Cut the dole to cut higher tax rates

[Purple]

It was already mentioned the number of schools in total added and associated costs would amount to chicken feed in the scheme of things.

That didn't answer the question.

The health insurance industry is a circus. If what is being provided by the private sector was being provided by the public sector you wouldn't tolerate it. Too bureaucratic, too much red-tape, too many plans etc..but because its the private sector its called 'consumer choice'.

Are you suggesting that's the main reason it's so expensive?

Btw, there are real time apps for Dublin Bus available on Android and the App store.

Yes, they are excellent. They were developed by private companies and a private company installed the infrastructure at the bus stops which displays the arrival times of the next buses. It is a good example of the Private Sector being contracted to provide or improve a public service.[/QUOTE]

 

[TheBigShort]

That didn't answer the question.

You are quite adept at not answering, editing, deleting questions yourself.
But in further consideration, given the ratio of pupils attending state schools to private schools it is likely that any increase in pupil attendance at state schools would be easily absorbed without any need to increase expenditure. In fact I would say the opposite, the State would save on having to pay for private teachers.

Yes, they are excellent. They were developed by private companies and a private company installed the infrastructure at the bus stops which displays the arrival times of the next buses. It is a good example of the Private Sector being contracted to provide or improve a public service.

Yes it is.

 

[Purple]

You are quite adept at not answering, editing, deleting questions yourself.
But in further consideration, given the ratio of pupils attending state schools to private schools it is likely that any increase in pupil attendance at state schools would be easily absorbed without any need to increase expenditure. In fact I would say the opposite, the State would save on having to pay for private teachers.

The ratio is the same. The extra teachers are paid for using the fees paid by the parents. Just another subsidy of the State schools by private schools. I think it's great; less tax for me to pay. Thank you, the parents who send their kids to private schools. You save me money.

The idea that the state providing schools and those extra teachers would actually save the state money, well...

 

[Purple]

Are you suggesting that's the main reason it's so expensive?

BS, speaking of not answering questions, how about his one?

 

[MrEarl]

....Apologies, the sample was 2000....

Oops, maybe I should leave the economic issues to those who can do basic multiplication !

Eh Leo, I think you might just want to let this conversation slip away down the thread before anything else goes wrong on you


.... I know we're never going to get to a stage where we both agree on this dog licence issue (which spun off from my proposal to bring in a bike licence / tax), but I'll just ask you to consider two more things when you think about covering the costs of the dog wardens:

• There are fines for dog owners caught not cleaning up after their dog, so effective "policing" by your dog warders no doubt helps generate additional funds from that source
  
• There's a health and safety issue, which supports the arguement for government spending general funds to help protect all of our health and not just relying on direct funding from the dog licence (and possible fines for owners not cleaning up after them)

 

[TheBigShort]

The extra teachers are paid for using the fees paid by the parents

Perhaps you and Firefly need to talk

the state pays the salaries of teachers in private schools and some people chose to send their children there

In any case, you would need to drill down the figures to see how much im being 'subsidised'. Id be happy to stump up the extra €1 or €2 to facilitate full state provisions but I suspect it would actually get a refund.

Are you suggesting that's the main reason it's so expensive?

No. Im suggesting the system is deliberately designed to confuse and obfuscate. But regardless of that it is still peddled as 'consumer choice'.
Are you suggesting that if a State body were to offer the layers of plans and options to the public that it would be accepted as an efficient competitive market?

 

[Firefly]

It was already mentioned the number of schools in total added and associated costs would amount to chicken feed in the scheme of things.

We could probably argue till the cows come home whether the private schools subsidise the taxpayer or vice-versa. The point is still the same - the teachers in private schools are paid from general taxation. The creche workers aren't. Should they be? perhaps, I don't know, but it's not the point I am trying to make....the point I am trying to make is that thousands of ordinary workers up & down the country are able to send their kids to creche (albeit a lot are struggling) and the fees for private education come in at about half those for a creche...therefore not as expensive as it sounds.

The health insurance industry is a circus. If what is being provided by the private sector was being provided by the public sector you wouldn't tolerate it.

Are you suggesting that if a State body were to offer the layers of plans and options to the public that it would be accepted as an efficient competitive market?

The VHI has a myriad of plans! https://www.vhi.ie/health-insurance.

It's great that they do - more choice for people on different budgets, but it only came about due to competition. The VHI has to compete now and the result of that is better choice for consumers. when it was just the good ole VHI there was very little choice and "having VHI" was almost a status symbol. The VHI was to healthcare what Aer Lingus was to travel.

The health insurance industry is a circus.....Too bureaucratic, too much red-tape, too many plans etc..but because its the private sector its called 'consumer choice'.

I disagree, I think it's much better. Due to competition there are products to suit different levels of income. As already mentioned, in the past one could only select from a few very expensive plans from the VHI...this excluded most from private healthcare. Now however there are plans to suits many different income levels. As for the red tape, I'm not sure what you mean here - I've set up my insurance pretty easily.

Btw, there are real time apps for Dublin Bus available on Android and the App store.

I am aware of those, but I'm referring to an app that shows you where the bus is as well as when it is expected to arrive. There's a big difference IMO...I've often seen the arrival time increase or drop down significantly....in other words I think it's ok but sometimes unreliable. However, if I can see on a map where the bus is then it would be much better. For example, if I am getting the bus to town and I can see that the bus has left its starting point I know it's on its way

 

[Purple]

Perhaps you and Firefly need to talk

Why?

In any case, you would need to drill down the figures to see how much im being 'subsidised'. Id be happy to stump up the extra €1 or €2 to facilitate full state provisions but I suspect it would actually get a refund.

So you "suspect" that putting more kids through the public school system would save the state money. If you can draw such an absurd conclusion to a simple example it does kind of weaken your views on something as complex as the impact of QE on the American economy.

No. Im suggesting the system is deliberately designed to confuse and obfuscate. But regardless of that it is still peddled as 'consumer choice'.
Are you suggesting that if a State body were to offer the layers of plans and options to the public that it would be accepted as an efficient competitive market?

No, but the private health industry buys most of its services from the State and operates in a heavily unionised industry where vested interest groups control so many aspects of the supply side of the market. In far too many cases when the State interfaces with the Private Sector the State gets screwed. That's because the State is rubbish at regulating, rubbish at running and rubbish at business. We have the worst of both worlds; a public health system which is grossly inefficient which is being subsidised to the tune of €2 billion a year in the form of private health insurance payments by the same people who pay for it the first time through their taxes. That gives a two tier system which is unfair and inequitable.

 

[Firefly]

Perhaps you and Firefly need to talk

Good, you might let Purple know that.

Divide and conquer eh?

 

[TheBigShort]

Divide and conquer eh?

I didn't know the State subsidised the salaries for school teachers in private schools at all. You seem to say that all teacher salaries are paid by the State. Purple seems to say that only some teacher salaries are paid by the State.
We cant all be correct.

 

[orka]

I didn't know the State subsidised the salaries for school teachers in private schools at all. You seem to say that all teacher salaries are paid by the State. Purple seems to say that only some teacher salaries are paid by the State.
We cant all be correct.

Purple is correct. My daughter goes to a private school. Most of the teachers are paid by the state and the school also employs some extra teachers who are paid solely by the school. I'm pretty sure that's how most private schools operate.

I can only think of one totally private school - the Institute of Education on Lesson St. They are not subsidised in any way by the state.

 

[TheBigShort]

If you can draw such an absurd conclusion to a simple example it does kind of weaken your views on something as complex as the impact of QE on the American economy

I didn't come to any conclusion, I made an assumption (without all the data, that is all that can ever be epoused here) based on teacher pupil ratios in State funded schools relative to teacher pupil ratios in private schools.

You seem to say that only SOME teachers salaries in private schools are paid by the State. Firefly seems to say that ALL teacher salaries are paid by the State. I didn't think that ANY teacher salaries were paid by the State to private schools.
We cant all be right. Until the facts emerge as to how many teacher salaries are being paid then all opinion and observations are of
equal merit.
To dismiss such opinions out of hand is to forgo your own inherent ignorance.

 

[TheBigShort]

Purple is correct. My daughter goes to a private school. Most of the teachers are paid by the state and the school also employs some extra teachers who are paid solely by the school. I'm pretty sure that's how most private schools operate.

I can only think of one totally private school - the Institute of Education on Lesson St. They are not subsidised in any way by the state.

Thanks for that Orka, this would imply that as the State already pays the salaries of the bulk of teachers, then what else is left to pay?
If students were absorbed into local State schools then office Secretaries, Caretakers already employed would be of no extra cost.
If it was a case of retaining the school in its current structure, only then would rent, heating, Caretaker, Secretary, some extra teacher salaries etc would come into play.
But the ratio of State run schools to private schools is huge.
In all a tax increase of €1 or €2 pa should cover it, if at all.

 

[Leo]

..so effective "policing" by your dog warders no doubt helps generate additional funds

Now that is funny!

 

[Firefly]

You seem to say that only SOME teachers salaries in private schools are paid by the State. Firefly seems to say that ALL teacher salaries are paid by the State. I didn't think that ANY teacher salaries were paid by the State to private schools.
We cant all be right. Until the facts emerge as to how many teacher salaries are being paid then all opinion and observations are of
equal merit.

I would say Orka is right - the state pays the salaries of most teachers in private schools (probably to meet the same pupil / teacher ratio as in public schools). The private schools, through the fees they collect can then pay for additional teachers if they wish.

It's still cheaper for the state though isn't it as the state doesn't have to pay for the upkeep of the buildings, insurance, rent, heating etc?

 

[TheBigShort]

that thousands of ordinary workers up & down the country are able to send their kids to creche (albeit a lot are struggling) and the fees for private education come in at about half those for a creche...therefore not as expensive as it sounds.

Thousands cannot send their kids to creche because it is cost prohibitive relative to the income on offer in paid employment.
If we were to privatise education, the same would occur.

The VHI has a myriad of plans!

Them, and the rest, making my point.

It's great that they do

Its a circus.

more choice for people on different budgets,

Because people on different budgets have different healthcare needs?

but it only came about due to competition.

Perceived competition.

Due to competition there are products to suit different levels of income.

Because people on lower incomes dont require healthcare that is as expensive as people on higher incomes?

this excluded most from private healthcare

Most are still excluded, cost prohibitive.

No, but the private health industry buys most of its services from the State and operates in a heavily unionised industry where vested interest groups control so many aspects of the supply side of the market. In far too many cases when the State interfaces with the Private Sector the State gets screwed. That's because the State is rubbish at regulating, rubbish at running and rubbish at business. We have the worst of both worlds; a public health system which is grossly inefficient which is being subsidised to the tune of €2 billion a year in the form of private health insurance payments by the same people who pay for it the first time through their taxes. That gives a two tier system which is unfair and inequitable.

I wouldn't disagree entirely with this.

 

[Purple]

I didn't come to any conclusion, I made an assumption (without all the data, that is all that can ever be epoused here) based on teacher pupil ratios in State funded schools relative to teacher pupil ratios in private schools.

You seem to say that only SOME teachers salaries in private schools are paid by the State. Firefly seems to say that ALL teacher salaries are paid by the State. I didn't think that ANY teacher salaries were paid by the State to private schools.
We cant all be right. Until the facts emerge as to how many teacher salaries are being paid then all opinion and observations are of
equal merit.
To dismiss such opinions out of hand is to forgo your own inherent ignorance.

Purple is correct. My daughter goes to a private school. Most of the teachers are paid by the state and the school also employs some extra teachers who are paid solely by the school. I'm pretty sure that's how most private schools operate.

Yep, as I said previously private schools have to pay for additional teachers as the state funds a higher pupil/teacher ratio in those schools. BS, before posting about these things Google can be your friend.

 

[TheBigShort]

I would say Orka is right - the state pays the salaries of most teachers in private schools (probably to meet the same pupil / teacher ratio as in public schools). The private schools, through the fees they collect can then pay for additional teachers if they wish.

It's still cheaper for the state though isn't it as the state doesn't have to pay for the upkeep of the buildings, insurance, rent, heating etc?

The Dept of Education estimates it to be €22m. Or about €15 a year per taxpayer. I was a bit off, so thanks very much to all the parents of fee paying schools for the €0.28c a wek subsidy.
In a months time im going to put that money together and buy a bottle of water from the shop, reducing the demand on the public water system as a way of showing my gratitude.

 

[TheBigShort]

Yep, as I said previously private schools have to pay for additional teachers as the state funds a higher pupil/teacher ratio in those schools. BS, before posting about these things Google can be your friend.

According to Firefly, there is no 'have to' pay for additional teachers, it is by choice.

The private schools, through the fees they collect can then pay for additional teachers if they wish.

Honestly, you guys should talk more. You can't both be right, right?

 

[MrEarl]

Now that is funny!

Why ?