Sinn Féin's tax proposals?

[Purple]

No comfort there. Pol Pot was the son of a wealthy Cambodian family who was privately educated in the best French speaking schools and went to university in Paris. Look how he turned out - death toll approximately 2 million, about 25% of the population.

It's strange how Labour become more palatable as time goes by; actually democrats who respect the will of the people, actually socialists who are in favour of real wealth taxes (property taxes) and they've never murdered any children.

 

[Marsupial]

It's strange how Labour become more palatable as time goes by; actually democrats who respect the will of the people, actually socialists who are in favour of real wealth taxes (property taxes) and they've never murdered any children.

Ireland's very own SDLP, sadly.

 

[Baby boomer]

It's strange how Labour become more palatable as time goes by; actually democrats who respect the will of the people, actually socialists who are in favour of real wealth taxes (property taxes) and they've never murdered any children.

Yes, but remember there are two lines of descent making up the current Irish Labour Party. There is the nice, cuddly traditional Labour sort who are (somewhat naively in my view) attached to the idea that Government knows best, and we should allow it to run more and more of the economy and society generally.

Then there's the other half of the merger - the line descended from Democratic Left, formerly The Worker's Party, formerly Sinn Fein the Worker's Party, formerly Official Sinn Fein, formerly Sinn Fein. This line maintained its army well into the 1980's for fundraising purposes and was involved in bloody warfare against the INLA and other far left Republican splinter groups. It also maintained cordial fraternal relations with the most unsavoury of Communist regimes and regularly sent and received delegations to places like North Korea.

Oddly enough, the former "Officials" never decommissioned their arms, and yet, they were welcomed with open arms into "respectable" politics. Can't imagine why. It's almost as if they had vast armies of people burrowing their way into the newspapers and RTE

 

[Marsupial]

Yes, but remember there are two lines of descent making up the current Irish Labour Party. There is the nice, cuddly traditional Labour sort who are (somewhat naively in my view) attached to the idea that Government knows best, and we should allow it to run more and more of the economy and society generally.

Then there's the other half of the merger - the line descended from Democratic Left, formerly The Worker's Party, formerly Sinn Fein the Worker's Party, formerly Official Sinn Fein, formerly Sinn Fein. This line maintained its army well into the 1980's for fundraising purposes and was involved in bloody warfare against the INLA and other far left Republican splinter groups. It also maintained cordial fraternal relations with the most unsavoury of Communist regimes and regularly sent and received delegations to places like North Korea.

Oddly enough, the former "Officials" never decommissioned their arms, and yet, they were welcomed with open arms into "respectable" politics. Can't imagine why. It's almost as if they had vast armies of people burrowing their way into the newspapers and RTE

There's a third element too: let's call it the O'Riordan/Bacik woke fringe, a sub-cult about which I have nothing nice to say.

 

[Purple]

Yes, if they had those savings in Bank shares. If they owned shares then they were ‘The Banks’ and they were not bailed out. If they owned a broad range of shares or property then they have been more than bailed out through quantitative easing in the last decade or so as that the reason their pension fund, property and share portfolio have increased at rates far exceeding inflation or wage growth.
That’s also the reason there’s a housing affordability crisis and future generations of average people won’t own their own homes.

More than anything it’s the lack of gratitude and sense of entitlement from older people that gets me.

On the QE point this article from two years ago by Patrick Jennings in the Financial Times puts QE front and centre as the reason for our house price and rent inflation.
When us over 40's meet a young person we should remember to say thanks, apologise maybe, but certainly say thanks.

 

[Baby boomer]

On the QE point this article from two years ago by Patrick Jennings in the Financial Times puts QE front and centre as the reason for our house price and rent inflation.
When us over 40's meet a young person we should remember to say thanks, apologise maybe, but certainly say thanks.

And sure they can thank us in return for paying 65% tax plus PRSI plus levies on our relatively modest 1980's salaries to pay for their education. T'was far from avocados and lattes we were while saving to qualify for a mortgage at rates of 10% plus.

 

[Purple]

And sure they can thank us in return for paying 65% tax plus PRSI plus levies on our relatively modest 1980's salaries to pay for their education.

It's a pity our generation wasn't better educated, we might have not wrecked the economy.

T'was far from avocados and lattes we were while saving to qualify for a mortgage at rates of 10% plus.

But with an average enough job you could buy a house, right?
I know which I'd prefer.
I started working part time in 1987, fulltime in 1990. It was certainly much easier back then than it is now.
I also know that the value of my pension and my house was more than halved in the late 2000's and the only reason I have equity or a decent pension now is because of quantitative easing and the debt that's been thrust on young people. I am very grateful for that and I'd be happy to pay a wealth tax to partially redress the balance.

Oh, and a high interest rate environment is, by far, the best one in which to buy a house. That should be obvious to everyone.

 

[Purple]

And sure they can thank us in return for paying 65% tax plus PRSI plus levies on our relatively modest 1980's salaries to pay for their education.

Actually if they were educated in the last 12 years it was paid for using a student loan. The loan was taken out as part of a larger package costing over €100 billion that we took out to pay for the 10 year party we have in the 00's.

 

[PebbleBeach2020]

I am very grateful for that and I'd be happy to pay a wealth tax to partially redress the balance.

You do realise that if you are happy to pay a wealth tax, just contact the department of finance and make a payment. Alternatively, do not claim tax refunds, credits etc to the value of your wealth tax. How's the air up there in your ivory tower tell us Purple?

 

[Marsupial]

It's a pity our generation wasn't better educated, we might have not wrecked the economy.

Not all of us voted for the snake oil being offered by FF, FG and the PDs back in the days when Digout Man was running/ruining the country.

 

[Shakespeare]

It's a pity our generation wasn't better educated, we might have not wrecked the economy.

But with an average enough job you could buy a house, right?
I know which I'd prefer.
I started working part time in 1987, fulltime in 1990. It was certainly much easier back then than it is now.
I also know that the value of my pension and my house was more than halved in the late 2000's and the only reason I have equity or a decent pension now is because of quantitative easing and the debt that's been thrust on young people. I am very grateful for that and I'd be happy to pay a wealth tax to partially redress the balance.

Oh, and a high interest rate environment is, by far, the best one in which to buy a house. That should be obvious to everyone.

To be honest, as someone in late 40s who paid 9% stamp duty on the full cost of the house, had no help to buy schemes, nobody fretting about my childcare costs and within 2 years of taking same, ended up with an increase in marginal tax rate of about 8% (none of which has been temporary!) tax reliefs all cut to standard rate, I only now, after almost 20 years have a house edging on what I paid for it.

At no other time that I know of has someone bought a house and almost 20 years later have had the noose of that mortgage be as big a burden as it was on day 1 - there has been collapse of house prices and negligble/zero inflation since 2006 until now so I find it a bit difficult to feel a huge amount of sympathy - at least these days there are voices caring about house prices - no one gave a s*** in 2006/7. Guess what, I couldn't afford to buy anywhere near where I grew up - all the talk of excessive house prices now, largely references the cost of new builds at talk of Eur400k+
You can buy a very spacious (1,250 sq ft ) 3 bed duplex 2 mins from a train station in a quiet area (20 mins to city on train) for under Eur300k - that is not beyond what lots of people could afford as a couple both earning and it's less for a 2 bed but that kind of realism doesn't suit the media populist narrative

apols, rant over.

 

[Purple]

To be honest, as someone in late 40s who paid 9% stamp duty on the full cost of the house, had no help to buy schemes, nobody fretting about my childcare costs and within 2 years of taking same, ended up with an increase in marginal tax rate of about 8% (none of which has been temporary!) tax reliefs all cut to standard rate, I only now, after almost 20 years have a house edging on what I paid for it.

I'm in the same situation. I'm just pointing out that the increase in the value of your house and mine was due to quantitative easing and that has disadvantaged those who don't own houses.

 

[Purple]

You do realise that if you are happy to pay a wealth tax, just contact the department of finance and make a payment. Alternatively, do not claim tax refunds, credits etc to the value of your wealth tax. How's the air up there in your ivory tower tell us Purple?

That's a silly post.

 

[The Horseman]

That's a silly post.

It's not really. If you as an individual feel you want to pay a wealth tax or give something back to the state then you can.

 

[Purple]

It's not really. If you as an individual feel you want to pay a wealth tax or give something back to the state then you can.

It really is.

This is about SF tax policy and their populist lie that the will tax the wealthy. They won't and have no intention of doing do because most of the wealthy don't understand the different between wealth and income. It's also true to say the most of the wealth held by the wealthy is due to political decisions rather than their own hard work. That doesn't mean they don't work hard, it's just a reflection of the fact that most wealth is held in the form of pensions and property (the primary place of residence) and their values have more than doubled over the last 12 years due to political decisions. At the same time real wage growth over that 12 years has been less than 10%.
I'm simple acknowledging my good fortune as one of those people and proposing that it would be fair to return some of that unearned wealth to those have been disadvantaged by events and will have to pay for it in the longer term. Think of it as giving them the resources to pay our debt for us since we are unwilling to do so.

 

[PebbleBeach2020]

That's a silly post.

I'm just following your lead. House prices increase due to inflation as well and over time, prices go up. A house in 1900 was cheaper than in 1950 and again cheaper than in 2000. Was there quantitive easying since 1900 and earlier?

Nobody agrees with your train of thought here it seems. You are like a priest, pontificating and telling us all the errors of our ways without doing anything to atone yourself. Your a Purple alright

 

[Purple]

I'm just following your lead. House prices increase due to inflation as well and over time, prices go up. A house in 1900 was cheaper than in 1950 and again cheaper than in 2000. Was there quantitive easying since 1900 and earlier?

This is an interesting study on house prices between 1709 and 1949. We've always had booms and busts but the difference between then and the last 12 years was the size and cause of the changes. This time it's been caused by QE and no, that's never happened before because governments were much smaller in economic terms back then.

You are like a priest, pontificating and telling us all the errors of our ways without doing anything to atone yourself. Your a Purple alright

I don't know what you mean by that. I'm advocating for a Wealth Tax that actually taxes wealth. That's all. What errors are you talking about?

 

[The Horseman]

It really is.

This is about SF tax policy and their populist lie that the will tax the wealthy. They won't and have no intention of doing do because most of the wealthy don't understand the different between wealth and income. It's also true to say the most of the wealth held by the wealthy is due to political decisions rather than their own hard work. That doesn't mean they don't work hard, it's just a reflection of the fact that most wealth is held in the form of pensions and property (the primary place of residence) and their values have more than doubled over the last 12 years due to political decisions. At the same time real wage growth over that 12 years has been less than 10%.
I'm simple acknowledging my good fortune as one of those people and proposing that it would be fair to return some of that unearned wealth to those have been disadvantaged by events and will have to pay for it in the longer term. Think of it as giving them the resources to pay our debt for us since we are unwilling to do so.

It is.

Sinn Fein will tax the wealthy as they want to appeal to the "have not's" as they see them. Property goes up on in value as inflation increases the value of an asset will increase in monetary terms (not necessarily in real terms). Pensions go up because pension funds are invested in economic activity be it shareholding by pension funds, govt bonds, property investment etc. This is exactly what should happen otherwise where do the funds for economic activity come from.

I am in my early 50's and have gone through high interest rates, stamp duty etc. What we are encountering is a populist view of pandering to peoples wants irrespective of the economic consequences.

 

[Purple]

Property goes up on in value as inflation increases the value of an asset will increase in monetary terms (not necessarily in real terms). Pensions go up because pension funds are invested in economic activity be it shareholding by pension funds, govt bonds, property investment etc. This is exactly what should happen otherwise where do the funds for economic activity come from.

Yes, that's what normally happens but QE doubled the money supply and that is the main driver in property and share price inflation in the last 12 years. Therefore the increases in wealth are due to QE, not economic activity. There's been almost no inflation due to economic activity in that period. I'm not saying that QE should not have happened, I'm just pointing out the result.

 

[Brian C]

None of these? What about the Vacant site levy introduced in 2018, and increased in 2019? The €70M grant to the Housing Agency to purchase and refurb vacant housing? Public opinion is very much against increasing the height restrictions, so you need to blame the public for that one.



If they wanted to enrich cronies, doing much of what you said would have been a perfect way to achieve that. They'd have made billions in development related income.

Don't get fooled that we have some abnormal issue with vacant or derelict properties. In 2014 it was reported we had over 400,000 vacant properties, many in unfinished ghost estates where no one wanted to buy. The 2016 census reported the number of vacant properties was down to 180k. The 2020 GeoView Report found ~90k vacant properties, and how many of those are second homes or owned by people in long-term care? That's progress in anyone's book.

Leo, the 400,00 down to 180,000 down to 90,000 isn't progress. It's just a correction of an incorrect figure. The 400,000 "vacant properties" never existed nor did the 180,000. With the 2016 census, a large amount of the 180,000 related to when if someone didn't answer the door the property was marked as vacant.

Also Dublin City Council like many other councils have said that their vacant numbers are much lower than what a national figure of 180,00 would give them. In fact a large number of them are actually holiday homes. Ultimately these figures are thrown around by opposition politicians. They are unsubstantiated rubbish. It is surprising that they are still being used.