Cut the dole to cut higher tax rates

[Purple]

True, not-for-profit healthcare was primarily provided through a voluntary and philanthropic ethos with donations and subscriptions from private individuals and estates.
The rich providing services to the poor.

Yep, back in the days when they paid little or no income tax. Now they provide a far larger proportion of their income but do so through the taxation system.

 

[Purple]

In the scheme of things, the costs of which would be chicken feed.

Borne by all taxpayers, in the scheme of things, chicken feed.

Sure, in the scheme of things, but still a subsidy and a significant one on a case by case basis.

Yes, that is the taxation system. I, perhaps incorrectly, assumed that you opposed paying for services that others use that you dont.

I assume, given the nature of this discussion, that there is an agenda on your part, not to pay no taxes, but to reduce taxes for high earners, in particular, where services are not being availed by those same earners and impose the cost of those services on lower-income earners.

Again, I assumed the agenda was to be able to avail of such options.

Lots of assumptions. Why not take what people say at face value and comment accordingly?

As far as I can see we all want the same outcome; a society where work is rewarded and those who need a hand up get it. We just disagree somewhat on how to achieve it.

 

[TheBigShort]

If you agree that nobody should be paying marginal tax rates above 45% then you must agree that the current rates are too high

They are too high at incomes of €33,800, not necessarily too high at higher incomes.

Not if it kicks in at €5000.

Such a drastic reduction if implemented swiftly would cause social unrest, in the end costing the state more. Incremental adjustments would be preferable but I doubt you would ever get to such levels in the absence of universal health care for all, free childcare, higher wages, etc, etc

So you think that a temporary emergency tax should be kept in place forever?

No, I just dont think it is feasible to abolish anytime soon.

That’s why we have budgets. If we reduce the tax burden on hard work and achievement then we are more likely to get hard work and achievement.

Without the rewards of such hard work and achievement being distributed fairly, invariably, those who control the wealth will gorge a larger slice of the pie, leading inevitability to the imbalances in our society once again.

That’s why we should strive to get to the average level of efficiency in the OECD when it comes to value for money in the delivery of public services.

We can do better than average.

LEAN, Kaizen, and other process improvement tools can and should be used to improve processes and efficiency. Duplication of services, duplication of actions, inefficient use of capital resources and restrictive work practices all lead to massive waste.

All useful tools and ideas applicable to all organizations both public and private, reducing state spending and reducing the cost of private goods and services.

The possibility should certainly be there. A review and maybe a move to a smaller property. If you aren’t making the effort to fend for yourself then your fellow citizens shouldn’t have to keep paying your way.

And if evictions follow? Homeless families roaming the streets? The construction of shanty towns?

Yep, back in the days when they paid little or no income tax. Now they provide a far larger proportion of their income but do so through the taxation system.

Are you harking for those days? Unfortunately, while it was admirable, it was not effective for the population as a whole.

 

[Purple]

They are too high at incomes of €33,800, not necessarily too high at higher incomes.

So you've said.

Such a drastic reduction if implemented swiftly would cause social unrest, in the end costing the state more. Incremental adjustments would be preferable but I doubt you would ever get to such levels in the absence of universal health care for all, free childcare, higher wages, etc, etc

Why? They were at that level a short while ago and we didn't have any of those things.

No, I just dont think it is feasible to abolish anytime soon.

Not without raising our game as a State drastically; maybe even to average OECD levels.

Without the rewards of such hard work and achievement being distributed fairly, invariably, those who control the wealth will gorge a larger slice of the pie, leading inevitability to the imbalances in our society once again.

Why such emotive and offensive language? Would it be ok to describe long term welfare recipients as parasitic scum? I certainly don't think so and by the same token I don't think it's ok to use that sort of language about rich people.

We can do better than average.

I see no evidence to support that view.

All useful tools and ideas applicable to all organizations both public and private, reducing state spending and reducing the cost of private goods and services.

Agreed. We sell the same products for less now than we did 20 years ago. Those tools are part of the reason we can.

And if evictions follow? Homeless families roaming the streets? The construction of shanty towns?

Not at all; hostels are used in many countries.

Are you harking for those days?

No. Are you?

 

[TheBigShort]

Sure, in the scheme of things, but still a subsidy and a significant one on a case by case basis.


Lots of assumptions. Why not take what people say at face value and comment accordingly?

As far as I can see we all want the same outcome; a society where work is rewarded and those who need a hand up get it. We just disagree somewhat on how to achieve it.

No bother, I still wouldn't interpret it as a subsidy, more an affliction to burn money than is really necessary on the part of the individual.
In the end, there are so many state services that few of us are not 'subsidising' or being 'subsidised' one way or another as to cancel each other out.

 

[TheBigShort]

the lack of ethical standards and social responsibility by those who choose to adopt a parasitical lifestyle

Why such emotive and offensive language? Would it be ok to describe long term welfare recipients as parasitic scum?

You have used emotive language yourself before when talking about poor people. Why so coy now?

 

[TheBigShort]

Not at all; hostels are used in many countries.

We use hostels here too, even for people who are working.

 

[Firefly]

Alternatively, if you choose to pay over and above that is your business, your investment in your children's education. But by no means are you subsiding my childrens education. I, and millions others pay for that through the taxation system.

I never said I was. I don't think it makes any difference whether children go to a public or private school as far as costs to the state are concerned - the state, ie taxpayer, pays the wages regardless. So we all subsidise each other in that respect. As Purple pointed out, it's probably cheaper for the state if children go to a private school as the state does not have to pay for the upkeep of the buildings.

That is your choice. If you believe that health services, education, transport etc are inadequate then you have the right to pay for your own services - but that is wholly conditional on being able to afford it.
Others, who cant afford such services, still need healthcare, still need education, still need housing and transport systems. Who is going to pay for it?

We have and will continue to make sacrifices in our house to be able to send our son to a private school. "Going Private" is not an ideological position for us. In fact out daughter will be going to a public secondary school as the one very near us is regarded as one of the best schools in Cork. If the boys school near us was as good we'd send our son there. For us, it simply comes down to providing the best for our kids. Regarding private school costs, these are a lot lower then you would imagine, in fact they come in at about half the cost of putting a child in creche! And so many normal, working people are able to afford that.

For instance, this discussion, in this format, is only possible by virtue of mobile and internet technology providers using the states communications apparatus. For that we all pay taxes. Even those who don't use the internet. They are subsidising you and me.

Not sure about this example. I use Virgin Media and my mobile is with Tesco.

The taxation system is there to provide the fabric of our society, social services, education, health services, transport etc...that would otherwise not be available to the population at large due to cost restrictions of funding private education, health, transport, housing etc.

You are assuming that these services would be more expensive if provided by the private sector.

I think what he is saying is that a healthcare system, designed for profit, is not an efficient means of providing healthcare. So much so, that in order to initiate a private healthcare system, the public system must be allowed to deteriorate, otherwise, who would buy into it?
Private health insurance is not about providing healthcare, it is about generating profits.

A healthcare regulator could be put in place. A private hospital could obtain a license to "trade" as long as they provide the same services as a public hospital (no cherry picking). Ditto for privatising the bus routes...a private operator could tender for a batch of profitable and un-profitable routes and have strict SLAs on delivery.

 

[TheBigShort]

I never said I was. I don't think it makes any difference whether children go to a public or private school as far as costs to the state are concerned - the state, ie taxpayer, pays the wages regardless. So we all subsidise each other in that respect.

Good, you might let Purple know that.

it's probably cheaper for the state if children go to a private school as the state does not have to pay for the upkeep of the buildings.

Its probably cheaper for the state if I buy bottled water rather than drink tap water. Its probably cheaper for the state if I use my own septic tank rather than plug into the public waste system. Its probably cheaper for the state if I walk to work rather than rely on a public road system...etc
There are so many ways that it could be 'cheaper for state' if I did things without using state built structures and facilities. But if I do, then most likely so are many others, to the point that we all 'subsidise' each other to some extent.

Regarding private school costs, these are a lot lower then you would imagine, in fact they come in at about half the cost of putting a child in creche! And so many normal, working people are able to afford that.

Im sure the costs are cheaper, considering the state pays the salaries of teachers. If they paid the salaries of childcare minders, childcare would be a lot cheaper too.

Not sure about this example. I use Virgin Media and my mobile is with Tesco.

The industry is regulated by comreg, a state body. Without which any cowboy outfit could set up shop, consumers ripped off, masts set up all over the place, etc..etc..
(Those things could still happen, but at least there is some deterrent and protections).

You are assuming that these services would be more expensive if provided by the private sector.

Im talking about the infrastructure of the state. The roads, the hospitals, schools, ports, water, defence, justice system, industrial parks, community parks, energy grid, etc...etc..
It is simply not plausible to assume the construct of a civil society in the absence of the organs of the state.

 

[MrEarl]

.....Sadly, I don't think Ireland and our leaders will somehow be the first country to implement an efficient system that will actually result in a net gain to the exchequer....

...Again, I think most other countries in the world have a better track record than us when it comes to administration. ....

Leo,

Any chance of some supporting evidence to back up your claims on things like net costs to other countries who tried to implement these ideas, or the point your making about the dog licences please ?

As for your comments on Ireland's ability to introduce an efficient administration system, all I'll say is that there's nothing to compel us from screwing up in the future, just because we've made such great successes of same in the past

... for the record, I'd be more inclined to outsource something like this to Capita (or similar) than risk entrusting it with state employees btw.

 

[Leo]

Any chance of some supporting evidence to back up your claims on things like net costs to other countries who tried to implement these ideas

Quite a few http://www.metronews.ca/views/winnipeg/your-ride/2015/04/13/why-bike-licensing-schemes-simply-do-not-work.html (links) for [broken link removed] one.

or the point your making about the dog licences please ?

In , less than 190,000 dog licences were purchased with an estimate of more than 700,000 dogs in the country. That's revenue of less than €380k per annum. An Post are paid for their contract to collect and administer licences, that doesn't leave a lot to fund the dog warden service in each local authority area.

 

[MrEarl]

Quite a few http://www.metronews.ca/views/winnipeg/your-ride/2015/04/13/why-bike-licensing-schemes-simply-do-not-work.html (links) for [broken link removed] one.

Thanks, will have a look at the links.

In , less than 190,000 dog licences were purchased with an estimate of more than 700,000 dogs in the country. That's revenue of less than €380k per annum. An Post are paid for their contract to collect and administer licences, that doesn't leave a lot to fund the dog warden service in each local authority area.

The factual bit - thats €380k (less costs, which could not be significant) more than the state woudl have had otherwise. It all adds up !

The estimated bit - estimates are worthless, often plucked out of the air. No offense Leo

It is now a legal requirement to have all dogs microchipped and I know that doesn't guarantee 100% compliance, but it should certainly facilitate some sort of accurate head count on the number of dogs in the country and over time, this will become far more accurate. I appreciate that the figures you have provided date back to 2012, so clearly they are well out of date at this stage.

Also, the microchip database gives a very simple list for people to cross check, to see if everyone has paid their dog licence. Absolutely no excuses for this one and it would be similar, if such a database existed for bike owners

Finally, as for the dog wardens... I actually wonder if they even exist tbh. I've never seen one, or heard of anyone else coming across one. However, if they do exist then I'm sure we could beef up their job spec to include monitoring cyclists (subject to a big arguement with their union and a few days strike action first, needless to say )

 

[Firefly]

Its probably cheaper for the state if I buy bottled water rather than drink tap water. Its probably cheaper for the state if I use my own septic tank rather than plug into the public waste system. Its probably cheaper for the state if I walk to work rather than rely on a public road system...etc
There are so many ways that it could be 'cheaper for state' if I did things without using state built structures and facilities. But if I do, then most likely so are many others, to the point that we all 'subsidise' each other to some extent.

If you (and others) did all of those things, it would be cheaper for the taxpayer yes. I agree that we all 'subsidise' each other to some extent as per post 468

Im sure the costs are cheaper, considering the state pays the salaries of teachers. If they paid the salaries of childcare minders, childcare would be a lot cheaper too.

Are you suggesing the state not pay the salaries of teachers in private schools? Fees would rise to such an extent that children would go to public schools where the state would then need to hire additional staff - the costs would just move.

The industry is regulated by comreg, a state body. Without which any cowboy outfit could set up shop, consumers ripped off, masts set up all over the place, etc..etc..
(Those things could still happen, but at least there is some deterrent and protections).

I agree with you on this - I was referring to the actual providers rather that the regulation aspect. In any case, this is an area where the state provides the regulation but leaves the private sector to provide the product / service and this is a good example of what I believe we should strive for in other areas where the state is currently providing the product / service, such as transport, education and health for example

Im talking about the infrastructure of the state. The roads, the hospitals, schools, ports, water, defence, justice system, industrial parks, community parks, energy grid, etc...etc..
It is simply not plausible to assume the construct of a civil society in the absence of the organs of the state.

I totally agree, but the state should not provide everything, but rather those products / services that are needed but not always economical. Anything the market can provide, the state should not.

 

[Purple]

I totally agree, but the state should not provide everything, but rather those products / services that are needed but not always economical. Anything the market can provide, the state should not.

Anything the State can provide better than the Private Sector should be provided by the State. I see no evidence that this is the case with Healthcare but the State generally does a good job with Education as we have an average enough education system which compares well relative to the appalling waste of money in our health service.

 

[Leo]

The factual bit - thats €380k (less costs, which could not be significant) more than the state woudl have had otherwise. It all adds up !

So go on then, how much of that €380k do you think goes to the exchequer after all costs are covered? Factor in what An Post is charging, the LA dog warden service costs, advertising, etc....

The estimated bit - estimates are worthless, often plucked out of the air. No offense Leo

None taken, however there's a whole field of science that would take offence to your generalisation that estimates are worthless. Until the CSO start tracking dog ownership, estimates are all we have to go on. The most extensive Irish survey on pet ownership only chose 200 households across the country as being representative, that found 49% of households owned one or more dogs. Work that out across number of households and it's clear the number of licences issued is nowhere close to the real number. How many dogs are currently microshipped?

It is now a legal requirement to have all dogs microchipped and I know that doesn't guarantee 100% compliance, but it should certainly facilitate some sort of accurate head count on the number of dogs in the country and over time, this will become far more accurate. I appreciate that the figures you have provided date back to 2012, so clearly they are well out of date at this stage.

I'd like to see any evidence that micro chipping has made any difference whatsoever.

Also, the microchip database gives a very simple list for people to cross check, to see if everyone has paid their dog licence.

Dog licence holders are listed in a database too. How is this more recent list going to become a magic cure to address lack of compliance?

Finally, as for the dog wardens... I actually wonder if they even exist tbh. I've never seen one, or heard of anyone else coming across one. However, if they do exist then I'm sure we could beef up their job spec to include monitoring cyclists (subject to a big arguement with their union and a few days strike action first, needless to say )

Every local authority either has their own dog warden service, complete with specially trained personnel, equipped vans, etc., or they have contracted those services out. I've never seen a high court judge, I do believe they exist though.

 

[MrEarl]

So go on then, how much of that €380k do you think goes to the exchequer after all costs are covered? Factor in what An Post is charging, the LA dog warden service costs, advertising, etc....

If your trying to tell me that dog wardens are funded exclusively from this income, then it certainly explains why I have never seen or heard of anyone else meeting one... I seriously doubt thats the case, if they do really exist. As for what I think the net take should be, if gross is €380k then I'd say net shoud be 15% less and thats being kind. If they made the process more efficient (i.e. changed the current paper based notification and subsequent licence, both sent by post etc.) then that could easily be trimmed to sub 10%. Anything above that percentage is simply being spent badly, imho.

....there's a whole field of science that would take offence to your generalisation that estimates are worthless.

I'm sure they'll get over it

....The most extensive Irish survey on pet ownership only chose 200 households across the country as being representative, that found 49% of households owned one or more dogs.

A sample group that small was rediculous, there's no way that could accurately represent the nation.

...How many dogs are currently microshipped?...

I don't know, but I know there's an accurate list in existence so someone knows the answer and thats massive progress on estimates based on sample groups of 200 households for example.

....I'd like to see any evidence that micro chipping has made any difference whatsoever.

I'd like to see evidence that it hasn't

....Dog licence holders are listed in a database too. How is this more recent list going to become a magic cure to address lack of compliance?

The list of dog licence holders only has a record of those who have paid the licence fee, so by default those who have not paid it don't appear on the list. The microchipping is now a legal requirement, so shortly after birth all new dogs will be microchipped and over time, this list will become complete (because older dogs that have not been microchipped will die off).

...Every local authority either has their own dog warden service, complete with specially trained personnel, equipped vans, etc., or they have contracted those services out. I've never seen a high court judge, I do believe they exist though.

You can go into a public court and see a High Court judge (working), where can we go to see the wardens (working) ?

 

[PaddyW]

Hi all, just on the income from dog licenses, should it not be €3.8m rather than €380k (190,000 x €20.00)

 

[Leo]

If your trying to tell me that dog wardens are funded exclusively from this income, then it certainly explains why I have never seen or heard of anyone else meeting one... I seriously doubt thats the case, if they do really exist. As for what I think the net take should be, if gross is €380k then I'd say net shoud be 15% less and thats being kind. If they made the process more efficient (i.e. changed the current paper based notification and subsequent licence, both sent by post etc.) then that could easily be trimmed to sub 10%. Anything above that percentage is simply being spent badly, imho.

You suggested that a licence such as this would be a revenue generator for the state. If you think the state is capable of pulling in a nett gain of 85% or revenue from this or any service, I don't think I'll even get there. Did you know 5 local authorities are listed as having contracted the ISPCA to perform their Dog Warden Services, for this the ISPCA receives over €1M annually.

A sample group that small was rediculous, there's no way that could accurately represent the nation.

Apologies, the sample was 2000, and chosen so to be representative as would be possible for such a study. I didn't suggest it would be 100% accurate, but the sample size at 2000 is statisticaly significant and the resulting numbers put us in line with the UK and a number of other EU nations.

The microchipping is now a legal requirement, so shortly after birth all new dogs will be microchipped and over time, this list will become complete (because older dogs that have not been microchipped will die off).

That's a long way from being true. It'll never come close to being complete when there are so many unregulated breeders in operation here.

You can go into a public court and see a High Court judge (working), where can we go to see the wardens (working) ?

In Dublin, call to Ashton pound, their van is clearly marked as well, or go to Wood Quay to visit the office based staff.

 

[Leo]

Hi all, just on the income from dog licenses, should it not be €3.8m rather than €380k (190,000 x €20.00)

Oops, maybe I should leave the economic issues to those who can do basic multiplication !

 

[TheBigShort]

If you (and others) did all of those things, it would be cheaper for the taxpayer yes. I agree that we all 'subsidise' each other to some extent as per post 468

Yes, but at a cost to the consumer.

Are you suggesing the state not pay the salaries of teachers in private schools? Fees would rise to such an extent that children would go to public schools where the state would then need to hire additional staff - the costs would just move.

It was already mentioned the number of schools in total added and associated costs would amount to chicken feed in the scheme of things.

this is a good example of what I believe we should strive for in other areas where the state is currently providing the product / service, such as transport, education and health for example

The health insurance industry is a circus. If what is being provided by the private sector was being provided by the public sector you wouldn't tolerate it. Too bureaucratic, too much red-tape, too many plans etc..but because its the private sector its called 'consumer choice'.
Btw, there are real time apps for Dublin Bus available on Android and the App store.