Teachers pay continued to increase right up to the IMF and EU took over. They were told that support services would have to be cut in order to pay their last round of increases and they took it anyway. They are paying more taxes now though and they have been hit with the pension levy but both happened after they took the money from the support srvices budget for themselves.
So we are agreed that Teacher's pay did not continue to increase right up to the relatively recent IMF/EU involvement ?
I have yet to see any evidence that support services would have to be cut to pay the 2.5% increase of September 2008 nor have I seen any evidence that teacher's were asked to forego that increase.
I don't believe that you would have to increase taxation at all, but rather decrease it. All the necessary savings to balance the budget and even run a surplus would be possible by cutting expenditure.What government would have the balls to tell us that the old and the vulnerable will suffer and the poor would be hungry for the first time in over 50 years and those left working will be even harder hit with eve more taxes? I ask because that’s probably the best solution to our current problems.
No, the bank bailout is down to the totally brainless decision by government to first guarantee private debt, then nationalise private debt, and then dump billions of publicly guaranteed money into private organisation.The bank bailout is down to the reckless behavior of a small number of bankers and the failure of the government to regulate them, but the taxpayers are being forced to contribute to this as well.
I absolutely agree that the banks were not honest, but I would expect no different. And while the government can "hide" behind the veil of ignorance, it does not excuse the utter stupidity of their policy. It was clear from the very start that the value at risk was huge. This should have prompted a decision to not take action until the level of risk was identified. Under no circumstances should such a decision have been made behind closed doors in essentially a matter of hours.Chris, I'm no way defending the guarantee but the government may point out that if they had known the extent of the problem in the banks (particularly Anglo) they would not have included them. At the very least the banks were not honest with the government on the night of the guarantee.
I would generally agree that everyone in some way benefited in the past 15 years, but that does not justify making private debt public. What the taxpayer is liable for is the debt due to the budget deficit, not the banks' debts.My point remains though, that most people benefited from the reckless spending and taxation policies and have a responsibility to contribute to fixing the problem. However, the banking problem was not the fault of the taxpayers yet we have to bail them out.
You should give Scandanavia a call and let them know. They've been surviviing quite well to date.No western government will ever have enough because the western way of life is intrinsically unsustainable. Universal health care, pensions and social welfare mean every western country with a low-tax fiscal policy is essentially bankrupt and always will be.
You should give Scandanavia a call and let them know. They've been surviviing quite well to date.
If you'd care to read my post you'd notice the term low tax. Scandanavia's tax take is approximately double that of Ireland.
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?