All of those points have been raised in the media already by Brendan and others. They won't get traction because they do not suit our left wing media's agenda and unless something is written by Reuters, the London Times or the English Daily Telegraph it won't make it into the Indo.
a general submission and then list 20 ideas for improving the long term financial stability of the country.
I agree. A free media is more important in protecting the interests of the citizen than democracy. In my opinion we are as badly let down by our media as we are by our government and State Sector.I understand the point you are making, but the problem with a single idea is that people get bored listening to it. The problems are complex and they need complex solutions. Having said that, the media wants sound bites "Tax the rich to help the poor"
Brendan
I understand the point you are making, but the problem with a single idea is that people get bored listening to it. The problems are complex and they need complex solutions. Having said that, the media wants sound bites "Tax the rich to help the poor"
We don't like that sort of thing here. We just want someone else to pay for everything. Property taxes, bin charges, water charges etc. are all forms of non-labour taxes which are not cyclical.Here is one today on Bloomberg relating to a discussion in the UK
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...see-the-u-k-tear-itself-apart-cable-will-warn
We just want someone else to pay for everything. Property taxes, bin charges, water charges
we need to shift the tax burden away from labour and onto capital.
The problem is that capital is mobile so there is absolutely no point in Ireland doing this in isolation.
The big question is how that can be done.I agree. A rise in wages (not restricted to Ireland) is required. Central Banks and governments need to engineer the conditions that facilitates economic forces to increase the return on wages over the return on capital - without crashing the world economy of course!
Back to the main topic, I think you'll be laughed at.Back to the main topic
Who speaks for the tax paying workers?
I will probably do a Pre Budget Submission based on my earlier post.
It will be a personal submission, but maybe I will make it "on behalf of all taxpayers and workers"
Brendan
And that is why an Irish taxpayer on 55 grand pays more that in other wealthier countries, because it is public policy that he/she should do so.
So there you have it. Taxation policy is, inter alia, to 'offset market income inequality'. So it was a bit of a waste of time to study, get that qualification, work hard and produce marketable goods and services, because somebody else, and not you and your family, will benefit from your hard work and effort, but you will at least know that you live is an less unequal society. And that is why an Irish taxpayer on 55 grand pays more that in other wealthier countries, because it is public policy that he/she should do so.
Furthermore the Fiscal Advisory Council's pre-budget submission http://www.fiscalcouncil.ie/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Pre-Budget-2018-Statement.pdf does not address the issue of personal taxation or the concerns of the Irish Tax Institute, presumably because they do not regard them as important or real, but notes that “there is more scope for government expenditure to expand in line with the economy’s sustainable pace of growth, while gradually reducing debt levels.” So public policy would appear to be firmly set on increasing government expenditure, when it can get away with it, with issues concerning personal income tax payers not addressed in the FAC's report.
Back to the main topic, I think you'll be laughed at.
f I am reading this correctly, when the economy is in the dumps we should increase government spending to boost the economy and when the economy is fine we should boost increase spending again as we have the funds?
I think a lot of people are afraid to speak out about the system because they will be laughed at or abused by the media or the poverty lobby.
Back to the main topic, I think you'll be laughed at.
t would appear however that you haven't considered the reasons why public policy is geared toward offsetting market income inequality.
We have the wrong discussion; it should be about value for money and efficiency, not increasing taxes and spending.
The figure of 55 grand comes from page 5 of the Irish Taxation Institute's document quoted by gnf_ireland in post no 1 of this thread. “At a salary level of €55,000, an Irish taxpayer pays more tax than in Sweden, Spain, Switzerland and the US. They pay over €800 more than a taxpayer in the UK.” https://taxinstitute.ie/Portals/0/The%20Budget%20Book%202017%20-%20Final%2016%20Sept.pdf.Are there any comparison sites to give these figures ?
This is a big debate. But there is all the difference in the world between having a welfare state that looks after society's unfortunates, which I and every other reasonable person supports and insists on, and policy that sets out to negate explicitly the benefits and distributions of a market economy.It would appear however that you haven't considered the reasons why public policy is geared toward offsetting market income inequality.
I presume this comment is directed at the Fiscal Advisory Council , and not me?Bananas.
The point I was making is that for acceptance, any submission must make sense within the current policy formation framework, e.g. the various official documents I quoted in my previous post. If a submission is regarded as a whinge document it will be dismissed. Your post no 9 is well argued as is the Taxation Institute's document.That would never stop me.
The figure of 55 grand comes from page 5 of the Irish Taxation Institute's document quoted by gnf_ireland in post no 1 of this thread. “At a salary level of €55,000, an Irish taxpayer pays more tax than in Sweden, Spain, Switzerland and the US.
And that is why an Irish taxpayer on 55 grand pays more than in SOME other wealthier countries,
But there is all the difference in the world between having a welfare state that looks after society's unfortunates, which I and every other reasonable person supports and insists on, and policy that sets out to negate explicitly the benefits and distributions of a market economy.
PMU has eloquently set down the difficulties faced by those who make pre-budget submissions.
But if everyone sits back and lets the poverty lobby call for even more expenditure when we already have €200 bn of national debt, they can't complain when we the Troika comes back in.
I want to offer the alternative view that there is an open-ended cheque book.
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?