gnf_ireland
Registered User
- Messages
- 1,441
Yes this is the great unknown. Let's say for the moment it would result in better services...If I thought it would lead to better services, I would seriously consider it.
But it wouldn't so I say no
Over the last few weeks, the usual budget discussions have occured were everyone wants increased spending using other peoples money. Maybe its time to decide what type of services we want, and how we fund them.
I am aware that the Social Democrats as part of the last election stated that they support increased taxation for better services. From what I can see all other parties in the centre support reduced taxation while calling for better services. The left aligned parties want to tax the higher income earners more (with no property tax) for better services.
I am wondering if a poll was run for say 10,000 people, across all areas of society, and suggested the following wording how many would say yes:
"I support the removal of the personal tax credit of 1,650 euro per person to fund increased spending on public services"
Based on some numbers floating around here, would increase the spending purse by 5.5bn a year. It would hit anyone with an income, so should hit the majority of people in some manner.
Thoughts - would people be willing to spend their money on improving services, or just other peoples?
always a fear of history repeating itself !absolutely not , increased public spending has only ever meant more money for staff in the public sector
If I thought it would lead to better services, I would seriously consider it.
But it wouldn't so I say no
I support the removal of the personal tax credit of 1,650 euro per person to fund increased spending on public services"
Based on some numbers floating around here, would increase the spending purse by 5.5bn a year. It would hit anyone with an income, so should hit the majority of people in some manner.
I'd happily pay more tax if it was used to fix the criminal justice system . . a restructured police force with 20,000+ police, more court sittings, more prison places . . ideally tackling the roots of crime too . . crime could be reduced year after year and such would have a knock-on benefit for business through increased tourism and consumer spending, and lower costs directly associated with crime.would people be willing to spend their money on improving services, or just other peoples?
Then you invest in early stage primary education.ideally tackling the roots of crime too
I understood tax credits to work very differentlyI'm not sure where €5.5bn came from. If you take the €1650 tax credit away all you will be doing is taxing everyone 20% on that amount - €330 per working person. Under €700m raised on taxes.
I understood tax credits to work very differently
Lets say I make 50k, single PAYE worker - 33800 cutoff
33800 * 20% = 6760
16200 * 40% = 6480
Tax Credits = -3300
Income Tax Due = 9940
The 1650 tax credit would see tax payers pay 20% on an extra 8250. Therefore the taxpayer pays 1650 more tax and not 330
But I could be wrong .....
@TheBigShort Ok, I fully understand this. However the point was more the fact that everyone and their mother seems to be calling for more spending, but in reality no one wants to pay for this. The call for more spending is based on the fact someone else foots the bill.
The Social Democrats stated before the last election that taxation would need to increase to pay for additional services. They got 3% of the vote, and personally I think this was more down to the leaders personalities than anything else.
The harsh reality is state resources are limited. The state cannot pay for everything for everyone. No one wants to fund additional services - for a variety of reasons. Where does that leave us ????
We should stop comparing ourselves and our services to the Nordics if we are not willing to pay for them...
To be fair, what I said above was not a proposal - it was a question.The proposals often made, such as the one in this thread, will only go to reduce the standards of living for ordinary working people who are trying their best to keep heads above water.
Personally, I think a number of things need to change with the system including these two for starters :This site is littered with threads attacking the least well-off, in order to provide for the better off. It is full of derogatory, bigoted language like 'malingers', 'those who live off the backs of everyone else' etc.
Since the crash we've increased payroll taxes as a proportion of the overall tax take by nearly 50% while at the same time taking hundreds of thousands of people out of the payroll tax net. Do you think that's fair or equitable?I'm not calling for increased spending. All I do is argue against those who want to extract more tax from those earn least, and in turn reduce taxes on those who earn most.
I point out the fallacy in this thinking. Cutting the personal allowance, as you have described above, would be counterproductive.
This site is littered with threads attacking the least well-off, in order to provide for the better off. It is full of derogatory, bigoted language like 'malingers', 'those who live off the backs of everyone else' etc.
There are those who play the system no doubt, but I have argued persistently that they are the thin end of the wedge. The proposals often made, such as the one in this thread, will only go to reduce the standards of living for ordinary working people who are trying their best to keep heads above water.
Since the crash we've increased payroll taxes as a proportion of the overall tax take by nearly 50% while at the same time taking hundreds of thousands of people out of the payroll tax net. Do you think that's fair or equitable?
The total tax take from payroll taxes is equal to the total social welfare budget. Do you think that's fair?
I'm asking you the question since you are telling other people what's right and wrong about their proposals to change things so it would be good to know where you are coming from.It's not about whether I think it is fair or equitable.
I'm asking you the question since you are telling other people what's right and wrong about their proposals to change things so it would be good to know where you are coming from.
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?