I'm curious at to what money is actually being used to pay this €700m, and the bank bailouts? Where is this money coming from?
According to a few posts on this thread, it's not tax payers' money being used, so where are we getting it?
I think I read that the plan is that the property tax can be accrued if the property-owner has insufficient cash to pay it and then when the house is sold/inherited, the tax becomes due then.
With the NPPR there isn't an option to NOT pay and let the charges accrue (well, not an official, reasonable-option one...) - the money has to be paid fairly soon after it's due or penalty interest starts to roll up. My understanding with the property tax is that the accrual option (if such a thing comes to pass) would be there to help cash-poor people so I expect any interest would be a modest annual amount (CPI inflation maybe?).If it accrues at the same rate as the NPPR (10% simple interest per month) some people will end up losing all the equity in their homes within a decade. This could amount to effective confiscation by the State of vulnerable people's property.
With the NPPR there isn't an option to NOT pay and let the charges accrue (well, not an official, reasonable-option one...) - the money has to be paid fairly soon after it's due or penalty interest starts to roll up. My understanding with the property tax is that the accrual option (if such a thing comes to pass) would be there to help cash-poor people so I expect any interest would be a modest annual amount (CPI inflation maybe?).
The current budget deficit is totally our own making though and within our control.
Purple, here is who we are being forced to pay:
€700m of our money was given to these people earlier this week.
I'm not referring to someone who bought a house at the peak of the bubble and are still paying off their mortgage, or even Mr McSavvy that bought 5 houses for speculation.
This is where your 'property tax' is going.
If you and Der kaiser want to convince yourselves that some how you are not going to pay for the bank bailouts and the €700m, that's fine. I won't try to argue with that.There is no link between a property tax and paying bond holders.
Der kaiser's excellent post above explains that.
If you and Der kaiser want to convince yourselves that some how you are not going to pay for the bank bailouts and the €700m, that's fine. I won't try to argue with that.
I know that this money is only coming from one place - Irish taxpayers, present and future. For me, this makes most sense.
You can call the new taxes whatever you like, property tax, poll tax, community charge, USC, but it's all going into the one pot.
If you and Der kaiser want to convince yourselves that some how you are not going to pay for the bank bailouts and the €700m, that's fine. I won't try to argue with that.
I know that this money is only coming from one place - Irish taxpayers, present and future. For me, this makes most sense.
You can call the new taxes whatever you like, property tax, poll tax, community charge, USC, but it's all going into the one pot.
This isn't just theory. All these phenomena are already happening in our economy, with serious consequences all round.For example, higher taxes can lead to
--less spending which means factories, shops etc closing = more people on the dole.
--less endeavours/more emigration of our most productive people especially the ones society spends a fotune educating.
--ever increasing black-market/nixing activities resulting in even less money to the exchequer.
--increasing discincentives to save, invest, build or other activities that would appear to result in continually added taxes.
Increasingly, it is being realised that ever harsher austerity measdures do NOT result in an economy that is able to pay off it's debts..so to quote Kaiser people do have a leg to stand on opposing this taxation.
(This is, of course, besides the argument that one should not ,really, be paying these damn debts in the first place)
i'd be sympathetic to the argument that excessive cuts & tax hikes will not get us out of this mess.
what I'm not sympathetic to is people accepting no responsibility for ever repaying the current budget deficits we've racked up
I don't see why I should also accept the debts of those that invested in bonds or hedge funds or whatever else that the government has unilaterally deemed that we must pay back.
This isn't just theory. All these phenomena are already happening in our economy, with serious consequences all round.
For example, higher taxes can lead to
--less spending which means factories, shops etc closing = more people on the dole.
--less endeavours/more emigration of our most productive people especially the ones society spends a fotune educating.
--ever increasing black-market/nixing activities resulting in even less money to the exchequer.
--increasing discincentives to save, invest, build or other activities that would appear to result in continually added taxes.
I don't see why I should also accept the debts of those that invested in bonds or hedge funds or whatever else that the government has unilaterally deemed that we must pay back.
And yet you are quite happy to accept that as a result of paying back those bonds that your deposits in your bank are secured and guaranteed. You have also historically been happy to accept and use the services and infrastructure that the state borrowed money to pay for.
I would have preferred if the banks had collapsed. Yes, I would have lost money, but that's capitalism (or at least it should be).
If the banks had collapsed, there would be new, better banks that would have filled the gap. Look at what we got instead.
As for the infrastructure argument, well I'm certainly paying for this, so why shouldn't I use it? It's my money that paid for it. There is no such thing as 'state funds'.
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?