Printable View
Although the media absolutely and adore reporting the woes of the 'hard-pressed taxpayer' Garrett Fitzgerald makes some interesting points in his weekly column.
Quote:
Ireland has by far the lowest level of taxation on incomes – subject to the single exception of Mexico. This is true at every level of income, although the tax differential is least marked in the case of those on the highest level of incomes.
We've low progressive taxes on income, and too many (regressive) taxes on consumption and services.
We're certainly undertaxed for the level of services that Irish people expect.
I think part of the problem is the various different taxes that people pay (whether directly or indirectly). Some taxes need consolidation IMO
At the bottom-end there are too many people paying too little and at the top end there are too many people paying too little tax.
Those at the bottom end are still paying a high proportion of income in indirect taxes. Bringing them into the direct tax system whilst leaving indirect taxes/ charges untouched would increase the inequality.Quote:
Originally Posted by OneRedArmy
I think that's a more general problem. People believe that the government has an obligation to deliver so many things to such a high standard and that it will be magically paid for. As an aside to the issue about over or undertaxing, what about tax reliefs that deny revenue and don't help anyone? For example we have rent relief and mortgage interest relief which instead of helping the average person just allow us to pay even more to our landlords or banks and subsidise them and not the general citizen.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dodge
Well im sure most people would not mind if they got rid of the army, the presidency and all that it entails, the seanaid, all the quangoes, the African aid, etc etcQuote:
Originally Posted by Poor Student
Most people just expect a hospital, a decent educational system and roads that are not littered with potholes?
Any sources for these "most people"?Quote:
Originally Posted by bennocelt
+1 for getting rid of the army. We should have an agreement with the UK, obviously with emergency measures in place.
If I had to choose between getting rid of the President or the Seanad, I'd lose the President. I think given our size two legislative arms is probably enough, but I think removing the balance AND the veto is nonsense. We'd still need someone to go to all the events though, if only to keep the Taoiseach doing ANY work.
I'd support getting rid of some of the quangos if it was done logically rather than maliciously. The gutting of the human rights orgs in Ireland is loony toons, yet we still have how many consumer agencies?
I don't think foreign aid should be stopped, but I do think there should be a provision for a pause in hard times. Also on arts and sports funding. The recent arts grant for Mary I is just crazy given the state of our finances. But then I have a fundamental problem with most arts and sports funding.
On the main subject, I wouldn't have a problem with paying more tax in time. But right now, if I pay a penny more, I'll go bust. So right now, I'm not undertaxed. There are plenty of people that are though. That's more about loopholes than rates though.
I'd agree on the direct and indirect taxes too btw. The levy was and remains wrong. If FF didn't have the balls to raise taxes directly, they shouldn't have been allowed to raise them indirectly.
Ok, you've chopped €1.5bn off the government's spend. You've just got to plug the other €17bn of our budget deficit and then you can look at increasing the health spend.Quote:
Originally Posted by bennocelt
Where you expecting him to outline a plan to save the country from economic disaster in a single post?Quote:
Originally Posted by Poor Student
General point he made is that there are lots of places where money is spent that seems to be either a luxury or a waste. Hard to disagree?
I think too many people can easily avoid paying taxes. e.g. publicans.
I think his point was that bennocelt's post was just far too simplistic a summation of the problems facing the country at the moment.
This is a football forum, he's allowed to be simplistic. Rubbishing someone for highlighting /some/ possible savings is, well, rubbish. PS's time would have been better spent either argue against the ones he's suggesting or suggesting more.
In darker hours, I sometimes think that there is more open, considered, and mutual debate on this football forum than in the Dáil, where partisan choices seem to be the only one's catching the attention...
Can I then argue against the use of "most people" in bennocelt's post? Of the list of things to cut, I'd argue only the quangos and possibly the Seanad would garner more than 50% support to get rid of them (or "most").Quote:
Originally Posted by dahamsta
That's debate, so I have no problem with that.
Personally I think the idea of dissolving the Seanad is beyond rubbish. Have people never heard the phrase "checks and balances"? Senates were invented for a reason.
Reform, yes, please. But getting rid of it? It's just bloody nonsense.
Considering they haven't stopped a single bill in their entire history I think the debate is valid. Reform may work, but as it currently stands the Seanad serves no purpose other than to stop politicians from getting real jobs whiel they seek re-election to the Dail (or Europe)
It's not valid, it's throwing the baby out with the bathwater at it's worst. It's Kenny at his most populist. It demonstrates a dangerous ignorance or dangerous lack of care for a safe and secure democracy. It's how people like Hitler get into power*.
* I avoided invoking Godwin once already today, so have at it.
Sorry, most people I talk to :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Dodge
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poor Student
smart a s s
Anyway Im sure if you could be bothered to look Im sure its all much more than 1.5bn which you just whipped off the top of your head!!!!
As for the Seanaid - two words - Donnie Cassidy!!!!
bennocelt, I defended your earlier post but I ain't defending that. You'll need to take it up a level if you want people to take you seriously in here. I've seen inter-cert students with better debating skills that ^that^.
I'm trying to make a simple point. A lot of people consider that the services currently offered by the state are inadequate as they stand including health, education etc. While I accept that there are inefficiences that prevent these services from being offered at an optimal level we are running a budget deficit of over €18bn just to offer what we currently have. Benno suggested a wide and radical range of things he'd slice off in order to prevent wase and improve basic services. I did a very rough calculation* of how much I think that even that level of radical change would save and even if I'm out by a couple of billion there's still a frightening chasm between state income and expenditure, I was simply trying to highlight how screwed we are. We can abolish all the institutions and spending Benno has suggested and more and it's a drop in the ocean.
*Rough workings. State defence budget is about 1bn. Presidency costs maybe 10m with salary, staff etc? Seanad 100-200m? 3rd world aid about 100m. Quangos several hundred million? I don't think €1.5bn estimate is that far off.
It's a very political response though PS. If the savings were 1.5m they'd be worth making, and other people will come up with other savings. I know it's a drop in the ocean, but we've got to start somewhere. Save the pennies, make the pounds like.
I can understand someone feeling defeated and being defeatist, but realism and pragmatism are a better approach imho, since we can't just fold up our tents and leave*. If we go with defeatism, we might as well not fix anything in the health service, the social welfare department, the education system, etc, etc.
But of course we have to. We have to start somewhere.
adam
* Of course we can, individually; I mean as a nation.
In relation to the cuts we could be making or trying to implement, I found it a bit disturbing that only now (in the past year) that the Social Welfare and Revenue Commissioners are convening to try and eradicate social welfare fraud and the like. I would have assumed that this type of thing would be exhausted at this stage, insofar as procedures in place and reducing both the expenditure in social welfare and increasing the Revenue income. I find it confusing that our country's brightest only decided to do something when the state is going down the ****ter.
I'd agree with the other poster that mentioned about the expectation we have on our services for what we pay. It's a good point. I think it's hard to have too solid an opinion on the likes of public transport unless you've experienced it in other countries over a decent period of time. If you want German public services and the level of efficiency that they are stereotyped for, you're going to have to pay for it, which we don't I believe, generally anywho.
I generally don't post here as I'm not as well versed as some of you, hopefully I made a bit of sense.
Wonder are they closing hospitals in Germany though, doubt it
great thread.
i have two questions which i would appreciate a simple answer to just to get my head around how things are in Ireland now.
1) how does the levy work?
2) Maybe i read the posts wrong but are people in favour of pumping more money into healthcare (which has proven time and time again to be a complete waste)? Wouldnt stabilisation/freezing of expenditure while forcing healthcare employers to find cost cutting efficiencies be a more prudent and realistic approach?
Om fairess they've been constantly fighting that battle. Might be highlighting it more now for show but its always been on the agendaQuote:
Originally Posted by Kingdom
You also have to look at the political will in fighting it. It was supposedly a cost saving measure to pay benefits direct into bank accounts which obviously facilitated fraud, rather than through post offices where ID and presence is required. The same Government that introduced it, rowed back as a "get tough" policy!Quote:
Originally Posted by Dodge
There was also no political appetite from the Galway Tent Host's to clamp down on the endemic practice of de facto employee's being treated as self employed sub contractors in the construction sector.
It's all part of the same light touch regulatory regime, that IBEC were still feckin pushing earlier this week!