What happens to our tax money is intrinsically important. Especially when you are concerned more about ethics than the legal situation.Like you said, this thread is about nixers and non tax compliance, so what Brian Cowen does doesn't come into it unless he is doing cash jobs on the side.
Two wrongs don't make a right and an argument of I'm doin less wrong than them doesn't stack up.
What happens with our taxes is without a doubt very important, but the issue here is whether or not we at heart cry foul about crime, but accept crimes that suit us. A bit like a white lie is only a small one but it's still a lie.What happens to our tax money is intrinsically important. Especially when you are concerned more about ethics than the legal situation.
As for the two wrongs argument, tax non-compliance is legally wrong. I don't regard it as ethically wrong when the whole picture is taken into consideration, but you may think otherwise.
What Brian and Bertie do is of the utmost importance.
there is really no point looking at this from a moral perspective,that only works if we lived in a perfect ideal world...we dont and never will, people will always do a few nixers on the quite,or not declare all there cash jobs to the revenue,we are no different to anyone else the world over.....human nature is what it is!
Do you understand the difference between ethics and law? Some things are legal, but not ethical (in some people's view). It's pointless continuing this if you can not make that distinction.As regards ethics and legality, thats easy cause it is illegal, but the ethics side of things goes to show in my mind anyway that some people are uncomfortable in accepting that they at times operate outside of the law because it suits them to.
Do you understand the difference between ethics and law? Some things are legal, but not ethical (in some people's view). It's pointless continuing this if you can not make that distinction.
That's one possibility. The other possibility is that the extra money goes to provide extra services, e.g. the 200 extra social workers being recruited for childcare services, the extra nurses being recruited for mental health services, the extra inspectors being hired by the EPA etc etc etc.The following year €5.5billion is collected. Guess what happens to the extra money? The government decides to give themselves all pay rises and large pensions.
It's not just a possibility - it's what happened during the celtic tiger and bubble.
This deserves its own thread - Is Ireland better off now than before the Celtic Tiger.I am against people like Brian Cowan rewriting history to suit themselves but I am also against people pretending that Ireland is not better off now than it was before the so called celtic tiger.
We have motorways and luas.
Do you understand the difference between ethics and law? Some things are legal, but not ethical (in some people's view). It's pointless continuing this if you can not make that distinction.
This deserves its own thread - Is Ireland better off now than before the Celtic Tiger.
Were we in a better position in 1996?
Consider what the government could have done with the extra money. Look what Norway does with it's oil money for example. What have we ended up with?
- Huge negative equity
- Massive debt
- Thousand of empty houses and ghost estates
- People emigrating again and unemployment
- Bust banks
We might have had nothing before, now were at minus.
We have motorways and luas. (We had a more extensive tram system 100 years ago, and a rail network).
Why not paying taxes isn't stealing from your fellow countrymen, at least under the current leadership.
Let's pretend that €5billion is collected in tax. All this is used to run the country. No money is borrowed.
The government discovers that 10% of taxes are not collected because of people evading tax. They put a new system in place that ensures 100% compliance.
The following year €5.5billion is collected. Guess what happens to the extra money? The government decides to give themselves all pay rises and large pensions.
This is a very simple example, but it illustrates that tax collected has no bearing on how much is needed to actually run the country. A real life example would be to consider what happened during the bubble, and how much public sector pay and costs went up. Consider that our tax money was effectively used not for the benefit of the country, but to keep the current government in power. When this power is forcing people with menaces, to pay taxes - for their own gain, then no, in these circumstances I do not believe that not paying is theft from fellow countrymen.
(Please use you mind to think this through before posting knee-jerk 'no it's not' responses)
I'm late to this discussion but I can not see how anyone can argue that not paying tax or fraudulently claiming social welfare or other state benefits to which you are entitled is anything other than stealing, and stealing from your fellow citizens at that.
The use that tax money is put to is a different issue. One of the few benefits of the economic crisis is that the public and the media is putting far more pressure on government and public service to be fully accountable in relation to what they are spending and why and to cut out out wasteful and excessive expenditure. As a taxpayer and civil servant, I am delighted about this. Lets hope that this culture of demanding accountability remains if and when the economy ever gets up off its feet again.
Its a pretty simple equation - being a citizen entails rights and responsibilities. Rights to basic services, an efficient public service, decent health care and education, democratic accountability. A responsibility to obey the law (including paying tax) and register protest through democratic means (i,e, if the government is crap, get involved, use the media and the democratic process to get rid of them, don't just sit around whinging about TDs expenses and use their supposed venality as an excuse for undermining and avoiding your responsibilities as a citizen)
Having said that, I believe the govt needs to think again about making it easier to stay within the law in relation to tax. An example: I was recently looking into hiring a childminder. Everyone I know who has a childminder pays cash in hand. Having done some research, I can see why - it is a pretty complex process to have to register as an employer, work out PRSI and tax deductions and pay same over to Revenue if you are not a business person. By way of contrast, I employed a childminder in Spain. It took me half an hour to call into the social security office, register myself as an employer of domestically based staff, formally employ my childminder and set up a direct debit for her PRSI, which was calculated there and then by the social security office staff. Tax liability was not an issue as the market rate for childminding is below the tax threshold, so the Sp govt just assume the person is not liable for tax and leave it at that. Second example: in my research I undercovered the fact that if I pay more than 40 a month to someone for childminding, I am formally their employer and so have the same liability for PRSI, tax calcuation et al as any other employer. This means that the girl who comes on average twice a month to babysit for us for a few hours is avoiding tax and I am acting illegally by not paying PRSI, signing a contract with her et al. That's just silly
This deserves its own thread - Is Ireland better off now than before the Celtic Tiger.
Were we in a better position in 1996?
Consider what the government could have done with the extra money. Look what Norway does with it's oil money for example. What have we ended up with?
- Huge negative equity
- Massive debt
- Thousand of empty houses and ghost estates
- People emigrating again and unemployment
- Bust banks
We might have had nothing before, now were at minus.
We have motorways and luas. (We had a more extensive tram system 100 years ago, and a rail network).
Hospital standards have dropped considerably, although the front line staff in my opinion are doing a fantastic job.