Yes, but the interest bill if we borrowed on the open market would be at least 3 times as high. That would be bigger than all of the repayment s we are currently being asked to make.
...and who is paying back the IMF/EU bailout fund? Many of these cuts and new taxes were introduced as a condition of that bailout.
Do you understand now?
There are two problems:
1. Ireland's huge overspend Vs Income
2. paying for bust banks, and giving money to bondholders, unsecured and otherwise.
We (and future generations) are paying for both.
Local household charges are in existence in many other European countries, so why not here?
Local household charges are in existence in many other European countries, so why not here?
I think that people need to get real and realise that many local authority services (such as public parks, playgrounds, public libraries, street cleaning and the maintence and upkeep of public spaces, etc.) so on, cost money and are free to use for everyone, so why not contribute to the cost of them?
I think the household charge is a good thing and I don't think that contributing €2 per week for street cleaning, the use of public parks (and their upkeep) and the use and services for public libraries and so on, is not a lot to contribute to them.
I have noticed in the last 2 or so years that the number of people using public amenities such as (parks, and so on) this has increased substantially so I think that it's reasonable for people to contribute.
Thinking that because you pay X amount in motor tax and Y in income tax to pay for the maintenance and upkeep (and ongoing existence of these services) is just silly.
Yes, alot of persons who bought properties over the last 10 years or so have paid up to 40 years of a property tax in the form of stamp duty.
No problem, if the government is willing to give this back, then I would have no problems paying it.
Its a double taxation in my opinion.
We can't just continue to run huge budget deficits. The measures being introduced at the moment would be no less severe if we hadn't take on bank debts.
I find it tremendously disingenuous of people to argue against cutting the budget deficits as if there was some realistic alternative. I've thought about it from many angles, but in the end decided that you just have to grow up and accept the practicalities of the situation we are in rather than engage in these childish antics of thinking we could live in the fools paradise of the boom years forever.
If we'd burned the banking bondholders and somehow europe still agreed to fund us, would we really get away with not cutting the €18bn deficit by 2015????
More realistically if we'd burned the banking bondholders how on earth would we immediately cut the €18bn deficit to zero?
I'm fed up listening to the self appointed spokepeople for the "vulnerable in society"* banging on about the hardships faced as if somehow there is a built in entitlement to everything they receive.
If that was the argument to bring in the charge, then we could equally bring in 24hour drinking laws, legalised prostitution, legalised drugs etc. Just because something is in existence somewhere else is no reason to bring it in here. We must think for ourselves, if we are capable of that.Local household charges are in existence in many other European countries, so why not here?
2. Using the phrase "The most vulnibble in society" is the Irish version of Godwins Law. Anyone using it has instantly lost the argument.
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?