Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

69% Tax? No Thanks!

2

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,924 ✭✭✭✭BuffyBot


    LOOK TO THE FUTURE NOT THE PAST

    It may have escaped your notice, but I think that is what people are trying to do on this thread - look at a future influenced by Sinn Fein's "policies".


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,959 ✭✭✭✭Villain


    Originally posted by daveirl
    I'd like to hear what guys like Irish1 think of the taxation suggestions? Obviously I wouldn't expect you to support Sinn Fein on every issue, but is this one that matters to you?

    Well I don't think the Examiner's figures are correct, Gerry Adams has said he would carry out a FULL review of the system first, which I think makes sense.

    Now can hear people saying thats just a way of avoiding the question, but I think its better to review a system and then come to conclusions than simply throw figures out that you think might win votes. Sinn Fein is seeking an Ireland of equals where the gap between the lower and upper class is closer than presently excists.

    I can understand why people who earn vast sums of money would be threatened by that, but I do believe everyone deserves a good standard of living something that isn't happening right now.

    Sinn Fein wants to try and make Ireland more self suficient by increasing the number of Irish owned companys, Ireland is the now the most expensive country in EU to llive in, and if the foreign companys were to start moving to India etc we would be left in a very vulnerable situation, so I think we have to try and find a balance.

    I'm glad some people can discuss politics in relation to Sinn Fein, a lot of people just make silly statements about them terrorists etc. They are a democratic party who have helped bring about the IRA cease fire and develop the Peace proccess in NI, not something terrorists would do IMHO.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,959 ✭✭✭✭Villain


    Originally posted by BuffyBot
    It may have escaped your notice, but I think that is what people are trying to do on this thread - look at a future influenced by Sinn Fein's "policies".

    SOME people BuffyBot, others simply want to call them terrorists, whether they don't understand politics or simply dont want to accept SF as a polictical party I'm not sure.


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Originally posted by irish1
    Well I don't think the Examiner's figures are correct, Gerry Adams has said he would carry out a FULL review of the system first, which I think makes sense.
    so let me get this straight, there will be no costings untill there is a full review?
    When is this review happening?
    Is it waiting untill they are in government.

    Personally I want to see credible figures before I can vote for a party not just spin and semantics and flowery policy.

    All the tools are there for whatever review SF want to make in order to present their policies and the costs of them.
    Otherwise all you have is fudge.

    This by the way is an attempt to set aside the usual analysis of SF and to scrutinise under the same conditions as the other parties.
    IE comparing the beef.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 14,483 ✭✭✭✭daveirl


    This post has been deleted.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,314 ✭✭✭ionapaul


    Originally posted by irish1
    Sinn Fein is seeking an Ireland of equals where the gap between the lower and upper class is closer than presently excists.

    I can understand why people who earn vast sums of money would be threatened by that, but I do believe everyone deserves a good standard of living something that isn't happening right now.

    When offered a choice such as this:
    A) Pay for a welfare state that supports the worst-off by levying higher taxes for high earners
    B) Keep tax rates low and leave a greater incentive to work hard/start a business/whatever and keep most of what you earn

    I believe most Irish people will go for B. Why? Because everyone likes to think, whether it is true or not, that they can make it big, earn the big bucks, and become rich - and don't want this opportunity made much harder by higher taxes on higher earners. Even those currently among the 'worst-off' section of society, most will think (again, whether it is true or even possible or not) that they can be one of the few to become wealthy. Most people will not willingly place hurdles in their path towards future economic success.

    I don't know how the Scandinavian societies have developed their welfare state economies, but I don't think a majority of Irish people want a big welfare state. We are closer to Boston than Berlin on this one.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,959 ✭✭✭✭Villain


    Originally posted by daveirl
    irish1, does it not worry you that the party have no real experience of governance. Remember Holland's experiment with electing a government of new politicians?

    Well daveirl I don't think SF are going to get voted in as majority party and control the Government for a very long time. I'd be thinking along the lines of them been in power with another party of partys and slowly gathering more experience.

    I agree with you I wouldn't like to see SF come into power in the morning, all our candidates dont have enough experience, however in 20 years time that will be very different.

    Earthman, I believe they would perform such a review if they got into government, not much point in doing a review now and getting elected into government in 10 years and using that review to make taxation decisions. But I see what you mean and perhaps they should carry out a brief review now to give the voters more of insight into their taxation policies.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,924 ✭✭✭✭BuffyBot


    Originally posted by irish1
    SOME people BuffyBot, others simply want to call them terrorists, whether they don't understand politics or simply dont want to accept SF as a polictical party I'm not sure.

    Reacting to it doesn't really help then, does it?
    ;)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    Originally posted by irish1
    Well I don't think the Examiner's figures are correct, Gerry Adams has said he would carry out a FULL review of the system first, which I think makes sense.

    Now can hear people saying thats just a way of avoiding the question, but I think its better to review a system and then come to conclusions than simply throw figures out that you think might win votes.

    So you're saying that SF have no plan to fix the problems and haven't carried out a full study of those problems? So why vote for them, when they have (and it's no use denying it) some serious issues with their credibility already, if they haven't any plans anyway?
    I mean, I might as well vote for "me mate jacko from down the pub" at that rate...


  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Originally posted by Sparks
    So you're saying that SF have no plan to fix the problems and haven't carried out a full study of those problems? So why vote for them, when they have (and it's no use denying it) some serious issues with their credibility already, if they haven't any plans anyway?
    I mean, I might as well vote for "me mate jacko from down the pub" at that rate...
    That would also be my view.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,450 ✭✭✭AngelofFire


    Originally posted by daveirl


    I'd like to hear what guys like Irish1 think of the taxation suggestions?

    Id rather hear what a few snotty nosed armchair progressive democrats think of the fact that ireland has the highest stealth taxes,highest consumer pricing index in the EU and a higher number of paye workers paying at the top rate of the national taxation rate than in any country in europe.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    Originally posted by Sparks
    I mean, I might as well vote for "me mate jacko from down the pub" at that rate...

    Well, given that so many of the electorate seem to vote for "shur hasn't my family always voted <insert politcal party here>" anyway, I don't think its that bad an idea voting for a party where you have at least identified with them on some somewhat-relevant issues, rather than just showing a sheep-mentality to a party.

    If you look at how they've gone about garnering support, as well, you'll notice that they've started by targetting a section of society where I think it is fair to say that many will not be as concerned with the finer points of economics, foreign policy, etc. that the posters here may be, and instead will be looking for on-the-ground changes (which Sinn Fein do seem to do at a local level) and a promise (it may be an empty one, but what election promise isn't) that with more power they will do more to improve the lot of said people.

    Sure....when you look at how they're gonna do this, it comes up well short...but look at it from the other perspective.

    Working class bloke has been shafted nationally and forgotten locally by the established main partys. Along come this bunch of lads, promise to make things better locally, and make some headway. They promise to do likewise at a national level. Why not vote for them rather than the shower who've spent your life letting you down?

    This obviously sets a limit on how far Sinn Fein can rise before they will have to improve the quality of their national-level political visions and plans.....but until they get to that point, it doesn't seem to be a major hindrance amongst the all-too-neglected section of the electorate they are working for/on.

    Maybe their plan is to cash in on that support, spend a term or two with a modicum of voting power to wield as they formulate how to move forward and grab the next chunk of electorate....which is when we'll see an improvement of their plans coupled with a better track-record.

    I seriously think that too many people are looking at the problems facing Sinn Fein if tehy want power in the next election. If you're not looking at the next election, then remember your ceding them 4-ish years to get to where you're complaining they ain't at today.

    If a week is a long time in politics.....4 years is, well, 200-odd long times. Thats, like, an eon, man.

    jc


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Originally posted by bonkey

    Maybe their plan is to cash in on that support, spend a term or two with a modicum of voting power to wield as they formulate how to move forward and grab the next chunk of electorate....which is when we'll see an improvement of their plans coupled with a better track-record.
    jc

    Key word there is maybe because nobody knows otherwise.
    What have they got now? 7 or 8% of the vote and thats largely drawn from how they have "on the ground" got things done for the marginalised.

    Problem for Sinn Féin is though the Vast majority of the voters aren't marginalised.
    They may be píssed off with the various other parties from time to time but when it comes to voting for government their self interest comes into play.

    I'd love to see the balancing act that SF have to do to reconcile continuing to look after the marginaised that now vote for them with policies to attract the much greater numbers of the not so marginalised.
    This is a country after all that has to import workers in their thousands to fill the less well paid jobs and thats a symptom of a "majority" in society who are not so marginalised if ever I saw one.
    Winning over that electorate might make North Belfast politics look like a "sinch" in comparison.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,924 ✭✭✭✭BuffyBot


    So you're saying that SF have no plan to fix the problems and haven't carried out a full study of those problems?

    This is the major problem I have with this. I'd like to see something more concrete before I'd buy into a policy such as this.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    Originally posted by Earthman
    Key word there is maybe because nobody knows otherwise.

    So what?

    Does anyone really believe they know the plans etc. of any of the established parties? Surely we're not gonna believe those election promises and the other guff we get given.

    The simple truth is that small parties do not have the details on everything because they don't need then while they are so small.

    jc


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 21 Irish04


    SF economic policies to cost E5bn more a year
    The Examiner have completed what they believe to be first detailed study of Sinn Féin's economic policies. Sinn Féin's policy of increasing tax, while previously stated by them has been shown to be having a "15% increase in the higher rate from 42% to 57%" and an increase in PRSI to 12%, giving you an astounding 69% rate of taxation.

    The Simple fact is, this study was carried out by a Right Wing Economist, who admitted he was biased because he was coming from a totally different point of view


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 610 ✭✭✭article6


    Originally posted by Irish04
    The Simple fact is, this study was carried out by a Right Wing Economist, who admitted he was biased because he was coming from a totally different point of view

    How do the economist's political views affect the truth of the figures? Are you accusing him of falsifying Sinn Féin documents to support his own position?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,924 ✭✭✭✭BuffyBot


    The simple truth is that small parties do not have the details on everything because they don't need then while they are so small.

    But if they are to grow to be a "big" party, they'll need some more details before people will put their trust in them, won't they?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,411 ✭✭✭shotamoose


    Originally posted by article6
    How do the economist's political views affect the truth of the figures? Are you accusing him of falsifying Sinn Féin documents to support his own position?

    Well he (Colin Hunt of Goodbody) is (a) wrong and (b) deliberately misleading.

    The article says Sinn Fein want to increase health spending to 9% of GDP. As far as I can see, this is wrong. They say they want to raise it to the European average level of 8%, from it's present level of 6.1%. Since GDP was €134,786m in 2003, that's an increase of about €2560m. Hunt goes for €3bn.

    Now, there's all sorts of ways a government could pay for such a rise, apart from a simple hike in the tax rate: Efficiency savings, cutbacks in other policy areas, more effort to close tax loopholes and shelters, a reduction in various exemptions, increases in other forms of taxation, adding in another higher tax band.

    In fact, this is pretty much what Sinn Fein proposed in their 2003 pre-budget submission: Reviews of tax shelters, increases in corporation tax, a freeze on investments into the SSIA, "A new 50% super tax band for individual incomes more than €100,000". The Examiner mentions some of these at the end of the article but prints Hunt's excitable "15% tax increase!" fantasies further up. There's no sign that he's thought about this much so he's probably completely wrong on those figures too. This 'analysis' is not worth the paper he probably didn't bother writing it on.

    If you're going to criticise Sinn Fein, at least do so on the basis of their actual policies. Or for the laughably self-serving 'History of the Conflict' on their website.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,761 ✭✭✭cdebru


    How do the economist's political views affect the truth of the figures? Are you accusing him of falsifying Sinn Féin documents to support his own position

    its scare mongering they tried to scare people away from sinn fein by going on about the IRA that didn't work so now they try the old they will ruin the economy
    something fianna fail started with a couple of weeks ago
    the fact of the matter is that we have one of the lowest tax rates in europe
    but we have the highest percentage of the workforce paying at the top rate

    we have been sold a lie by ff and the pds
    they have decreased the headline tax rates
    but we are paying more tax now as a percentage of income than we did 10 or 15 years ago
    the people who have really benefited are the high earners there tax rates have come down
    just over the average industrial wage pays the high rate of tax


  • Advertisement
  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 13,018 ✭✭✭✭jank


    If you read the articale in question you will notice that they are basiclly full of " we want to sell newspapers"= "bull****e"


    IS there going to be a review on an other partys economic policys tommorow??

    I hope there is!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,959 ✭✭✭✭Villain


    Originally posted by jank
    If you read the articale in question you will notice that they are basiclly full of " we want to sell newspapers"= "bull****e"


    IS there going to be a review on an other partys economic policys tommorow??

    I hope there is!

    Well if there is everyone will probably come out and say it's not true.

    Bash away because I don't think too many Voters will believe what they read in the Examiner.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,295 ✭✭✭Meh


    Originally posted by cdebru
    they have decreased the headline tax rates
    but we are paying more tax now as a percentage of income than we did 10 or 15 years ago
    This is demonstrably false.
    http://www.oecd.org/document/51/0,2340,en_2649_201185_30486387_119690_1_1_1,00.html
    According to the forthcoming edition of the OECD's annual publication Taxing Wages, the tax wedge for a typical married production worker with two children, measured as a percentage of the overall cost to the employer, has declined over the last seven years by about one and half percentage points across the OECD's 30 member states.

    Ireland saw the biggest fall in the tax wedge from 1996 to 2003, with a reduction of 18.3 percentage points,
    http://www.oecd.org/document/49/0,2340,en_2649_34533_30481201_1_1_1_1,00.html
    At the average earnings level, single workers without children pay over 40 per cent of their annual wages in personal income tax and employee social security contributions in Belgium, Denmark and Germany. In Greece, Ireland, Japan, Korea, Mexico, Portugal, the Slovak Republic and Spain the personal average tax rate was below 20 per cent.

    It is interesting to note that when cash benefits are taken into account, married one-earner couples face a negative burden in Ireland and Luxembourg because cash benefits exceed the income tax and social security payments.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,075 ✭✭✭ReefBreak


    Originally posted by irish1
    Well if there is everyone will probably come out and say it's not true.

    Bash away because I don't think too many Voters will believe what they read in the Examiner.
    Ah, so the Examiner has no credibility now, as well as any other paper that likes to justifiably criticise the Shinners. Before you reply, may I remind you that ex-terrorist (I believe torturing people was allegedly his speciality) used to (still does?) write a column for the Examiner.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,959 ✭✭✭✭Villain


    Originally posted by ReefBreak
    Ah, so the Examiner has no credibility now, as well as any other paper that likes to justifiably criticise the Shinners. Before you reply, may I remind you that ex-terrorist (I believe torturing people was allegedly his speciality) used to (still does?) write a column for the Examiner.

    I never said it had no credibilty, I simply said I didn't think too many Voters would believe this article, there is a difference.

    The Examiner piece is bulls*it, and some people here that aren't so anti SF can actually see that, but I wouldn't expect you to think anything else.

    Bash away reefbreak, but to be quite honest its all getting a little borring at this stage. If people were so interested in the policys of the current government and their failings then maybe we might actually get somewhere, but instead people want to bash and bash and bash and bash some more a party that has approx 8%-10% of the vote because there beliefs don't confirm to the main partys line.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,075 ✭✭✭ReefBreak


    Depite their low percentage of the total vote, I will continue to "bash away" while Sinn Féin continue to link themselves to terrorists. I will continue to do this because it embarrasses me as an Irish person, that other Irish people would even consider voting for them.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,075 ✭✭✭ReefBreak


    Originally posted by irish1
    I never said it had no credibilty, I simply said I didn't think too many Voters would believe this article, there is a difference.

    The Examiner piece is bulls*it, and some people here that aren't so anti SF can actually see that, but I wouldn't expect you to think anything else.B]
    I imagine that you consider any article that criticises Shinner's is bullshít?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,314 ✭✭✭ionapaul


    Does the fact that Sinn Fein promises to reduce taxes blind people to the fact they are linked on many levels to an illegal army of kneecappers, murderers and bombers?

    I believe this is why those of us who bash and bash and will continue to bash are doing so. I would rather have a government containing a few corrupt and money-hungry members than one containing murderers, terrorist activists and amoral thugs. But that's just me I guess.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,959 ✭✭✭✭Villain


    Originally posted by ReefBreak
    I imagine that you consider any article that criticises Shinner's is bullshít?

    NO Not one based on proper facts and wrote in an unbiased manner


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,959 ✭✭✭✭Villain


    Originally posted by ionapaul
    Does the fact that Sinn Fein promises to reduce taxes blind people to the fact they are linked on many levels to an illegal army of kneecappers, murderers and bombers?

    I believe this is why those of us who bash and bash and will continue to bash are doing so. I would rather have a government containing a few corrupt and money-hungry members than one containing murderers, terrorist activists and amoral thugs. But that's just me I guess.

    The IRA have been on a ceasefire for many years, SF are committed to peaceful democratic means, if you can't understand that then thats your problem!


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,295 ✭✭✭Meh


    Originally posted by irish1
    The IRA have been on a ceasefire for many years, SF are committed to peaceful democratic means
    If they're committed to peaceful democratic means, then why do they still need their illegal army?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,924 ✭✭✭✭BuffyBot


    Wasn't there a debate about taxation policy somewhere in here...?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    Originally posted by BuffyBot
    Wasn't there a debate about taxation policy somewhere in here...?

    I'd like to think so.

    If this thread is just another "Kick/defend SF/IRA and those who support it/them" then I don't really see the point....

    jc


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,959 ✭✭✭✭Villain


    Originally posted by BuffyBot
    Wasn't there a debate about taxation policy somewhere in here...?

    Ya when you find it let me know, people always go back to the IRA when they try to bash SF, old and and not very interesting.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,608 ✭✭✭✭sceptre


    Originally posted by irish1
    Ya when you find it let me know
    It's about a page back


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Originally posted by bonkey
    The simple truth is that small parties do not have the details on everything because they don't need then while they are so small.
    jc
    With respect Bonkey,I disagree.
    no party should expect to put their policies in front of an electorate without expecting them to be critically analyised from a cost point of view by their rivals or their prospective voters.
    Untill SF do this which includes a reality check involving the self interest of the majority of voters then their growth potential is very limited.

    Thats where I await with interest how they are going to reconcile their care for the marginalised with the wants(often selfish) of the rest of the electorate.
    Socialist parties didn't flourish in the 1980's when unemployment,taxes and emmigration were at major highs.
    Democratic Left ended up merging with labour ditching much of it's more extreme left wing philosophy having seen the writing on the wall as regards peoples selfish wants.
    I don't see a road to Damascus conversion of the majority of comfortable reasonably well off people towards neo communist ideals.
    It's not in their nature.

    What I do see though is (if they want votes) a slow conversion of SF down the path of realism and a slow recognition by them that votes eventually have to be bought by giving people what they want and not by deciding that what SF believe as of now is what they want.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,411 ✭✭✭shotamoose


    Originally posted by Earthman

    I don't see a road to Damascus conversion of the majority of comfortable reasonably well off people towards neo communist ideals.

    This is getting ridiculous. In what way are their actual policies 'neo-communist'? As opposed to in your own head, for example. I dislike Sinn Fein intensely, but I haven't seen any evidence of neo-communism, just fairly mild socialism. And no, they're not the same thing.


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Originally posted by shotamoose
    This is getting ridiculous. In what way are their actual policies 'neo-communist'? As opposed to in your own head, for example. I dislike Sinn Fein intensely, but I haven't seen any evidence of neo-communism, just fairly mild socialism. And no, they're not the same thing.
    It's not easy to get particulars as SF don't provide them.
    I did have one councillor call to my door at the last election blurting out that Banks would be better nationalised.
    Then theres this
    Ultimately, this must translate into local communities being allowed to become centrally involved in planning and making decisions about economic development programmes which directly affect them.
    Central planning-thats communist isn't it?

    As regards them being mild socialists as opposed to neo communists-thats all down to perception.
    It's in my head certainly,It's my perception untill I see some beef to convince me otherwise.
    Having offices in Havana Cuba hasn't helped that perception either...
    The labour party are a nicely socially driven political party-do they have ties with Cuba?
    Then theres SF's historical ties with North Korea
    The main link between Sinn Fein and North Korea is Gerry MacLochlainn. The former Sinn Fein organiser in Wales was released from Maidstone Prison in November 1983 after serving two and a half years of a sentence for conspiracy to cause explosions; before becoming the main representative of Sinn Fein in Great Britain. More recently, he has been a Sinn Fein appointed councillor in Derry and Mitchell McLaughlin's constituency manager. MacLochlainn came into contact with circles on Britain that were sympathetic to the North Korean regime and its official ideology known as Juche; such as the GIFAC and Harpal Brar's Indian Workers Association (Harpal Brar is now president of the Stalin Society). Sinn Fein developed friendly relations with those circles. MacLochlainn even wrote a booklet entitled "The Irish Republican and Juche Conception of National Self-Dignity are One" (London: Mosquito Press, 1985). The publication was about the similarities existing between the Irish Republican and Juche ideologies. The Juche ideology is a mixture of radical nationalism and socialism, and would be close to Maoism. It is not surprising that during its more "thirdworldist" days, some Sinn Fein members were sympathetic to such views. The world, Ireland and Korea have changed a lot since 1985, but as late as November 1999, MacLochlainn was a speaker along with Harpal Brar at a commemoration of the 1917 Great October Revolution organised by the Stalin Society in Leicester.
    Regarding information on Sinn Féins policies,they sure do know about utopia...
    All I've read on the website is a doom and gloom analysis of whats going on in Ireland.
    Unemployment rates around 4% aren't something to cry about,increasing corporation taxes on companies that have by their presence here factored them into their decision to provide tens of thousands of jobs here would be though, if it means they go.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,411 ✭✭✭shotamoose


    Originally posted by Earthman
    It's not easy to get particulars as SF don't provide them.

    They provide enough to see that they're not 'neo-communist'. In their pre-budget statement, for example.
    Central planning-thats communist isn't it?

    That's only central planning if you re-arrange the words of the sentence to give it a different meaning, which I think is something of a slipperly slope.

    Rather, it is local communities being centrally involved in planning and "making decisions about economic development programmes which directly affect them". If this is neo-communist than New Labour must be neo-communist too, as local community involvement in policy development is a long-established policy of theirs, for example in the New Deal for Communities, extensive public consultations on the London Plan and the Mayor's Economic Development Strategies, and public involvement in local authority planning policy and decisions.

    I'm all in favour of people drawing Sinn Fein into a real debate on their actual policy proposals. Baselessly labelling them 'neo-communist' just ensures an immediate lapse into the kind of time-honoured mud-slinging we've already seen too much of on this thread.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,761 ✭✭✭cdebru


    centrally involved in planning

    is not the same as
    Central planning-thats communist isn't it?

    that kind of slippery mixing of words and taking things out of context is disgraceful

    as for sinn fein it is a broad church or was anyway
    there was stalinist and trotskyists
    maoist enviromentalists marxists republicans nationalists
    anti abortionists pro choice socialists, liberals and pretty much anything else you can think of
    mostly united on the national question
    other issues that could divide the party where usually put on the back burner to be sorted out when the war was won
    such as abortion

    it is broadly left leaning
    definitely not communist although i dont doubt that some of its member would have communist leanings

    abit like the anc in south africa ( iam not comparing their struggles so dont go there)
    the anc had communists and socialists of all types in fact its vice president was a communist
    as well as plenty of other political beliefs in its ranks
    all united on the struggle for freedom
    since it has taken government it is definitely not undertaken any communists policies

    but it is still probably broadly left leaning


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 14,483 ✭✭✭✭daveirl


    This post has been deleted.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,924 ✭✭✭Cork


    Originally posted by daveirl
    SF economic policies to cost E5bn more a year
    Examiner.ie

    The Examiner have completed what they believe to be first detailed study of Sinn Féin's economic policies. Sinn Féin's policy of increasing tax, while previously stated by them has been shown to be having a "15% increase in the higher rate from 42% to 57%" and an increase in PRSI to 12%, giving you an astounding 69% rate of taxation.

    Will people actually go in for this?

    Socialist partys like tax and spend policies.

    Instead of allowing people the discretion touse their income they take take and take in the form of taxation.

    Why should the Irish tax payer foot the bill for bloated public services?

    What incentive does a 69% tax rate give people to work?

    I think people would prefer to pay $6 per week to Bupa rather to pay 69% to the goverrment.

    I work and they expect that I will pay 69% from my hours work to the government?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,450 ✭✭✭AngelofFire


    Originally posted by daveirl
    Well I'm not a snotty nosed armchair pd, but I'll reply all the same. I don't like the rate of taxation the way it is, but that doesn't preclude me from not wanting an even higher rate of taxation.

    would you be in favour of raising the standard taxation rate if it meant that stealth taxes were lowered considerabley.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,450 ✭✭✭AngelofFire


    Originally posted by Cork
    Socialist partys like tax and spend policies.

    Instead of allowing people the discretion touse their income they take take and take in the form of taxation.

    Why should the Irish tax payer foot the bill for bloated public services?

    What incentive does a 69% tax rate give people to work?

    I think people would prefer to pay $6 per week to Bupa rather to pay 69% to the goverrment.

    I work and they expect that I will pay 69% from my hours work to the government?

    Before you indulge yourself in neo liberal fantasies you musn`t forget that the system of low taxes high stealth taxes benefits high earners.Since waste charges were introduced the PAYE Worker pays 2% of their income towards the charges whilst the high earner only pays 0.2%, it was much fairer when waste disposal was payed through the standard taxation system as peoples earnings etc were taken into account.The fact that poverty in this country has doubled over the past 7 years is no accident,its the fault of this government`s economic policies.We now rank second in the UN poverty index for developed countries.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,924 ✭✭✭Cork


    high stealth taxes benefits high earners

    Why can't people bring their waste to bring centres?

    At the moment - I don't put cardbroad, glass, paper, food waste etc for for landfill. Some of my neighbours are too lazy to seperate their rubbish. Its their choice, If they want to pay for refuse disposal.
    The fact that poverty in this country has doubled over the past 7 years is no accident,its the fault of this government`s economic policies.We now rank second in the UN poverty index for developed countries.

    In its latest UN Human Development Index of the best countries to live in, the UN agency Norway, Sweden, Australia, Canada and The Netherlands were chosen as the best five places to be a citizen of. Belgium is in sixth place, followed by Iceland, the United States, Japan and Ireland to complete the top 10.

    So as a country we are in the top 10 places to live according to the UN Human Development Index.

    Top 20:

    1. Norway
    2. Sweden
    3. Australia
    4. Canada
    5. Netherlands
    6. Belgium
    7. Iceland
    8. United States
    9. Japan
    10. Ireland
    11. Switzerland
    12. Britain
    13. Finland
    14. Austria
    15. Luxembourg
    16. France
    17. Denmark
    18. New Zealand
    19. Germany
    20. Spain

    SFs tax policy is nonsense. We need more tax like a hole in the head.

    People can get health insurance say for 6 euro per week. Why would these people want to hand over 69% of their earnings to the state?


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,450 ✭✭✭AngelofFire


    First of all i dont support Sinn Fein the party i support is Labour.I dont like the idea of a 69% higher taxation rate.I would support 3 taxation rates 20% for small earners 35% for those earning below €70,000 and a 48% rate for high earners.

    €6 euro per week is an awfull lot for those on the average industrial wage particularily large families, in cases of them being asthmatic or diabetic that fee could double. A family of 5 with one worker on the minimum wage would have to pay at least €30 per week out of €280.stealth taxes,mortgages etc will gobble much of the remainder of the income.Having essential services such as childcare and healthcare paid for by the standard taxation system works in denmark and sweeden.It has created greaty equity between social classes, The average industrial worker in Denmark has more disposable income than his/her counterpart in ireland.The countries with the lowest poverty on the Un development index were those with higher taxes.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,314 ✭✭✭ionapaul


    Originally posted by AngelofFire
    €6 euro per week is an awfull lot for those on the average industrial wage particularily large families.

    Fair enough point, but even if someone is making €250,000, should they have to pay for someone else's large family? What is mean is that is seems pretty irresponsible to have a large family is you only have one person in the family making money, and not a whole lot at that! It does anger me a little when I see young girls or young working-class couples walking around with three or four kids in tow - it isn't fair on the kids, who don't get enough resources spent on them, nor on the taxpayer, who is expected to fund this large family. Maybe I'm way out of line, but I don't plan to have any kids until I am well established with a decent income and a good sized investment put away so they can be taken care of.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,924 ✭✭✭Cork


    High Taxes has not worked in Ireland. It encourages people not to go to work but to stay at home and draw welfare.

    Low taxes mean that people have the power to spend the money that they earn.

    FF introduced measures to tax property years ago but it met with a revolt from certain middle class interest groups.

    Paying 69% tax is pure nonsense. The Green Party are also in favour of Green Taxes.

    These partys would like to spend your money as they like. But it should be up to you how you spend it.

    I earn far less than the average industrial wage and I pay for medical insurance. I don't smoke or have cable TV.

    I don't pay bin charges as I recycle. But I don't pay much tax. I have the power to spend what I earn.

    High tax rates take this right away from me & I would probably then be better on the dole or doing a CERT or Fas course.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,411 ✭✭✭shotamoose


    Originally posted by AngelofFire
    The fact that poverty in this country has doubled over the past 7 years is no accident

    I'm pretty sure poverty has not doubled over the past 7 years. Some evidence for your claim would be nice.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,411 ✭✭✭shotamoose


    Originally posted by Cork
    High Taxes has not worked in Ireland. It encourages people not to go to work but to stay at home and draw welfare.

    If that was true Sweden would be the most bone-idle place in the world. It isn't. In fact, according to the figures you just quoted, it has a higher standard of living than Ireland. I think most of the other countries above us in the table also have higher tax burdens.

    Ireland's position in the Human Development Index is artifially high since a major element in the index is GDP per capita. GDP measures money made within the country which is subsequently taken abroad, such as the corporate profits sent overseas, but GNP doesn't. Surprise surprise, our GNP per capita is 20% lower than our GDP capita, which puts us ninth instead of third in the income list.
    Paying 69% tax is pure nonsense.

    Absolutely. As I said above, Sinn Fein haven't proposed a 69% tax rate. So why are you saying they have?
    The Green Party are also in favour of Green Taxes.

    As are Fianna Fail, if the plastic bag tax is anything to go by.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement