Indo - "There is no cost of living crisis for majority of people in Ireland says IBEC CEO"

(Neither - it's Cork. Well maybe we'll have to build a wall around it.)
Fair point. ;)
It's a national crisis requiring a national level response - either because of the severity of the impact in some locations and\or the widespread negative impact on a broader front. That doesn't mean every part of the country is equally affected or that all are affected.
Okay, so I take it that you are against across the board cost of living mitigation measures in the budget and in favour of the Nation getting behind those who really need the help. If so you're agreeing with Danny.
Edit - You don't just spend it where's there are problems. You should try tackling root causes - both because it is cheaper and may have wider benefits to society. Specific mitigation measures in hardest hit areas may be needed.
That's what Danny said. I agree with him.
In cost of living terms, that means looking at why they are going up instead of pretending nothing needs to be done because of semantics over the word 'crisis' as McCoy seems to suggest - or maybe he was just trying to get help for SMEs only, hard to tell through the waffle.
They are going up for everyone but that's only a problem for a minority. Therefore we should help that minority. That's what Danny said.
 
I suspect that Danny, God bless him, wouldn't know an SME if one of them bit him on the bum.

IBEG have bigger fish to fry than common SMEs.
Yep, IBEC are a way of getting Multinationals into the Social Partnership tent. They are a pointless talking shop with no connection to real indigenous business and industry.
 
Okay, so I take it that you are against across the board cost of living mitigation measures in the budget and in favour of the Nation getting behind those who really need the help. If so you're agreeing with Danny.
Nope. I don't know how you got that from his speech either. You seem to have read a different one to the ones given.
What mitigation measures, targeted or otherwise, did he advocate for recently? Were any of them for sections of society outside the lobby he is well paid to represent?

Specific targeted measures have a place. Across the board cost of living mitigation measures have a place too, depending on the 'filtering' costs of applying targeted measures. But also because wider mitigation measures may have wider benefits to society.
Tackling root cause would be preferable to both.
It is not good for our society in the long run to be caught in such a cycle.

Asked and answered below:
You don't just spend it where's there are problems. You should try tackling root causes - both because it is cheaper and may have wider benefits to society. Specific mitigation measures in hardest hit areas may be needed.
In cost of living terms, that means looking at why they are going up instead of pretending nothing needs to be done because of semantics over the word 'crisis' as McCoy seems to suggest - or maybe he was just trying to get help for SMEs only, hard to tell through the waffle.
Prices are going up, food prices especially more than the base rate of inflation. Is there a lack of competition somewhere in the chain and companies are taking advantage of the price increases?
Ditto for energy prices etc
 
I agree the media, and the opposition political parties, can blow this way out of proportion. It's their job, regardless of hue.

What defines a 'cost of living' crisis? Hard to define.

I would suggest that there must be some long-term data detailing the extent of poverty in the country? It's when that long-term data begins to increase, year-in, year-out, that it could arguably stated that there is a crisis. As long as the numbers caught in poverty traps keeps increasing then the question must arise, where, when will it stop? In the absence of an answer, that is a crisis.
 
would suggest that there must be some long-term data detailing the extent of poverty in the country? It's when that long-term data begins to increase, year-in, year-out, that it could arguably stated that there is a crisis. As long as the numbers caught in poverty traps keeps increasing then the question must arise, where, when will it stop? In the absence of an answer, that is a crisis
If that’s the metric then there’s definitely no crisis.
 
There is clearly no poverty crisis, because of elaborate (and sooner or later unaffordable - just look at the current state of the UK economy in the absence there of a multinational tax boom) social provision, but that doesn't mean thar we don't have a cost of living crisis nor a cost of doing business crisis.
 
There is clearly no poverty crisis, because of elaborate (and sooner or later unaffordable - just look at the current state of the UK economy in the absence there of a multinational tax boom) social provision,
Agreed.
but that doesn't mean that we don't have a cost of living crisis nor a cost of doing business crisis.
I agree; one doesn't correlate with the other but the national habit of catastrophising everything, of crying wolf, makes such pronouncements suspect.
 
There is another very dirty national habit in this country of castigating any public figure who says anything, on literally any subject, that questions or deviates from national conventional wisdom and it's underlying assumptions.
Yep, it reminds me of when Conor Skehan, the head of the Housing Executive, a man who has been homeless himself, said that people were gaming the system the response from the left wing establishment was to attack him and call for his resignation rather than examine the veracity of his claims given that he was and is an expert on the subject.
 
Prices are going up, food prices especially more than the base rate of inflation. Is there a lack of competition somewhere in the chain and companies are taking advantage of the price increases?
Ditto for energy prices etc
It's all goes back to energy and government interference in energy markets, we have the highest energy prices in Europe. Our electricity prices are so high because of the huge subsidies and guaranteed prices for renewable energy, they reap all the profits whereas the consumer needs to pay for all the costs of grid stability and other energy sources like power stations when renewables not available.
When you hear of farmers being offered 1000 euros an acre for solar farm leases, that shows you the guaranteed profits that these companies are making. This also distorts the normal leasing for agricultural use which pushes up food prices indirectly. The unforeseen consequences that our establishment is famous for. Also why nobody wants to build a conventional power station which are bqdly needed aswell.

Also among the highest for fuel in EU due to very high carbon taxes. Because food production is energy intensive all those increased costs are fed back through large price increases for groceries and staples.

Then you have enforced government bureaucracy and regulations on business and a load of government quangos that feed off all of this bureaucracy which is another inflationary force
 
Last edited:
That's quite the assertion
No, it's 100% correct. We have a very generous welfare system that ensures people get housing supports (HAP, Council Housing etc), Working Family Payment, One Parent Family Payment, Back to School Allowance, Footwear Allowance, Child Benefit and if needed there's Supplementary Welfare Allowance. All of the above is available to any household where one parent is working and on a low income.

If a parent is working 18 hours a week and getting €37 an hour they still qualify for FIS. That's not a low wage in my world. That, in my opinion, is a generous welfare system. I think that on balance that is a good thing.
 
Unlike the 1980's when there was a real permanent cost of living crisis there is a high level of discretionary expense today that can be cut back if people really wanted. And plenty of chances to pick up extra work too even if you have to pay dreaded tax on it.
 
And plenty of chances to pick up extra work too even if you have to pay dreaded tax on it.
I worked six and a half days a week for about 15 years. I worked around 65 hours a week. With overtime I was getting over 80 pay hours a week. On todays minimum wage that's €1080 a week. As a 21 year old I was getting, in todays money, around €1750 a week. That allowed me to save and at the age of 23 I could buy an apartment (they were much cheaper in real terms in the mid 90's). Unfortunately we now have a stupid nanny state law called the Working Time Act which makes working hard illegal.

We've artificially increased the cost of energy, created an environment where people think working thirty or so hours a week is actually a full time job and increased the size of the State sector by 40% in 6 years. It would be a miracle if things weren't getting more expensive. Thankfully for most people they already had surplus income and their income has increased faster than the rate of inflation.
 
The other point is that the Government rolled out expensive cost of living measures in Budgets, to mitigate the effects of the increases in the cost of living.
If there wasn't a cost of living crisis, why did they do that?

From the previously linked Irish Times article:
To buy votes? I mean clearly electricity prices went through the roof so naturally they reacted to it.

The Government got away with some iron laws of economics here because we operate within a pan continental currency, have an interconnected supply chain and also because we had the Corporation Tax revenues to support it. In many respects this was the inverse of the Global Financial Crisis, whereby we were absolutely hammered because of our membership of the Euro and how different our economy was to the core economies. The fact that we were in a wider currency this time meant we could spend whilst the overall Euro Area had to deal with bringing down inflation.

Ireland outperformed basically everywhere on earth in response to the post COVID/Ukrainian inflation. We can see this by basically any economic and fiscal measure.

I would say the Government mitigated issues before they became a "crisis".
On the contrary. We have discussed this at length before on askaboutmoney.

People argue that we enter the top bracket relatively early, which is true. But the effective tax rate for low and middle earners is below average while for single people and higher earners it's about average.


These figures are a few years old, but I don't think that tax rates have increased in Ireland and reduced elsewhere to change the overall conclusion. But I am open to correction if anyone has more up to date figures.
The Irish Times did a good series with the Irish Tax Institute on this 2 years ago (I cannot link but its at "

Tax: how does Ireland compare with other countries?"​


Clearly more elements need to be added into this but it is startling how little tax those at €25k pay. And bear in mind that this represents over 40% or 1.4m tax payers out of 3.4m. They pay less than 1% of our total income tax collected. And really we have close to 1m tax payers who pay less than €50m combined out of €35bn.

This puts us at the uber progressive tax levels of Switzerland. You pay €4,000 more in tax in Germany at that level than in Ireland. Private health insurance is not worth €4k for the average person.

At around the median wage (of €50k) I think we come out close to par for what a social democratic country would expect, possibly a bit less. They have significantly more tax home than a Germany but about the same as Sweden. I think when you add up the quality of services and other stealth taxes that you'll find we are fairly in the middle, on balance.

At higher salaries, we are absolutely at the social democratic European levels of high tax.

The issue in Ireland is that long term housing costs have distorted the picture. I don't propose to go splashing enormous taxes on the lower paid at German levels, but I'd also make a strong argument that many in that bracket should be paying tax from an equity perspective. I say equity perspective because unfortunately I don't think there is an awful lot of money to be raised here. When you compare to our Corporation Tax receipts, we are only touching the surface. It's the same thing with the Left's proposals for higher taxes on higher earners. What it will actually raise is not going actually do much at all given our current spending.
 
Back
Top