Making do - on how little?

wiggzie

haz wrote:

So Minister McDowell has had his evil way with poor Mr Cowen and there is to be a reduction in the higher rate of tax to 41%, costing 230 million euro per year - i.e. costing twice as much as the 15 euro per week increase in the pension, but still only half what the PDs asked for.

1. The cut in higher rate of income tax was a fundamental promise for the last election compaign, so delivering what they promised, about time.
2. The government shouldn't be taking money from taxpayers that it doens't need. Currently running massive surplus for this year - this is tax that it should NEVER have taken and is right that the people who paid it should pay less subsequently.
3. They should be taking as little as possible from taxpayers - it's not a governments right to overtax its populace and then blow what it gets. It should take the minumum required to meet it's needs.

As a taxpayer, what do I get from the taxes I pay? I don't see much benefit, so I'd much rather pay less.

RainyDay

wiggzie wrote:

As a taxpayer, what do I get from the taxes I pay? I don't see much benefit, so I'd much rather pay less.

Most people seem to think differently - See http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/frontpage/2006/1202/1164823860027.html

The overwhelming majority of voters want Brian Cowen to give top priority in next Wednesday's budget to putting more money into public services such as health and education rather than income tax cuts, according to The Irish Times /TNS mrbi poll.

Asked to rate five budgetary options in order of priority, 51 per cent opted for extra spending on health and education as the number one choice on the basis that Mr Cowen would have about €2 billion to give away in the upcoming budget. The next highest priority, with 16 per cent support, was cutting stamp duty to help first-time house buyers.

haz

wiggzie wrote:

The cut in higher rate of income tax was a fundamental promise for the last election compaign, so delivering what they promised, about time.

They also promised to provide effective A&E, no overnight stays on hospital trolleys, adequate nursing staff levels, reduced waiting lists, paediatric care, community psychiatric supports, 24-hour rape crisis centres, juvenile psychiatric care, no children in adult prisons, ....

230 million would be better spent on any of these, speaking as having used some of these services.

hmmm

Government budgets should be automatically cut by 5% every year until we get to a stage where we are getting value for money. I'd rather that 230 million in my pocket rather than wasted on another ripoff round of benchmarking.

MOH

RainyDay wrote:

Most people seem to think differently - See http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/frontpage/2006/1202/1164823860027.html

Yes, of course most people would rather the money went into proper public services/infrastructure, but it's not going to. Hasn't in the past, why start now. So I'd rather have the 1% cut.

haz

hmmm wrote:

Government budgets should be automatically cut by 5% every year until we get to a stage where we are getting value for money. I'd rather that 230 million in my pocket rather than wasted on another ripoff round of benchmarking.

And you are happy to have the savings for, or pay the overhead on insurance for, the unfortunate possibility of a debilitating car accident? Or the probability of incapacitating dementia (30%), visual impairment (11%), motor impairment preventing dressing / feeding / personal hygiene (4%) - or of having to pay fulltime nursing care (50,000+ euro per annum) to live in your own home in old age? With private care costing at least 15% more than public care, insurance creaming off a minimum 5% (BUPA) to 10% (the other fully private insurers) and consultants employing less experienced juniors at their own rates (and pocketing the difference). That is assuming you don't have the two years out of work on a failed hip, spending your hard earned savings whilst on the waiting list.

Public hospitals can deliver the most efficient services. They don't. Ireland's public services are some of the least efficient, with some of the most self-interested over-employment from unions to consultants. Starving the services of resources will not improve them. Transparent accounting will.