Cut the dole to cut higher tax rates

orka said:
The direction is the same as any progressive system but the slope is much steeper. I'm happy with a progressive system but why is ours the most progressive in the world?
Click to expand...

Because it makes way for those on the lowest of incomes to be able to manage the cost of living in this country. To extract higher taxes from such low incomes sows dissent.
This was evident in the water charges protest. Some might label that the protesters as nothing more than left-wing rabble, but that would be out of naivety. The largest protests were made of people who are working people, many on reasonable average incomes who simply had enough of the repeated penny-pinching and wage suppression.
It also evident in the UK, Scottish Independence movement, Brexit etc, also evident in France with increasing strikes. Also evident in the US and im not even talking about Trump. Im talking about Sanders, a self-labelled socialist, who pushed Clinton close for the nomination. Imagine if a socialist was President of the United States! Unthinkable 10yrs ago.

The Capitalist system is broken, if it is to be restored it needs society to buy into it. Who should pay for that? The poor?
 
TheBigShort said:
Yes, build more schools and employ more teachers.
Click to expand...

Where will this money come from?

Would it not be better & cheaper to raise our teaching standards? Can you imagine the improvement in teaching standards if courses were run during the summer months? Most schools have wifi - couldn't the highest regarded teachers provide in-service training over Skype at little or no cost? That's what we do at the company I am contracting for - we have lunch & learn sessions every month where someone prepares an in-service on a particular topic. Can you imagine the material that could be gone through over 6 weeks every summer! And it wouldn't cost a cent. Wouldn't it be great to be regarded as the country in Europe with the highest teaching standards?
 
TheBigShort said:
So which is it? Continue to put customer's at risk or borrow to invest in upgrading the infrastructure?
If it was your decision, what would you do?
Click to expand...

I certainly would not increase wages! I would look at other options regarding the infrastructure...perhaps there are lines that are unprofitable that could be just as easily be replaced with a private bus operator.
 
TheBigShort said:
So is this too high a tax rate on too low an income? I certainly would think so, so that is why I would not be in favour of transferring more tax liability from high earners onto these earners.
Click to expand...
You talk about a 40% income tax rate at €33,800 which is the marginal tax rate. Later, when talking about the highest earners you talk about overall tax paid as a proportion of income. This is typical socialist double speak, using two different meansurements when talking about the same thing.

The marginal tax rate on 33,800 is not 40%, it’s closer to 50% as there are three different kinds of income tax applied.






TheBigShort said:
Not true, USC kicks in after €12,001 @3%
Click to expand...

Ok, €180 here, €2280 in the UK.




TheBigShort said:
Again not true, either you are talking about £18,000 (€20,000) or €18,000 (£16,200).
Click to expand...

Someone on €20,000 will pay €1,790 in tax/usc/prsi. The equivalent in the UK at that income would be €2,486 tax. A difference of some €696. Is this what this thread is all about? [/QUOTE]

€18000 is £16100/£16200. A single person on £16200 a year will pay £1040.00 in income tax and £976.80 in National Insurance. That’s £2016.8 or €2254.58. Calculations here.



For instance, the very top 16,168 of earners who had a combined income of €8.887bn contributed €3.559 bn in taxes, or 40%.

The next highest group of earners in the €200,000 - €275,000 bracket contributed 35% of their combined income in taxes. The next income bracket contributes 32.5% of combined income in taxes. It keeps sliding downwards like any progressive system. [/QUOTE]

See, you are doing it here.

People on relatively high incomes are paying 52% income tax. In the UK it’s 42% on incomes up to £150,000 (€168,000) a year and after that it’s 47%. The amount of your marginal income you get to take home is nearly 21% higher in the UK.
 

Source please?

I spoke to the guy who was putting down our meter and he told me the only areas where they met resistance were in areas where "people are used to getting everything for nothing" as he put it himself.
 
Firefly said:
Source please?

I spoke to the guy who was putting down our meter and he told me the only areas where they met resistance were in areas where "people are used to getting everything for nothing" as he put it himself.
Click to expand...

Source please.
 
Purple ,
We don,t have a real lack of skilled labour in any sector.
What we have is competition for scarce skills eg IT, nurses etc.
We will continue to have anomalies such as occurred in fluffy times on building boom.
Any sector where wages take an obvious spike will always be a sign of trouble.eg your brickie example.

Reducing class sizes to an optimum level can make sense, if students learn well, and be cost effective .Your other comments are ok but again all change costs money , so would be hard to implement and people fear change and need to be brought properly onside..

It seems to me that doctors and nurses do a good job and that they are willing to tweak the way they do things if the infrastructure is in place eg funding seems to run from crisis to crisis meaning operations are cancelled etc.

Fully agree that because we are small , we need to increase the export sector, again it looks like we ain,t doing too bad by international comparisons.

Maybe in todays world 33,800 is a high earner ! Seems to mise, a dumbing down of wages continues apace ?
 
Firefly said:
perhaps there are lines that are unprofitable that could be just as easily be replaced with a private bus operator.
Click to expand...

Well are there, or are there not? It all sounds great to 'privatise' these services but it is rarely supported by any economic or social impact. Instead the profits to be made for foreign shareholders is the aim.
 
You cant accuse me of double speak when on the one hand you proclaim the top 5%-10% carry the rest of us and low and middle income earners do not pay enough tax while simultaneously highlight a 52% tax on incomes over €33,800 as being too high.
On the one hand you label some people for not paying for anything and simultaneously say that most income earners dont pay enough tax.
 
TheBigShort said:
I didn't miss it, it just didn't make any sense to me, sorry.
What is a 'normal European style' school year?
Click to expand...
The Irish secondary school year is 167 days. I think Mexico is our nearest rival in terms of shortness. More typically that length is 180-190.

So there's up to a month of missing school days in the Irish secondary year, we try to make up for it by having longer school weeks. That may sound equivalent, but it's a a problem. Since now you need to teach ~10% more classes per week than in other countries you have to hire more teachers than they do. You're also going to find a school doing things like having a class of 34 instead of splitting it into two classes.

Many of our of our secondary school problems can be traced to the school year, stressed out teachers complaining of not enough time during work hours to prepare, pupils struggling to keep up, large class sizes, better off families being able to use grinds to fill in the gaps to their fortunate children.

From what I can see the number of secondary school students in Ireland is around 370,000. The number of secondary school teachers in both public and private seems to be around 28000. That's a ratio of something like 14:1.

With that ratio and when class sizes can be 30+, it should be clear we've got a problem allocating teachers.

Throwing money at it as you suggest - would certainly bring down the student teacher ratio further, it is not guaranteed it would bring down class sizes.
 
I really thought you had been following this.

Rates are too high but so are the amounts at which the lower rate kicks in.


The lower rate should kick in at a much lower income level.

The higher rate should kick in at a higher level.

The PRSI ceiling should be reintroduced.

USC should be phased out as a priority.


Nobody should contribute less than 10% of their income in tax. Nobody should be paying the higher marginal rate until they earn 150% of the average industrial wage. Nobody should contribute more than 45% of their marginal income in tax.


Overall tax receipts should be reduced as we reduce costs in delivering services. We should strive to be average by international standards when it comes to value for money in the health service (let’s not set the bar too high). We should strive to have wage costs as a proportion of healthcare spending at OECD average levels.


Welfare rates for short term unemployed should be increased and those for long term unemployed should be decreased.

Public housing should be provided on 3 to 5 years lease agreements. There should be no expectation that the state will provide a house for anyone for their whole life.


We should, over a period of a decade or two, move towards self funded pensions for everyone in the private and public sector (new entrants only in both sectors) in order to address the single biggest financial issue facing this country.

The other main long term priority should be to address the structural, skills and funding issues in the education sector. A longer school year, better facilities for staff and students, better supports for students who need it, more school psychologists and guidance counsellors and higher teaching standards etc should all take priority over pay levels.


All of this would move us towards a fairer and more socially just society where those who work retain a reasonable proportion of their income and those who need a hand up get it but living off your neighbour is neither economically viable or socially acceptable.
 
TheBigShort said:
Well are there, or are there not?
Click to expand...
You'd have to ask Irish Rail (good luck with that!) or the minister for transport. Do you really think that all lines are profitable? If not what's your solution?

TheBigShort said:
It all sounds great to 'privatise' these services but it is rarely supported by any economic or social impact.
Click to expand...

Aircoach seems to work pretty well. Ryanair seems to work pretty well. De-regulating the taxis seems to work pretty well. De-regulating the energy sector seems to work pretty well. De-regulating the telecoms industry seems to work pretty well. See where I am going?


TheBigShort said:
Instead the profits to be made for foreign shareholders is the aim.
Click to expand...

That could be viewed as zeonophobic. We live in a European union where there is meant to be the free movement of people and capital. Are you suggesting irish firms should not be able to compete abroad?
 
Gerry Canning said:
Purple ,
We don,t have a real lack of skilled labour in any sector.
Click to expand...
That's a lack of skilled labour. The lack of skilled labour in the construction sector is because our construction tradespeople are not much good at their job. The standard of training and skills is higher in Eastern Europe and most of the UK. So we have them, they just aren't very good.

Gerry Canning said:
We will continue to have anomalies such as occurred in fluffy times on building boom.
Any sector where wages take an obvious spike will always be a sign of trouble.eg your brickie example.
Click to expand...
Yes, they are examples of skilled or semi-skilled labour.

Reducing class sizes is very bad value for money if done by building more classrooms and employing more teachers. There are far better and cheaper ways to get the same returns in terms of educational outcomes.

Gerry Canning said:
It seems to me that doctors and nurses do a good job and that they are willing to tweak the way they do things if the infrastructure is in place eg funding seems to run from crisis to crisis meaning operations are cancelled etc.
Click to expand...
Really? 20 odd years for Consultants to renegotiate their contract. Nurses who won't take bloods or monitor patients after IV antibiotics (duties carried out by nurses here until recently and just about everywhere else still). GP's who do far less than they do in the UK, despite being paid far more here. Doesn't sound like they are part of the solution to me.

Gerry Canning said:
Fully agree that because we are small , we need to increase the export sector, again it looks like we ain,t doing too bad by international comparisons.
Click to expand...
Only in the multinational sector. Irish export businesses, who are less capital intensive and so more exposed to wage costs, are still struggling.

Gerry Canning said:
Maybe in todays world 33,800 is a high earner ! Seems to mise, a dumbing down of wages continues apace ?
Click to expand...
I don't think it is. I don't see any evidence of the dumbing down of wages. We are one of the highest wage economies in the world.
 
Firefly said:
You'd have to ask Irish Rail (good luck with that!) or the minister for transport. Do you really think that all lines are profitable? If not what's your solution?
Click to expand...

So there might not be unprofitable lines then?
In any case you assume the purpose of irish rail is to generate profit for the taxpayer. The purpose of a public transport system is to provide an efficient sustainable means of transport for the population. If that turns out a paper loss, then that loss needs to be weighed against the economic and social impact of providing public transport in the first place.
I laugh when I hear people suggesting 'car pooling' as a means to reduce gridlock in traffic. Its like they never notice the big double-decker bus-pool that operates in Dublin. But if Dublin Bus returns a loss there are calls to privatise it. If it makes a profit there are calls to privatise it and resistance against paying workers a fair share.
Why not invest in it? Increase the fleet, reduce fares? For every 80 passengers on a bus there is arguably 20 cars, at least, removed from the road reducing gridlock.But god forbid, the taxpayer should have to pay for this!

Firefly said:
De-regulating the taxis seems to work pretty well
Click to expand...

I dont think the taxi service was ever a public service. If its de-regulation you are in favour of, I could easily point to de-regulation of bank lending to show how sometimes it doesnt work too well.


Firefly said:
De-regulating the energy sector seems to work pretty wel
Click to expand...

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

Firefly said:
De-regulating the telecoms industry seems to work pretty well.
Click to expand...

Yes, especially as the sale of Telecom Eireann was front-loaded onto Irish citizens in the form of shares that crashed and burned, before being scooped up at rock bottom by whatever conglomerate has it now.
As for the providers, more circus theatrics in the name of 'value', 'free enterprise'.

Firefly said:
That could be viewed as zeonophobic.
Click to expand...

It could, or it could be viewed as wealth being sucked out of the country unnecessarily.
 
orka said:
These show that many went to the protests (we all know that) - there's nothing about their backgrounds and in particular whether they are 'working people' which is what you said.
Click to expand...

Using logic, I would assume that a large proportion (vast majority) of these people were working people. I do this by comparing these marches to the last time similar sized marches occur, like for instance, the PAYE marches in the '80's. Or when farmers march, or students.
I cant recall the last time lazy, want everything for nothing, type people marched in such numbers. By definition, they couldn't organise a group march to the pub, let alone organise marches across the country, in thousands. So by that reasoning, I would deduce that they are mostly hard-working people fed-up with the penny-pinching, wage suppression system.
 
It has been proven that austerity does NOT work. Wealth does not trickle down from the top, instead, the rich get richer and the poor get poorer and the middle class shrink in size.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register