that very few people are red-handedly 'to blame' for the current crisis
> But pretty much everybody has benefited in some way from the things that caused the crisis.


 
As a nation we currently spend €20bn a year more than we raise in taxes. This is the big item we have to deal with and it will ultimately involve reduced wages and services as well as higher taxes. Having run up massive personal debts to maintain an unsustainable lifestyle is no excuse for people not to face up to the situtaion.

However, we are now being saddled with a probable €5bn deficit from Anglo. A few very corrupt people have made the situation we are in a lot more severe than it should be. People can say this corruption was just a product of the society we live in so we are all responsible, in the same way we are responsible for each and every gangland muder and each road death. Ultimately some are a lot more reponsible than others and to say otherwise is simply denial of the number of things in our lives that aren't directly under our control.




orka said:


> salaries were increased, taxes were reduced and social welfare payments were increased. What now needs to be done (amongst many other things...) is an unwinding of these benefits that none of us should have had in the first place. And while it is unpalatable because nobody wants a reduction in income/standard of living, people need to ask themselves honestly 'where would I be/what would my income/standard of living be if some of the 'bad stuff, nothing to do with me, bankers/developers run amok' things had NOT happened. If the government had kept a firm hand on things, if banks didn't lend to developers etc etc - what would your net income be today? If it would be lower, you are part of the problem if you refuse to be flexible in sharing the pain.


Agreed, there was no long term sustainability of high wages and lowincome taxes. In fact the short term wage and tax levels have contributed to a squandering of money we needed to ride out the recession



orka said:


> I find the stubborn 'nothing to do with me but I'm not handing back what I gained' attitude really troubling - because if we can't get past that, it is difficult to see a way out of this without either a very prolonged recession or external management of our economy.


For me this is the heart of the matter and I too think that such attitudes only serve to make the situation worse.


----------



## Lex Foutish (24 Feb 2009)

Teatime said:


> We were too cocky and voted No to Lisbon - next time we will be all over Lisbon like a rash and begging for more EU grants...


Oh, so true. And no shame whatsoever!


----------



## Teatime (24 Feb 2009)

orka said:


> I find the stubborn 'nothing to do with me but I'm not handing back what I gained' attitude really troubling - because if we can't get past that, it is difficult to see a way out of this without either a very prolonged recession or external management of our economy.


 
When will people get the message I wonder? We nearly need to beg the govt to increase taxes and cut spending at this point.

I know couples who are not affected by the crisis at all yet i.e. still have high salaries in safe jobs, high savings etc. They are cutting spending in a huge way e.g. no social life, making lunch rather than buying, bargain hunting constantly, so that they "can ride out the storm" - but surely if these people dont keep up their normal level of spening it only makes the downturn worse with less taxes to govt and more unemployment ?


----------



## PaddyW (24 Feb 2009)

I just wonder why the goverment ever cut the taxes in the first place, had they left them at higher levels people wouldn't have been so reckless with the extra money that they had in their pockets. Better put them back in place and cut public spending asap.


----------



## Padraigb (24 Feb 2009)

PaddyW said:


> I just wonder why the goverment ever cut the taxes in the first place...



Because the electorate kept voting for parties that promised to cut taxes.

I think we might have reached a point where tax-cutting was not as high a priority as it had been for most people, but many politicians failed to notice that.


----------



## PaddyW (24 Feb 2009)

Yeah, kinda guessed it was to do with their election promises. For me, if they had left them as they were it would have been no problem, what you never had you never missed and all that. Could've held off some of the obscene spending that we've seen in the past few years if they had kept the taxes high and people had less in their pockets to squander.


----------



## DublinTexas (24 Feb 2009)

Increasing taxes? Are you guys seriously? You seriously believe that raising taxes will help?

In a country where savings these days yield no or minimal return and that minimal return than is taxed with 23% and possible also eaten by inflation, how can you expect people to prepare themselves for bad times. Now you want to raise that tax even higher?

The couple that Teatime talks about reduced their spending because they are worried and our govement is doing nothing to calm the situation. So they save money and don't spend and you are complaining about that, now you raise the taxes so they have less to spend (possible even less than they have now) and hence they will make further cutbacks or even find legal loopholes to pay less taxes. 

So instead of raising taxes you must give a break on DIRT to encourage saving and find a way to get them spending again by for example lowering the VAT and making them feel that the storm is over.

I have only made minor cutbacks up to now (grab a bus instead of taxi, shop at tesco instead of superquinn, downgrade my Sky subscription) but if the taxes are going up than I will have to make further cutbacks which will directly effect the jobmarket.

I will do my own cleaning at home more often which means I cut the time the cleaning lady comes in half resulting in her sooner or later being out of a job.

I will do the same with my garden and that company is already near to going out of the business anyhow so I might be the last straw.

I stop going out regulary and eat at home more often which means that there are less restaurant staff and VAT. And that is a hard one for me because I love going out for food.

I will up my contribution to my pension fund because I feel that I want to lower my tax burden while doing something good for myself. And rather me having it in my older years than a uncontrollable tax man now.

I will finaly hire an accountant to ensure that I get all tax benefits I can get rather than just accepting the PAYE way. 

Put even more money into the savings account because I feel that if this continues I will be out of job. And use a large part that I would usualy spend to pay for a bill protector which gives me additional funds if I become umployed.

Now what does hiking taxes bring you, more people that feel the storm is too big to handle and which cut off spending resulting in more umemployed.

What you want is me continuing to get services done for which I am too lazy (Cleaning/garden) or which I enjoy (going out for food) while encouraging savings (by getting ride of DIRT or lowering it).

But that is only my personal situation.


----------



## DerKaiser (24 Feb 2009)

That's your budget.  The country also has a budget and it is running up debts of €20bn a year on behalf of all of us.  Like it or not this cost will ultimately be bourne by all of us.  

There is naturally a vicious circle of higher taxes not leading to proportionately higher tax takes as disposable incomes fall.  This is why public spending will utimately be slashed with the most vulnerable suffering (given that the bulk of spending is on health, education and social welfare).


----------



## cork (24 Feb 2009)

DerKaiser said:


> This is why public spending will utimately be slashed with the most vulnerable suffering (given that the bulk of spending is on health, education and social welfare).


 
But why not cut back the 113 local authority organisations or the small hospitals or one person garda stations?

It is time we dragged public services into the 21st century.


----------



## DerKaiser (24 Feb 2009)

cork said:


> But why not cut back the 113 local authority organisations or the small hospitals or one person garda stations?
> 
> It is time we dragged public services into the 21st century.


 
Because these measures alone will not save €20bn.

Cutting the dole by €50 pw would save less than €1bn per annum.

Adding a flat 5% tax on gross incomes will raise barely €4bn before taking account of the resulting loss of VAT etc from reduced consumption.

We're gone well beyond the point where efficiencies and minor tinkering will balance the books.

Schools will be severely underfunded, Hospitals will close, social welfare will be cut and taxes will be increased significantly.

We will look back in a couple of years time and the lunacy of someone on €50k a year protesting at losing €50pw from their net pay will appear ridiculous. 

If someone doesn't understand that a 5 - 6% cut in net pay will pale into insignificance in terms of what is to come they have no right to criticise government policy


----------



## cole (24 Feb 2009)

DerKaiser said:


> If someone doesn't understand that a 5 - 6% cut in net pay will pale into insignificance in terms of *what is to come* they have no right to criticise government policy


 
This is part of the problem..we haven't a clue what's to come. We have conjecture and rumour but no hard facts. I suspect our leaders have some hard facts but they are unwilling (or unable) to share them with the rest of us. Why don't they lay the cards squarely on the table so that we know what's ahead of us?


----------



## Padraigb (24 Feb 2009)

cole said:


> This is part of the problem..we haven't a clue what's to come. We have conjecture and rumour but no hard facts. I suspect our leaders have some hard facts but they are unwilling (or unable) to share them with the rest of us. Why don't they lay the cards squarely on the table so that we know what's ahead of us?



How do you think some people here know that we have a €20bn public finances gap? The government told us, and we heard it.

So we know something about what is ahead of us: expenditure cuts and tax increases on a massive scale. But, as OP said, we are in denial.


----------



## cole (24 Feb 2009)

That's only part of the picture/problem. We still don't know our exposure to the banks. As well as that, some economists are saying that the government picture on public expenditure is too conservative.


----------



## jasconius (24 Feb 2009)

1c tax on text messages would raise say €75million
So 10c tax could raise €0.75billion
Allow for less usage, call it €0.5billion


----------



## jasconius (24 Feb 2009)

Sorry system very slow tonight


----------



## PaddyW (25 Feb 2009)

Carrying on from that DerKaiser, how bad do you imagine things will get. Anyone care to hazard any guesses??


----------



## Padraigb (25 Feb 2009)

jasconius said:


> 1c tax on text messages would raise say €75million
> So 10c tax could raise €0.75billion
> Allow for less usage, call it €0.5billion



Add on a 1c tax for posts to bulletin boards and, more particularly, social networking sites, and you're going back towards €1.0bn!


----------



## NorthDrum (25 Feb 2009)

PaddyW said:


> Carrying on from that DerKaiser, how bad do you imagine things will get. Anyone care to hazard any guesses??


 

I will be honest and suggest that nobody really wants to suggest a figure or outcome . . . .

The truth is nobody knows, but most fears the worst. . .

Hey, we could be out of this in three years or twenty years (is it any crazy then saying we could be bankrupt in 2009!!!).

To be honest Paddyw . . . . 

I personally think that alot depends on how we, as a nation, can respond to the *tyranny* of the self interested . . .

Just ask yourself, who has anything to gain, from anything that comes from most of the things that we can all associate from most government departments . . .

Honestly, ask yourself, who really benefits from this strike campaign . . . Oh, the average Joe, who hasnt been heard for the last 20 years . .


----------



## PaddyW (25 Feb 2009)

Touche.. Too true.


----------



## Teatime (25 Feb 2009)

NorthDrum said:


> Just ask yourself, who has anything to gain, from anything that comes from most of the things that we can all associate from most government departments . . .
> 
> Honestly, ask yourself, who really benefits from this strike campaign . . . Oh, the average Joe, who hasnt been heard for the last 20 years . .


 
Who !?

You're up early PaddyW.


----------



## PaddyW (25 Feb 2009)

Early riser, up almost an hour at that stage... my 11 hour days dictate to that!


----------



## RMCF (25 Feb 2009)

Although many will say that those marching and constantly threatening about strikes are only looking for the rich to get hit as well, I don't believe this.

We always hear about the willingness of this population to take a bit of pain to get us out of this mess. I think we may have overestimated the willingness.

As soon as cuts/changes were made (necessary cuts/changes) then everyone started complaining. Many are now taking to the streets and I think that a summer of strikes and more marching is also on the way. I just feel that these people can't accept the fact that they have to pay more. But I'd love to know how they expect the country to operate if it doesn't do these things?

Simple answer - it can't. These cuts must happen. And they will probably get worse in the next 12 months too, and so will the complaining.

I do feel that the Gov is going to come down hard on the rich/super rich in the next budget. And this will be welcomed if it happens. But we all need to accept that getting angry about cuts and marching on the streets serves no purpose. We have to take the pain, and lets hope that everyone suffers.


----------



## Shawady (25 Feb 2009)

Just realised we are worrying over nothing.
The government has it all under control.

[broken link removed]


----------



## UptheDeise (25 Feb 2009)

DerKaiser said:


> Because these measures alone will not save €20bn.
> 
> Cutting the dole by €50 pw would save less than €1bn per annum.
> 
> ...


 

I agree with you DerKaiser that the goivernment will have to make substantial cuts to save this country. 

However I believe that forces outside of control will ultimately lead to our demise.

President Barack is hell bent on destroying the US dollar like Prime Minister Browne is destroying streling.

The bail outs are failing and the stimulus packages won't work. Already AIG is calling for a third bailout package of 60 billion.

Both the American and British fed and central banks are beginning to print billions if not trillions of paper money. This will devalue there currencies and eventually lead to hyperinflation which will lead to price controls which will lead to food lines which will lead to riots.

If we don't have any money we will not be able to pay our public servants or our social welfare recipents.

The middles classes will be wiped out and they'll be utter economic ruination.

That's all folks.


----------



## Purple (25 Feb 2009)

Buy a shotgun and stock up on canned/ dried goods.


----------



## Padraigb (25 Feb 2009)

Purple said:


> Buy a shotgun and stock up on canned/ dried goods.



What's the point? We're all doomed, anyway.


----------



## Purple (25 Feb 2009)

Padraigb said:


> What's the point? We're all doomed, anyway.



Doomed I tells ya, DOOMED!


----------



## Complainer (25 Feb 2009)

RMCF said:


> Although many will say that those marching and constantly threatening about strikes are only looking for the rich to get hit as well, I don't believe this.
> 
> We always hear about the willingness of this population to take a bit of pain to get us out of this mess. I think we may have overestimated the willingness.
> 
> ...


I disagree. Much of the resistance to the pension levy is the fundamental unfairness of targeting one particular group of workers, when the Govt has many other options available. Eliminating mortgage interest relief for landlords and reducing the cap tax relief for pension contributions from €150k to €100k per annum would bring in the same amount as the pension levy, but the Govt took (yet again) what they percieved to be the easy option.


----------



## PaddyW (25 Feb 2009)

And all those things may yet happen Complainer. Many non public service workers have already been targeted, maybe not by the goverment, but by having their pay cut. Yet I don't hear them complaining, all I hear is how happy they are to still have a job and a regular income. 

I expect a pay cut any day soon. I'm not going to complain, I'm willing to take the pain if it means that I still have a job at the end of the day. I also expect increased taxation, I won't complain, even though most of the extra tax I pay will (quite possibly) go towards footing the wage bill of those particular group of workers who have been unfairly targeted.


----------



## UptheDeise (26 Feb 2009)

Also stock up on booze and tobacco. They'll be worth a fortune when the economy collapses.


----------



## Padraigb (26 Feb 2009)

UptheDeise said:


> Also stock up on booze and tobacco. They'll be worth a fortune when the economy collapses.



Nobody will have the means to buy them from you.


----------



## dockingtrade (26 Feb 2009)

lets just have a big party that lasts a few months and blow it all, at least we would have enjoyed it


----------



## Purple (26 Feb 2009)

dockingtrade said:


> lets just have a big party that lasts a few months and blow it all, at least we would have enjoyed it



We did; it lasted 10 years.


----------



## UptheDeise (26 Feb 2009)

Padraigb said:


> Nobody will have the means to buy them from you.


 

But I could trade them for things I need.


----------



## Padraigb (26 Feb 2009)

UptheDeise said:


> But I could trade them for things I need.



I chose the word _means_ rather than _money._


----------



## Complainer (26 Feb 2009)

PaddyW said:


> And all those things may yet happen Complainer.


Why wait? Why hold off addresses these issues and other abuses while singling out public sector staff? There is no fairness in that.



PaddyW said:


> I also expect increased taxation, I won't complain, even though most of the extra tax I pay will (quite possibly) go towards footing the wage bill of those particular group of workers who have been unfairly targeted.


A fair bit of your tax increase will go towards govt spending with the private sector too.

I wouldn't be complaining about a fair increase in taxation either. I am complaining about the unfair levy, and if you think the current complaints/campaigns/protests are rough, wait till you see what happens if the two Brians are dumb enough to try to come back and hit public servants for a tax increase on top of the levy.


----------



## PaddyW (27 Feb 2009)

Ok, so never mind the country going broke, if they dare to hit the ps with tax increases, you'll just bring the country down anyway?


----------



## Complainer (27 Feb 2009)

PaddyW said:


> if they dare to hit the ps with tax increases, you'll just bring the country down anyway?


No, if they dare to hit the PS with two cuts when everyone else gets hit with one, we'll show them the error of their ways.


----------



## Teatime (27 Feb 2009)

Complainer said:


> No, if they dare to hit the PS with two cuts when everyone else gets hit with one, we'll show them the error of their ways.


 
And when the govt cannot pay your wages because they cant borrow any more money, who will be in error ?


----------



## DerKaiser (27 Feb 2009)

Complainer said:


> Why wait? Why hold off addresses these issues and other abuses while singling out public sector staff? There is no fairness in that.


Fairness is a concept that has to apply to others as well as yourself.

Your main suggestion was to eliminate the mortgage interest offset against rent.

This is highly unfair as any other business can offset their interest against revenues to calculate the profit on which they are taxed.

Secondly eliminating the interest offset by definition targets those with little or no equity in their investment properties i.e. it's not an effective way of targetting wealth

Thirdly most of these people will have paid hefty stamp duties in recent years.

So I ask you to have a long thing about it and come back and tell me whether you think someone with a loss making investment who has ploughed a huge amount of stamp duty into the exchequer should now be targetted.

By the way I do not own an investment property.


----------



## Purple (27 Feb 2009)

Teatime said:


> And when the govt cannot pay your wages because they cant borrow any more money, who will be in error ?


 Did you notice that no one has answered you?


----------



## Teatime (27 Feb 2009)

Purple said:


> Did you notice that no one has answered you?


 
Perhaps they're in denial...


----------



## UptheDeise (27 Feb 2009)

Teatime said:


> Perhaps they're in denial...


 
The government will start issuing IOU's which of course will be worthless. I think they are doing this in California.


----------



## Complainer (27 Feb 2009)

Teatime said:


> Perhaps they're in denial...


Or perhaps they are too busy working serving the public to be reading/posting on AAM?


----------



## S.L.F (27 Feb 2009)

Teatime said:


> And when the govt cannot pay your wages because they cant borrow any more money, who will be in error ?


 
I can answer that...........the Govt


----------



## Complainer (28 Feb 2009)

DerKaiser said:


> Fairness is a concept that has to apply to others as well as yourself.
> 
> Your main suggestion was to eliminate the mortgage interest offset against rent.
> 
> ...


Isn't it strange how the firstly/secondly/thirdly downsides of the pension levy don't get much airtime? Isn't it strange how the example you give isn't of the landlord with multiple properties who experienced approx ten-fold growth in the value of his investment over the previous 15 years and maximises his interest allowance artificially with interest-only loans, even though he has more than enough cash to pay down the capital? We're a longway from fairness in this discussion.

There are no easy decisions here. All the options available to the Govt will involve pain. It is a question of fairly spreading that pain. The pensions levy is fundamentally unfair, and this Govt will pay the price.


----------



## RMCF (28 Feb 2009)

The post about the Gov not having the money to pay wages in the public sector got me thinking about the worst case scenario and if this became likely.

What assets does the Irish Gov own that it could sell off now to make a handfull of billion? How many things could it privatise?


----------



## liaconn (28 Feb 2009)

Teatime said:


> And when the govt cannot pay your wages because they cant borrow any more money, who will be in error ?


 
The Government, for not going after bankers, developers etc and for trying to get the little people to bear the cost. The reason no one answered is probably because we're fed up having to make this point over and over and over.


----------



## diarmuidc (28 Feb 2009)

liaconn said:


> The Government, for not going after bankers, developers etc and for trying to get the little people to bear the cost.


Please specify *exactly* what you mean by "going after bankers developers etc" and roughly how much you intend to raise by your actions.


----------



## liaconn (28 Feb 2009)

diarmuidc said:


> Please specify *exactly* what you mean by "going after bankers developers etc" and roughly how much you intend to raise by your actions.


 

I wasn't aware 'I' was suddenly 'the Government'_._

_They_ should study I_CTU_'s ten point plan and get back into talks to ensure that the ordinary workers do not carry the entire can through job losses, pay cuts and levies while the wealthy, including bankers and developers escape unscathed. This would require significant input from tax experts, economists etc who are far better qualified than 'I' to work out the fine details. Like everyone else, I am just intelligent enough to realise that there is something very wrong about the ordinary man on the street suffering while the people who caused the problem appear to be getting off scot free. I don't mind 'sharing the pain' if it gets the country back on its feet, I do mind the fact that some people seem to be hogging all the painkillers and leaving the rest of us to suffer.


----------



## DerKaiser (28 Feb 2009)

Complainer said:


> Isn't it strange how the firstly/secondly/thirdly downsides of the pension levy don't get much airtime? .


 
Well here you go in regards of airtime and the fairness of the pensions levy. It's simply a pay cut to reflect the fact that this country cannot afford current levels of public sector pay. If you want to make a protest about its perceived fairness in the guise of a pensions charge that's fine. 

Personally I believe it should be tweaked so that top levels of pay are cut in line with the way bank salaries are now being cut. As regards those on lower pay I'd be happy to support the idea that top rates of public sector pay should be much harder hit but I wouldn't support any protest aimed at not taking any hit themselves


----------



## diarmuidc (28 Feb 2009)

liaconn said:


> I wasn't aware 'I' was suddenly 'the Government'_._
> 
> _They_ should study I_CTU_'s ten point plan and get back into talks to ensure that the ordinary workers do not carry the entire can through job losses, pay cuts and levies while the wealthy, including bankers and developers escape unscathed. This would require significant input from tax experts, economists etc who are far better qualified than 'I' to work out the fine details. Like everyone else, I am just intelligent enough to realise that there is something very wrong about the ordinary man on the street suffering while the people who caused the problem appear to be getting off scot free. I don't mind 'sharing the pain' if it gets the country back on its feet, I do mind the fact that some people seem to be hogging all the painkillers and leaving the rest of us to suffer.



So you have no idea if what ICTU is claiming is possible or not, you are just repeating their talking points? If you take even 5 minutes to look at the figures you'll quickly realise that it's not possible. I could outline why if you don't believe me.


----------



## shanegl (1 Mar 2009)

Complainer said:


> No, if they dare to hit the PS with two cuts when everyone else gets hit with one, we'll show them the error of their ways.



I must have imagined all those pay cuts happening in the private sector. I guess since the Government didn't make them, they musn't count.


----------



## sunrock (1 Mar 2009)

People who are earning less than the average industrial wage may not lose out terribly by losing their jobs.Apart from a redundancy cheque,a married couple with 2 kids would be getting about 400euros a week .Surely the dole could be cut by 50 euros a week to 150 euros.....it wasn`t that long ago that it was about that amount.Also the other forms of welfare like pensioners and carers etc could take a similiar cut.I know not politically popular especially as there  are maybe 400,000+ people claiming in this way.The minimum wage will have to be reduced as well,down to about 5 euros.Then we can have benchmarking looking down,instead of everyone trying to match the salaries above them.Next we need to get back to progrssive taxation like it used to be and also to include gov. pensions...I propse a 90% tax on evry gov pension on the balance above 50,000..that would sort out  the likes of neary.Its amazing how people would adjust if everyone took their fair share of pain...after all,the furore of the teachers unions after the autumn budget seems to have abated.


----------



## cole (1 Mar 2009)

sunrock said:


> Its amazing how people would adjust if everyone took their fair share of pain...


 
I agree. And if someone lead by example imagine what the outcome could be.

Just imagine... Cowen caps bankers pay at 150k. He then caps TDs pays at 60k. Ministerial pay is reduced accordingly. He then leads by example and announces that he won't be taking his ministerial salary for the next two years. Would the people follow him? You bet they would. Will it happen? Not likely. It's a pity as they have a real chance to take the people with them if only they'd show some leadership.


----------



## Padraigb (1 Mar 2009)

sunrock said:


> ...Surely the dole could be cut by 50 euros a week to 150 euros.....it wasn`t that long ago that it was about that amount.Also the other forms of welfare like pensioners and carers etc could take a similiar cut....The minimum wage will have to be reduced as well,down to about 5 euros.Then we can have benchmarking looking down,instead of everyone trying to match the salaries above them. ...I propse a 90% tax on evry gov pension on the balance above 50,000.



I suspect that you are not any form of SW support, and don't expect to be, are paid above minimum wage, and are not in the public service. This post looks to me like yet another case of "let somebody else take the pain".


----------



## Complainer (1 Mar 2009)

shanegl said:


> I must have imagined all those pay cuts happening in the private sector.


This is exactly why it is essential that additional revenue requirements are raised through the tax system. If you are earning more, you pay more. If you are earning less, you pay less.


----------



## shanegl (1 Mar 2009)

When taxes are raised, this will be a second cut for many. The PS are not the only ones to have suffered a pay cut.


----------



## Padraigb (1 Mar 2009)

shanegl said:


> When taxes are raised, this will be a second cut for many.



Sure. And there might be need for a third cut, too. The government (any government that we might elect) has very little room for manoeuvre.

The best thing you can do is get ready. Organise your personal finances on the assumption that you will need to manage your life with less money.


----------



## shanegl (1 Mar 2009)

I agree entirely. However, Complainer seems to think that the PS is special and has already taken their (un)fair share of the pain.


----------



## liaconn (1 Mar 2009)

diarmuidc said:


> So you have no idea if what ICTU is claiming is possible or not, you are just repeating their talking points? If you take even 5 minutes to look at the figures you'll quickly realise that it's not possible. I could outline why if you don't believe me.


 
The plan is being presented to get the Government back into talks. David Begg has said himself that its not perfect but is the best that can be offered in the absence of any coherent plan from Government. And this is what we need. A coherent, objective plan with input from all parties including opposing political parties ie putting the economy before votes.  At present the Govt is still indulging its cronyism tendencies. The appointment of Richie Boucher is proof of that.

Out of curiosity, are you saying bankers and developers shouldn't have to pay for their recklessness with our money?


----------



## diarmuidc (1 Mar 2009)

liaconn said:


> The plan is being presented to get the Government back into talks. David Begg has said himself that its not perfect but is the best that can be offered in the absence of any coherent plan from Government. And this is what we need. A coherent, objective plan with input from all parties including opposing political parties ie putting the economy before votes.  At present the Govt is still indulging its cronyism tendencies. The appointment of Richie Boucher is proof of that.


 I have heard David Begg (a director of the Central Bank for years BTW)  say that their plan is more about "fairness" than anything else, basically admitting that their 10 point plan is next to useless in closing the deficit



liaconn said:


> Out of curiosity, are you saying bankers and developers shouldn't have to pay for their recklessness with our money?


Bankers and developers should be responsible for their actions. If they committed crimes they should be punished according to the law. No more no less. If the companies they worked for has made huge losses on the back of their actions, the company owners or shareholders should demand their resignation. However as I am neither a shareholder or owner of a bank I am not in a position to demand anything of them. If the government is coming in to support the banks with my tax money I expect to see the required changes in management to ensure the guys who made this mess do not get rewarded for it or are not involved with the running of the banks in the future. This is the governments responsibilty (god help us)

Apart from that, I really don't care about them. The damage is now done, the next goal is to get out of the situation we are in. Taking out all the bankers/developers in the morning and shooting them will make no difference to the huge budget deficit.


----------



## Complainer (1 Mar 2009)

diarmuidc said:


> I have heard David Begg (a director of the Central Bank for years BTW)  say that their plan is more about "fairness" than anything else, basically admitting that their 10 point plan is next to useless in closing the deficit


Congratulations on putting two and two together to get two hundred and seventeen. Let's hope the dept finance guys are better at their sums than you.

Good analysis of the pensions levy from two Trinity academics at http://www.tascnet.ie/upload/public_service_pension_levy_1.pdf


----------



## diarmuidc (1 Mar 2009)

Complainer said:


> Congratulations on putting two and two together to get two hundred and seventeen. Let's hope the dept finance guys are better at their sums than you.



Petty insults like this just makes you look foolish. Your post makes little sense in the context of this discussion


----------



## Complainer (2 Mar 2009)

shanegl said:


> When taxes are raised, this will be a second cut for many.


For how many will it be a second cut?



diarmuidc said:


> Petty insults like this just makes you look foolish. Your post makes little sense in the context of this discussion


OK - let me be less obtuse.



diarmuidc said:


> I have heard David Begg (a director of the Central Bank for years BTW)  say that their plan is more about "fairness" than anything else, basically admitting that their 10 point plan is next to useless in closing the deficit


Can you please clarify how you came to the conclusion that the 10-point plan is 'next to useless' from his comment regarding fairness? There is no logical connection between the two.


----------



## DerKaiser (2 Mar 2009)

Complainer said:


> Congratulations on putting two and two together to get two hundred and seventeen. Let's hope the dept finance guys are better at their sums than you.
> 
> Good analysis of the pensions levy from two Trinity academics at http://www.tascnet.ie/upload/public_service_pension_levy_1.pdf


 
Thanks Complainer, that is a good paper. I wonder whether there are such clear thinkers in the Dept of finance?

The point I take from it is that new taxation measures such as the levy need to be thought through more clearly _if _they are to be introduced. 

Personally I would have thought that any savings can be introduced using our existing taxation system or by cutting wages rather than reinventing our taxation and public sector pay system with hasty measures.


----------



## Teatime (2 Mar 2009)

liaconn said:


> I wasn't aware 'I' was suddenly 'the Government'_._
> 
> _They_ should study I_CTU_'s ten point plan and get back into talks to ensure that the ordinary workers do not carry the entire can through job losses, pay cuts and levies while the wealthy, including bankers and developers escape unscathed. This would require significant input from tax experts, economists etc who are far better qualified than 'I' to work out the fine details. Like everyone else, I am just intelligent enough to realise that there is something very wrong about the ordinary man on the street suffering while the people who caused the problem appear to be getting off scot free. I don't mind 'sharing the pain' if it gets the country back on its feet, I do mind the fact that some people seem to be hogging all the painkillers and leaving the rest of us to suffer.


 
It's a fair point and I think there is enough momentum at present to 'go after' the bankers and developers etc but we'll still be in the same financial mess when these guys & dolls get their just desserts.

My private sector employer is feeling the pinch at the moment has is putting measures in place to address the shortfalls (pay cuts, redundancies). We all have to grin and bear it and hope we survive the lean years.

The government is an employer. It is putting measures in place to address the shortfalls within its own workplace and there is massive resistance. It is only a starting point and maybe PS employees feel targetted but I think it will balance itself out very very soon.


----------



## Bronte (2 Mar 2009)

diarmuidc said:


> However as I am neither a shareholder or owner of a bank


  Are you sure you aren't a part owner of Anglo Irish?


----------



## diarmuidc (2 Mar 2009)

Complainer said:


> Can you please clarify how you came to the conclusion that the 10-point plan is 'next to useless' from his comment regarding fairness? There is no logical connection between the two.


It was a Matt Cooper interview, on each point he was challenged as to how much tax revenue it would raise, on each occasion he claimed that it was more about fairness and he couldn't specify how much it would raise.. You can go and download their [broken link removed], but it's basically a summary of their talking points that you will hear in any David Begg interview. In it they mention the standard tax levies on "wealthy" people etc. but there *isn't a single indication of how much tax revenues their plan will raise.* 

In 2008 €13bn was raised in income tax, with 6.5% of the population paying half this. So lets say this 6.5% are the wealthy and we increase their tax burden by 30%, at the best case scenario this will net €2bn. How is this going to plug a €10+bn deficit? This is the tax take in 2008 (in m€)

Excise Duties    € 5,581.00
Captial Gains    € 1,710.00
Stamp Duties    € 1,780.00
Income Tax    € 13,200.00
Corporation Tax    € 6,000.00
VAT    € 13,525.00
Non Tax    € 808.00
Other    € 576.00

Where are you going to get a couple of billion from this?



> Are you sure you aren't a part owner of Anglo Irish?


True, I forgot about that unfortunate purchase.


----------



## shanegl (2 Mar 2009)

Complainer said:


> For how many will it be a second cut?



More than zero. Many more than zero. Everyone who lost their job will most likely get hit too with lower welfare payments. Making a mockery of this statement:



Complainer said:


> No, if they dare to hit the PS with two cuts when everyone else gets hit with one, we'll show them the error of their ways.



The gist of which states 'we're not taking a pay cut till everyone else does'. 

You and others with this line of thinking need to reconcile the dual nature of the government as both your employer and the taxman.

Like many other employers they have cut the wages of their employees. Some workers in the country aren't going to get hit, some are still getting pay rises. I suggest public sector workers deal with this reality. More power to them, their companies are obviously still doing well and should be commended for their hard work in contributing to the exchequer.

This isn't a socialist paradise yet.


----------



## TarfHead (2 Mar 2009)

Interesting (to me, anyway) piece by Stephen Collins in Saturday's Irish Times.

[broken link removed]

Excerpt (underlines are my choice)

"_The figures on this are quite stark. Just 6 per cent of the workforce earn more than €100,000 a year, yet they contribute 47 per cent of the tax take. The top 1 per cent of earners on €200,000 or over contribute 21 per cent of the total tax take. While people on such large incomes should certainly be asked to pay more in the current national emergency, the exclusion of the bottom 40 per cent of the workforce from the tax net is no longer sustainable._
_In this country workers don’t pay any tax, PRSI or the income levy if they earn less than €18,000. By contrast, in Britain all income above €6,860 is subject to income tax at 20 per cent. Most EU countries follow the British example and bring workers into the tax net at a much lower income threshold than in Ireland._
_.._

_Similarly any increase in the basic 20 per cent rate of tax will also provoke outrage but the Government really has no choice in the matter. Every 1 per cent increase in the standard rate will generate an extra €535 million in revenue in a full year, compared to an extra €220 million for every percentage increase in the top rate._"

Do Fianna Fail have the political courage to widen the tax net and get more people paying a higher standard rate of tax ? This will infuriate the unions, but, how else can they get a similar amount from the tax base ?


----------



## MissRibena (2 Mar 2009)

It's mad Ted!  We've spent the last 10 years listening to how people on the minimum wage should be taken out of the tax net, that this was a priorty, yada, yada, yada.  

Now, all of a sudden, they act all surprised that low-paid workers are not paying much/any tax and claim that a situation like this is not sustainable!  But if it's not sustainable now, how could it ever have been sustainable? Surely sustainable means that it can last through a variety of good and bad times.  

Have they forgotten it was all their own idea - a policy that was trumpeted with puffed-out chests?  Why did the unions go with it anyway; surely it's worse to be taking money from low-paid people when the country is going belly up than when it's bouyant and there are good chances for upskilling and moving to better paid work.  

It's like they have amnesia and are expecting us all to contract it along with them.  I know it's expecting too much to ask for some straight talking but for crying out loud, a short-termist view has been taking by most of the world for the last 10 years, it's not like any of us would die of shock at this stage.   Why all the BS?  More than anything else in this mess, I'm sick of being patronised. 

One way or another, the lower paid are going to have to be hit, either with honest-to-goodness band widening (unlikely) or some other sly type tax that will have the same impact and cause even more agro.


----------



## Bonafide (2 Mar 2009)

They should have brought in a 3rd low tax rate for low earners in the good old days. Then they would only be raising the rate already in existance and not bringing people into the tax net (who never should have left).

Try my hindsight glasses. 20:20 vision.


----------



## Complainer (2 Mar 2009)

TarfHead said:


> Interesting (to me, anyway) piece by Stephen Collins in Saturday's Irish Times.
> 
> [broken link removed]



Just in case you thought that Stephen was some kind of independent commentator, you might like to check out his background; 




MissRibena said:


> It's mad Ted!  We've spent the last 10 years listening to how people on the minimum wage should be taken out of the tax net, that this was a priorty, yada, yada, yada.
> 
> Now, all of a sudden, they act all surprised that low-paid workers are not paying much/any tax and claim that a situation like this is not sustainable!  But if it's not sustainable now, how could it ever have been sustainable? Surely sustainable means that it can last through a variety of good and bad times.


Indeed, less that six months ago Cowen was boasting of taking people out of the tax net. From 


> We took 500,000 such workers out of the tax net altogether over the past decade.





shanegl said:


> More than zero. Many more than zero.


So what is 'many'? Wouldn't it be nice if all our politicians who keep telling us how the private sector has been devastated actually know what this number was?



shanegl said:


> You and others with this line of thinking need to reconcile the dual nature of the government as both your employer and the taxman.
> 
> Like many other employers they have cut the wages of their employees. Some workers in the country aren't going to get hit, some are still getting pay rises. I suggest public sector workers deal with this reality. More power to them, their companies are obviously still doing well and should be commended for their hard work in contributing to the exchequer.


It may be a surprise to you, but I was pretty clear on the fact that my employer was the taxman when I moved from private sector to public sector. I share your 'more power to them' view, as it happens. 


shanegl said:


> This isn't a socialist paradise yet.


Not yet. Wait for the next election...


----------



## DublinTexas (3 Mar 2009)

TarfHead said:


> Interesting (to me, anyway) piece by Stephen Collins in Saturday's Irish Times.
> 
> [broken link removed]
> 
> ...


 
You must put this into real word figures to make it more scary:

about 213822 people are contributing a full of 47 per cent of the tax take.
about 35637 people are contributing a full 21 per cent of the tax take.

If one of the 35637 leaves the state (or pulls a Bono) the state is out of 0.0005 % of it's taxes!

And now they want to rely even more on this group? What if 100 of the 35637 people leave? 0.05% of tax income gone!

Madness.


----------



## sunrock (3 Mar 2009)

DublinTexas said:


> You must put this into real word figures to make it more scary:
> 
> about 213822 people are contributing a full of 47 per cent of the tax take.
> about 35637 people are contributing a full 21 per cent of the tax take.
> ...


 
NO  It will be one less exorbitant salary the government will have to pay. The replacement worker will no doubt be on a lower salary. I f  the worker is in the private sector even lower still.
And no I don`t think ,you should worry that these high earners will chuck in their high paid jobs to leave the state.They know which side their bread is buttered on.People who can decide in which country they pay their tax are relatively few and have already made their decision by and large.
Multinational companies of course could leave but there is no danger of their tax being increased.
I see the media touting AUSTRALIA as an option for the irish  unemployed but one needs a work permit and as everyone in europe sees australia as an option, I think the oppurtunities will be limited and I wouldn`t advise any irish jobseeker to go there unless for abit of sun and fun.


----------



## diarmuidc (3 Mar 2009)

http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0303/economy.html

_Figures from the Department of Finance showed an Exchequer *deficit of just over €2bn for the first two months of the year* as tax revenues continued to fall._

Puts the pension levy into perspective.


----------



## orka (3 Mar 2009)

sunrock said:


> NO It will be one less exorbitant salary the government will have to pay. The replacement worker will no doubt be on a lower salary. I f the worker is in the private sector even lower still.


This doesn't make any sense - how can a replacement private sector worker earning less and paying less tax be a good thing for government finances?



sunrock said:


> And no I don`t think ,you should worry that these high earners will chuck in their high paid jobs to leave the state.They know which side their bread is buttered on.People who can decide in which country they pay their tax are relatively few and have already made their decision by and large.


There are some highly paid people who won't move - medical consultants are the stand-out group for me - there's no way they could get the same public pay/private practice set-up they have here.  But there are many people who are very mobile - finance professionals for example are often working in global markets anyway so it doesn't really matter where they are located.  Many probably would prefer to stay here - but not if they are going to get bent over in being asked to pay really high taxes without meaningful cuts in public spending and a widening of the tax base so there isn't the ridiculous situation (a major anomaly in the EU) where 40% of people pay NO income tax (but still feel entitled to bleat on about 'fair shares').


----------



## DublinTexas (3 Mar 2009)

orka said:


> This doesn't make any sense - how can a replacement private sector worker earning less and paying less tax be a good thing for government finances?
> 
> 
> There are some highly paid people who won't move - medical consultants are the stand-out group for me - there's no way they could get the same public pay/private practice set-up they have here. But there are many people who are very mobile - finance professionals for example are often working in global markets anyway so it doesn't really matter where they are located. Many probably would prefer to stay here - but not if they are going to get bent over in being asked to pay really high taxes without meaningful cuts in public spending and a widening of the tax base so there isn't the ridiculous situation (a major anomaly in the EU) where 40% of people pay NO income tax (but still feel entitled to bleat on about 'fair shares').


 
I agree mobile workforces that can provide their work independend from the physical location are most likely to ask for inter company transfers to some other countries where they can keep their standard of living.

If they now raise the tax by at least 5% as they must to cover the whole you are going to see a lot of more people in international companies asking for transfers and in addition existing employers are going to have problems to fill positions for highly skilled workers which are open because our 3rd level education system can't fill them. 

The new Intel Facility for example, they have a lot of open jobs, do you really think that an international professional will come to their if he has a tax burden that is unresonable?


----------



## sunrock (3 Mar 2009)

When the tax take is dicussed as in the above posts , it is a percentage of income tax Only. The low paid still have to pay tax on petrol,cigs,drink and cars etc.
Personally I think the low paid should be brought into the tax net and the high earners should also have their tax increased.
I do not share the concern of other posters in worrying about getting people to fill job vacancies. Highly qualified job applicants are desperate to find jobs and are adjusting their salary expectations downwards,and this recession is worldwide,so intel could recruit anywhere in the world.
I also feel this government jobs embargo is  really discriminating against young people entering the job market...I presumt the government are hoping they will all emigrate,but seeing that this is a world wide recession,it looks like they will sit tight on the dole which will of course cost the government a lotof money


----------



## zephyro (4 Mar 2009)

Complainer said:


> Not yet. Wait for the next election...



The budget deficit will be around €25b this year and probably more over the next few. Do you have or know of a plan from the socialist brethren backed by hard numbers that sum to around €25b?


----------



## sunrock (4 Mar 2009)

orka said:


> This doesn't make any sense - how can a replacement private sector worker earning less and paying less tax be a good thing for government finances?
> 
> 
> I was responding to a prvious posters concerns about  workers leaving their jobs in this state to work abroad because of increased taxes here.
> ...


----------



## shnaek (4 Mar 2009)

sunrock said:


> ... concerns about  workers leaving their jobs in this state to work abroad because of increased taxes here.



I have to say that I do think these concerns are real. When you look at this from a logical point of view - why stay here if we become a high tax economy, when you can go to other high tax economies and enjoy far better services for those taxes?

Look at what you get in Denmark, Sweden, France, Germany etc for what you pay. You get far superior roads, superior public transport, superior health etc. What do you get here for your higher taxes?

Thinking about it in the 'Shopping Around' sense of things (which we were all encouraged to do a while back in order to get the best deals!) then you have to say that a high tax Ireland would be rather poor value for money. Unless you really loved the country, or were stuck here for some reason - you have to say there are better options out there, even with the global downturn. 

I hate to run down the country - on a beautiful day there's no nicer place - but our leaders have really let us down, and this time it could screw the country for a decade or more. Do we really want to stay when all we hear every day is depressing the life out of us? Could you take ten years of this? Could you even take 5 years of it?


----------



## sunrock (4 Mar 2009)

shnaek said:


> I have to say that I do think these concerns are real. When you look at this from a logical point of view - why stay here if we become a high tax economy, when you can go to other high tax economies and enjoy far better services for those taxes?
> 
> Look at what you get in Denmark, Sweden, France, Germany etc for what you pay. You get far superior roads, superior public transport, superior health etc. What do you get here for your higher taxes?
> have to say that a high tax Ireland would be rather poor value for money. Unless you really loved the country, or were stuck here for some reason - you have to say there are better options out there, even with the global downturn.
> ...


----------



## Purple (4 Mar 2009)

sunrock said:


> I do not share the concern of other posters in worrying about getting people to fill job vacancies. Highly qualified job applicants are desperate to find jobs and are adjusting their salary expectations downwards,and this recession is worldwide,so intel could recruit anywhere in the world.


There are still many job vacancies that Irish people cannot fill because they don't have the skills or an education system which is good enough to train them. Even in my company, which is relatively low-tech, we cannot get skilled Irish people. What chance does Intel have?


----------



## Complainer (4 Mar 2009)

zephyro said:


> The budget deficit will be around €25b this year and probably more over the next few. Do you have or know of a plan from the socialist brethren backed by hard numbers that sum to around €25b?


Do you have or know of a plan from *anyone* backed by hard numbers that sum to around €25b?


----------



## sunrock (4 Mar 2009)

Purple said:


> There are still many job vacancies that Irish people cannot fill because they don't have the skills or an education system which is good enough to train them. Even in my company, which is relatively low-tech, we cannot get skilled Irish people. What chance does Intel have?


 
Surely these companies can get the skilled jobseeker from one of the unemployed in the WHOLE WORLD. Wages even with higher taxes are still quite good by internatioal standards.


----------



## diarmuidc (4 Mar 2009)

Complainer said:


> Do you have or know of a plan from *anyone* backed by hard numbers that sum to around €25b?



*YES* but you don't want to listen to it.


----------



## Complainer (4 Mar 2009)

diarmuidc said:


> *YES* but you don't want to listen to it.


Let's hear it, then.


----------



## diarmuidc (5 Mar 2009)

Complainer said:


> Let's hear it, then.


You cut expenditure in each government department back to pre-bubble levels. If each minister can't get the job done, hire in someone who will. Pretty much every large company has done the same exercise at some period in their history.


----------



## DublinTexas (5 Mar 2009)

shnaek said:


> I have to say that I do think these concerns are real. When you look at this from a logical point of view - why stay here if we become a high tax economy, when you can go to other high tax economies and enjoy far better services for those taxes?
> 
> Look at what you get in Denmark, Sweden, France, Germany etc for what you pay. You get far superior roads, superior public transport, superior health etc. What do you get here for your higher taxes?
> 
> ...


 
And this why mobile workers (which are funny enough the people which the unions want to take the money way from to re-distribute wealth) might go an leave because they have the option now that companies are starting to move away.

A couple of people I used to work with in other companies got the offer to move to either Germany or Sweden where the company intents to move large parts of it's HQ to. While previously they were of the opinion that unrooting their family would not be worth it they now might move.

The class warfare that is going on here (and sadly in the Communist Federation of America) is a joke. Large parts of the population pay nothing in taxes and the goverment relys on the "better off" to take the largest tax burden. Fair would mean that the tax burden is spread more even not having "better off" people pay more.


----------



## orka (5 Mar 2009)

DublinTexas said:


> And this why mobile workers (which are funny enough the people which the unions want to take the money way from to re-distribute wealth) might go an leave because they have the option now that companies are starting to move away.
> 
> A couple of people I used to work with in other companies got the offer to move to either Germany or Sweden where the company intents to move large parts of it's HQ to. While previously they were of the opinion that unrooting their family would not be worth it they now might move.
> 
> The class warfare that is going on here (and sadly in the Communist Federation of America) is a joke. Large parts of the population pay nothing in taxes and the goverment relys on the "better off" to take the largest tax burden. Fair would mean that the tax burden is spread more even not having "better off" people pay more.


Agree totally with this. There's only so far you can push 'the rich' before they start exercising the options to move that are usually more available to them than to the lower paid. I never thought I would consider leaving Ireland but we are already thinking about the logistics of when the best time to leave in the next couple of years would be - taking into account state exams for our children etc. Our children were the only thing keeping us here but to be honest, they will probably be better off finishing their education in an economy that doesn't seek to punish people for being better paid. A point lost on most left wing commentators is that people are usually better paid because they have worked hard at their education/skills and often work very long hours. I don't want my children to lose any drive and ambition they may have if they think any rewards for hard work will be taken away.



sunrock said:


> If you do think you can get a similiar income abroad,please don`t think,it would be unpatriotic to move.In actual fact you could hardly do a more patriotic act,someone on the dole will slip into your job saving the government here this persons dole money or saving them your salary if you are a public worker and the gov applies the job embargo.


These aren't widget-making jobs that people will be moving from. The most mobile people are those working for foreign companies who are often indifferent to where the employee is based - if the employee goes, the job often will too. High-paid job gone - high tax gone - high employer PRSI gone - high income consumer spending gone - not good for Irish economy.


----------



## zephyro (5 Mar 2009)

Complainer said:


> Let's hear it, then.





diarmuidc said:


> You cut expenditure in each government department back to pre-bubble levels.



I eagerly anticipate your alternative proposal Complainer. Your first reaction will of course be to detail how misguided diarmuidc is but I'd prefer to read your suggestion first.


----------



## Complainer (5 Mar 2009)

diarmuidc said:


> You cut expenditure in each government department back to pre-bubble levels. If each minister can't get the job done, hire in someone who will. Pretty much every large company has done the same exercise at some period in their history.


And how much does that save? And what is the impact on services?

Come on now, if you're going to propose a plan - you have to have some detail to back it up.


----------



## diarmuidc (5 Mar 2009)

Complainer said:


> And how much does that save? And what is the impact on services?
> 
> Come on now, if you're going to propose a plan - you have to have some detail to back it up.



It will save what ever amount one proposes to cut. That's the starting point. (eg cut €3bn from the health budget). Services will be impacted, but taking us back to 2003/2004 levels of expenditure will not exactly send us back to the stone ages. Also surely even you won't deny that there is plenty of productivity gains to be made. As for a detailed plan, all that needs is a handful of people, a couple of months of work and most importantly a free hand to operate. If you have  worked in a private company over a number of years you'll surely have seen it in action.  

You'd swear this is unprecedented, there are about 150 companies worldwide with more revenues than the Irish government.


----------



## Complainer (5 Mar 2009)

diarmuidc said:


> It will save what ever amount one proposes to cut. That's the starting point. (eg cut €3bn from the health budget). Services will be impacted, but taking us back to 2003/2004 levels of expenditure will not exactly send us back to the stone ages.


So you don't have a plan. You have a vague idea. You don't know how much it's going to save or what impact it's going to have.



diarmuidc said:


> As for a detailed plan, all that needs is a handful of people, a couple of months of work and most importantly a free hand to operate. If you have worked in a private company over a number of years you'll surely have seen it in action.
> 
> You'd swear this is unprecedented, there are about 150 companies worldwide with more revenues than the Irish government.


This kind of divisive nonsense has no credibility. I've seen a $1 billion plan produced by one of the largest companies in the world - a household name. It took a team of 30 people nine months to get it to the stage that there was sufficient detail to allow a sensible decision to be made. Nobody makes billion-sized decisions with ' handful of people, a couple of months of work'.


----------



## Purple (6 Mar 2009)

Complainer said:


> So you don't have a plan. You have a vague idea. You don't know how much it's going to save or what impact it's going to have.




It must be great to be able to just be against everything, to never have to come up with any ideas of your own and never have to be constructive but just pick holes in other people’s ideas as if general suggestions could or even should be costed before being touted. If I tell purchasing that they need to cut back spending by 20% I don’t tell them how to do it, they are paid to figure that out themselves. What I do require is that they cut costs without any reduction in the quality or volume of material and equipment they buy. 
The constant reply by some posters implying that if you can’t give a detailed costing your point is not valid is childish in the extreme.


----------



## diarmuidc (6 Mar 2009)

Complainer said:


> So you don't have a plan. You have a vague idea. You don't know how much it's going to save or what impact it's going to have.


I don't think it can be spelled out an more clearly for you. I give up.


----------



## zephyro (6 Mar 2009)

Purple said:


> It must be great to be able to just be against everything, to never have to come up with any ideas of your own and never have to be constructive but just pick holes in other people’s ideas



Come on Complainer, now is your opportunity to be constructive, let us in on your proposal to close the €25b gap and prove Purple wrong! I find it difficult to believe that someone who so consistently ridicules the suggestions of others with such eloquence doesn't have an alternative suggestion.


----------



## Complainer (7 Mar 2009)

zephyro said:


> Come on Complainer, now is your opportunity to be constructive, let us in on your proposal to close the €25b gap and prove Purple wrong! I find it difficult to believe that someone who so consistently ridicules the suggestions of others with such eloquence doesn't have an alternative suggestion.


There seems to be some confusion here. I don't claim to have magic bullet solutions that all the relevant professionals working on these complex and challenging issues have missed. 

I'm not a bar-stool economist. I'll leave that role to those who have delusions of grandeur about their own competence.


----------



## Purple (8 Mar 2009)

Complainer said:


> There seems to be some confusion here. I don't claim to have magic bullet solutions that all the relevant professionals working on these complex and challenging issues have missed.
> 
> I'm not a bar-stool economist. I'll leave that role to those who have delusions of grandeur about their own competence.


Yes, it’s not as if this is a financial discussion board where ideas can be suggested and debated by contributors. Down with that sort of thing, much better to be negative about everything and make snide comments about those that attempt to be positive and suggest a solution. 
The old line about the only man who has never made a mistake is the one who has never done anything comes to mind.


----------

