Lex Foutish
Registered User
- Messages
- 825
I asked my kids today was there any reaction from their teachers or discussion about the budget in school today..
2 teachers made snide comments and one said that the sweets she gave out would have to stop to make up the difference in pay..
Now this is 3 different schools ,so much for the caring/concerned teacher who just wants to look after the pupils..
Im aware emotions are high today but having said that I never mentioned to my kids what I think of their teachers and the public service yet they seem contented enough to let the kids know..
Hopefully, when the dust settles in years to come we will have a more robust, efficient, manageable public service and a more competitive, export driven private sector.
VOR a damned interesting post and speaking as a CS I did not think your comment was anti public service but there has been such a barrage of abuse against us lately that we cannot help to go on the defensive first. There are people out there who are completely insensitive about the situation that we are now in.
Over your comment above I do think the Government were handed the large part of reform of the CS/PS last week and foresaked it for other gains. I would suffer the pay cuts that we got yesterday if it had incorporated the reforms that are badly need but I do think that other parties probably interfered out of hysteria etc.
All the same oul guff......€2bn tax relief on pensions...€500m mortgage interest relief to landlords...Big man, Brian.
I agree it would be better and would simplify the taxation system if all reliefs were abolished but he has taken a big step in reducing the effectiveness of these as a way of avoiding all/most tax. By ensuring that all very high earners must pay a minimum 30% effective tax rate (up from less than 10% by the looks of the most recent 2006 data), he is forcing higher earners to either use fewer reliefs or else invest in whatever schemes (can't say I know much about them) attract reliefs but not get the actual reliefs. It's actually not the worst of an idea. If the reliefs are supposed to be of some benefit (encourage investments in certain areas maybe?), then maybe they should be left but the overall use by individuals capped as is now happening.The Minister had plenty of other options - like .... or cutting any of the 100+ tax reliefs used by high earners to avoid tax (as detailed in the Commission on Taxation report.
All the same oul guff on this thread as on all the other - no alternative - cant afford it - no other option etc.
The Minister had plenty of other options - like cutting the €2bn tax relief on pensions, most of which goes to high earners, or cutting the €500m mortgage interest relief to landlords, or cutting any of the 100+ tax reliefs used by high earners to avoid tax (as detailed in the Commission on Taxation report. But instead, he hit social welfare and public servants, including those earning under €30k. This is not about sharing of pain or putting shoulders to the wheel. Big man, Brian.
It's not an either/or choice. He has explicitly chosen to put the entire burden of our Govt finances onto public sector staff.Same oul poor PS guff here, insulate the insulated.....why not ask the 420,000 unemployed (+ the 50,000 expected to lose their jobs in 2010) - not one of whom was a permanent PS employee, what they feel about this guff.
Or ask the thousands of private sector employees, whose pension funds are in deficit, of which many will have to wind-up, or slash benefits - what they feel about this guff.
We simply cannot afford a boom time PS infrastructure - 54 billion into 32 billion, will not go.....basic maths....basic economics....
It's not an either/or choice. He has explicitly chosen to put the entire burden of our Govt finances onto public sector staff.
This will come back to haunt him, and FF/Greens.
It's not an either/or choice. He has explicitly chosen to put the entire burden of our Govt finances onto public sector staff.
This will come back to haunt him, and FF/Greens.
This will come back to haunt him, and FF/Greens.
The judgement was made that increasing taxes further would be counterproductive. I think this was the correct decision.
All the same oul guff on this thread as on all the other - no alternative - cant afford it - no other option etc.
The Minister had plenty of other options - like cutting the €2bn tax relief on pensions, most of which goes to high earners, or cutting the €500m mortgage interest relief to landlords, or cutting any of the 100+ tax reliefs used by high earners to avoid tax (as detailed in the Commission on Taxation report. But instead, he hit social welfare and public servants, including those earning under €30k. This is not about sharing of pain or putting shoulders to the wheel. Big man, Brian.
I think they have gone as far as they can with actual tax rates but they could bring more people into the tax take.
I can't understand why taking 10 or 20 euro a week of people on minimum wage would be any worse for econmoy than taking 8 euro off unemployed.
In saying that, I agree social welfare rates have to be reduced but I am not convinced nothing could be done on the taxation side.
All the same oul guff on this thread as on all the other - no alternative - cant afford it - no other option etc.
The Minister had plenty of other options - like cutting the €2bn tax relief on pensions, most of which goes to high earners, or cutting the €500m mortgage interest relief to landlords, or cutting any of the 100+ tax reliefs used by high earners to avoid tax (as detailed in the Commission on Taxation report. But instead, he hit social welfare and public servants, including those earning under €30k. This is not about sharing of pain or putting shoulders to the wheel. Big man, Brian.
The unions used be big supporters of axing pension relief, until it was explained to them that the most egregious tax relief is the one that operates on tax free lump sums. This is used by the wealthy but mostly as it happens by retiring public servants (think it's a tax giveaway of around 200m+ per annum).€2 billion in tax relief on pensions
.You never mentioned to your kids what you think of their teachers???? You probably don't have to
What are the question marks for? And No I dont speak ill of their teachers..
I think that if they were the most "caring/concerned teachers" in the world, you still wouldn't be happy with them. This isn't the first or second anti-teacher or anti-P.S. post you've put on AAM, as is your right, but there's very little balance in a lot of them.[/QUOTE)
Some of them are,very caring and concerned so where did you come up with that retort?
And I suppose your posts are all very rational and balanced?
I think that this post really shows you up and does you little credit. You sound like you waited in the long grass for the evidence you needed to share with us.
And I'm sure that, if the teachers did give out sweets, you'd be posting here straight away, telling us that they were unfit to do their job because of the anti healthy eating signals they were sending to your children.
Ah wrong again,This happened in a secondary school where they do not give out sweets,the teacher used the anology to make a point
Why not go into the schools and speak to the teachers in question?
Oh, maybe you can't because those awful teachers would then take out their anger on your children...........[/QUOTE
Ha ha well it wouldnt be the first time!!
[
Ah wrong again,This happened in a secondary school where they do not give out sweets,the teacher used the anology to make a point
Em, I think maybe it was a joke Thedaras. God, and we get accused of being over sensitive.
What were the 'snide remarks' the other two teachers made?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?