General Election - Who will you vote?

ballooba

Ibid wrote:

Of course it creates jobs!!

Not if the companies have no employees.

These companies are not leaving because the tax rates are too high. They are leaving because all of the other costs are too high. Property, Wages, Utilities, the works.

Time Magazine

Right, as promised, my view on SF's economic policies.

Firstly, I notice their email address is sfadmin@eircom.net. Do SF support this privatised company and continue to give them custom? .

The first paragraph speaks of an economy "which cherishes all our people equally and prizes equality and social justice." Sounds lovely doesn't it? It's nothing but vacuumous rhetoric. Cherish all people equally and prize equality? In the words of Amartya Sen, equality of what?

Do Sinn Féin see equality as everyone on a similar income? I'm currently working my ass off getting up at 6am every morning to go to work at minimum wage before college starts to put myself through an economics degree. Obviously, I expect this investment to pay off dividends when I graduate. I work bloody hard and will continue to do so. Does Sinn Féin's concept of equality means all people will be treated equally and thus my hard work will result in sh*t loads of cash; or does it mean that I will be taxed through the nose so people who don't work as hard as me get subsidised?

Now don't get me wrong, I'm all for social justice. I just think social justice should be aimed at rewarding effort and hard-work - to encourage the levels of economic growth that we have seen - as opposed to soundbites of "equality".

Information on inequality continues, and they go on to state that "Our party has at the core of our political programme a commitment to eradicate the causes of these prevailing injustices." I wonder does that include getting the long-term unemployed off the dole by not giving them cash anymore? Or to lower the dole so that people like my friend can no longer live a more comfortable life than me sitting in his room practicing guitar? I wonder.

The policy goes on to speak about the need to, from what I can see, decentralise the corporate process to community-based democratic organisations. We have an important quote here. On Sinn Féin's economic policy document it clearly states:

The document does not set out our definitive position on, for example, macroeconomic policy, the EU or foreign investment, but these and other economic issues are discussed as they impact on community economic development.

Clear as f*cking mud. I think I'm going to be wasting my time reading this report, they just said they're not going to go into actual policies.

To report goes on to make reference to 1916 and 1919. Strange that, seeing as this is an economic policy document, and economics has come a long way since 1919. Interestingly, they state "The problems of 1919 - unemployment, homelessness, emigration, educational disadvantage, lack of adequate health and social services - persist today in Ireland, North and South."

We still have the problems of unemployment and emigration, eh? I could have sworn we have a problem with immigration and that we have one of the lowest unemployment rates in the OECD. Homelessness, educational disadvantage and social services belong in social, educational and medical policy documents and are thus ignored.

I love the following: "Economic sovereignty has been eroded by EU membership, with ever-greater constraints being imposed on economic policy in the 26 Counties." Are they complaining about the single market, the EMU, the ESF grants? Boohoo EU. The single greatest structural factor to reducing our unemployment only warrants the description as an "ever-greater consraint"? Do they suggest we pull back from Europe and screw over our currency and our trading partners, not to mention our access to the single market which has been so vital to securing FDI?

No, they don't, because they said they won't be commenting on macroeconomics.

In both economies, economic discrimination and inequitable economic structures have led to the exclusion and marginalisation of women both inside and outside the workplace, the long-term unemployed, those with inadequate access to education resources, rural and urban communities, small farmers, and part-time and low paid workers.

What exatly is economic discrimination?

How are women excluded from inside and outside the workplace? Do they exist in some invisible vacuum here? Women participation has multiplied several times since EU accession.

How exactly do we discriminate against the long-term unemployed?

Who has inadequate access to education? If you're going on about Ballymun, that's a social policy issue. Not to belittle the problem, but it's a social policy issue. I wouldn't mention greenhouse gases in a document about education; I wouldn't mention social exclusion in an economic document.

We're discriminating against rural and urban communities? How?! Who's getting the preferential treatment then, the suburbians?! Part-time workers have the exact same legislative rights as full-timers. Our minimum wage is €8 at the moment. Contrast this to America's minimum wage of €3.93. Raising the minimum wage much higher will cause job cuts, take my word on that. Do SF suggest tax cuts for low earners?

The overriding premise of current economic policy throughout Ireland is one where the rights, wages and working conditions of workers are sacrificed to the needs of international competitiveness and industrial development.

The rights, wages and working conditions of Irish people have risen successfully under this current shower. We had no minimum wage before the PDs came along and our national income per capita has soared. The rights and working conditions of workers have been vastly improved since the relevant Act of 1997.

What exactly do SF do, other than moan about things that aren't actually happening? Where are the suggestions?

There is no doubt that the Irish economy is producing more wealth than ever. However, it is also sadly clear that increased wealth has meant ' increased exclusion, increased poverty and increased joblessness. The overall experience is a failure of current economic policy throughout Ireland.

Exclusion and poverty are social issues. Joblessness has plummeted.

Sinn Féin's response to these issues is to reiterate our belief that economic democracy and economic unity are the basic principles that should underwrite a way forward for the Irish people. Such thinking arises from the philosophies of Tone, Davis, Lalor, Connolly, Pearse and Markievicz.

As much as I like the references to some dirty Trinity prods, I'd rather if Ireland's economic debate argued about people who have lived in times since, say, the beginning of the collection of national income accounts (Duncan, 1937). Or the realisation of the governmental role in the economy (Keynes, 1936). Or the use of econometric tools to estimate economic changes. Or the realisation of the importance of the money markets and investment (Friedman, 1952). Or the impact of multi-national borders (EEC, 1972). Or the advent of a single monetary union (Frankfurt, 1999).

Are SF aware of these developments in the study of the economy?

FFS, I'm only on page three. I'm going to have to streamline this.

Haha, I like this at the start of page four:

Sinn Féin believes that the failure of formal conservative and monetarist economic policies, in terms of unemployment, poverty and social
exclusion, stems from the failure to put the needs of local communities at the forefront of policy development.

Monetarists have failed?! Link?

Inflation-adjusted real GDP per capita in the USA has increased tenfold in the last 120 years. Monetarists have failed!!

In Ireland, key infrastructure in communications, electricity generation, industrial development and transport have been built by the state and funded by Irish taxpayers. Privatisation, leading to increased costs for consumers

Phone and broadband prices have plummeted since eircom was privatised and your email address proves it. Certainly broadband provision is dire - but that requires a strong regulator, not a public company. Electricity generation leads to increased costs for consumers? Damn those Airtricity bastards and their clean policies, it goes costing us people money! (Aside: do they suggest we, say, allow Shell into Rossport to increase supply and thus lower energy prices?) They clearly haven't taken a bus to Cork since that route was opened to private operators. It now costs about €7 - it used to cost €40.

How exactly do you privatise industrial development?

In essence, Sinn Féin's vision is a socialist society that grants economic justice to all its people.

You see, as I mentioned above, I think "socialist" and "economic justice" (unless very well-defined) are exclusive. Do I not deserve to be rewarded for my hard work?

These objectives will only be achieved by eliminating unemployment and poverty, developing more fully the industrial base and generating higher
levels of income and wealth for the benefit of all the people in Ireland.

If people think SF will eliminate unemployment and/or generate more income while thinking that monetarism has failed, they're really making a very, very big mistake. But then again, they list their economic policies of Theo Tone so I'm not surprised.

...justice for all irrespective of religion, political opinion, gender, sexuality, disability, age or ethnic origin;

You mean the Equal Status Act of 2004?

In the 26 Counties, the live register stands at around 280,000, with the true figure over 300,000. Across Ireland, over 430/000 people are unemployed.

I find it interesting that (400 divided by 000) are unemployed. But aside from that, the Live Register's figure for unemployed is far higher, not lower, than the actual unemployment level. People sign on and do nixers. Successive household budget surveys show this. Our unemployment (in the "26") is lower than (just about?) anyone in Europe. We don't set economic policy in the North. The instability in investment in the 1970s and 1980s because of bombings didn't help their economy though.

On emigration,

In the 26 Counties, official figures show that during the
1980s over 250,000 emigrated, 49,000 in 1989 alone.

Lol.

In the 26 Counties, there has been no effective solution found to the problem of systematic underdevelopment of indigenous industry. The
overreliance on foreign investment has hampered the development potential of indigenous industry.

As responded to ballooba, Irish firms are almost as likely to jump ship as American ones. They're greedy, profit-driven enterprises (aren't they?), they'll stay where the taxes are low.

Right, I'm giving up. There's nothing here of substance. Come on lads, emigration figures for 18 years ago?!

I'm scrolling through the document and there's nothing on tax rates; on income-tax bands; on the National Development Plan; on investing in third- and fourth-level education; nothing on stamp duty; nothing on VRT; nothing on VAT; nothing on growth rates; nothing on public spending; nothing on monetary policy; nothing on what happens in case of a construction crash; nothing on over-reliance on EMU interest rates; nothing on trade; nothing on Development Aid; nothing on future revenues; nothing on infrastructure; nothing on fostering links with Britain; nothing on the threat of higher American interest rates; nothing on China; nothing on the growth of Eastern Europe; nothing on investment abroad; nothing on Doha trade talks; nothing on WTO, IMF or World Bank; nothing on drop-the-debt campaigns; nothing on marginal propensities to consume post-SSIA; nothing on capital gains tax; nothing on value for money..... there's nothing of substance about macroeconomics here.

We cannot, from reading this document, say what SF will actually do to what affects us. I can confidently predict of what their presence will do to what affects us, however. Please do not vote for them.

While scrolling I did find this gem:

Foreign investment should not be accepted at any price

I think we should leave Sinn Féin's economic policies at that.

Time Magazine

ballooba wrote:

Not if the companies have no employees.

Please read what I read. If company X have no employees in Ireland but still pay tax here, that will create jobs and wealth. If you don't understand this concept, please read what I previously responded with.

Agent Smith

I'll Be Voting For FG.
The Health service IMHO has been run into the Ground. I waited 6 hours to be seen in a Un-named hospital that services part of south dublin and wicklow. I dont think that this is good enough.

paconnors

Heres who i'l be votin for LINK...... Bring back the plastic bag ;);)

delta_bravo

DaveMcG wrote:

Do the Socialist Party have anybody running in Dublin SW?

I think Mick Murphy usually runs for the socialist party in Dublin SW. Not sure though, he might only be a councillor

ballooba

Ibid wrote:

Please read what I read. If company X have no employees in Ireland but still pay tax here, that will create jobs and wealth. If you don't understand this concept, please read what I previously responded with.

I am not a public sector worker and have no desire to be one. If the only money coming into the country is in tax revenue then how is this supposed to help the private sector worker.

P.s. The Sinn Fein Economic policy you spent so long reading is from 1998 and is completely out of date. The up to date one is on their website. I'm not a Shinner but I did them the courtesy of reading the correct one. As a result I found one or two roses in the thorn bush.

marco murphy

The Economy

Introduction
The last ten years have been a time of unprecedented economic growth. There is greater prosperity in Ireland and more people are working, but successive governments have failed to use economic growth to create equality. Not only did the Fianna Fáil/Progressive Democrats coalition fail to tackle the structural inequalities that warp our economy and damage our society, they actually worsened those inequalities and widened the gap between rich and poor and between men and women in every single budget over the last five years.

A United Nations report (July 2001) has found that we have the most unequal distribution of wealth of any industrialised state outside the USA.

A quarter of our children and a fifth of our adults are in households with less than half the average income. Women are over represented among those on the minimum wage and in the area of part-time work, which is economically undervalued.

There is a crisis in our health care system and a housing nightmare for the 54,000 housing units, representing 140,000 people in need of accommodation.
One in four women raising children, or managing households on their own experience poverty.

Sinn Féin’s Vision of a Just Economy
Sinn Féin seeks to build an all-Ireland economy where everyone can have a dignified, productive and well-paid job and all can have a fair income and better quality of life.

We want an economy where everyone's contribution -whether in the workplace, the home, the school or hospital - is valued.

We need an economy growing not just in an environmentally sustainable way but in a manner that reverses the erosion of our environment in past decades and develops a better quality of life for us now and generations to come.

Managing the Economy
Thousands of new jobs have been created over the last decade and considerable wealth has been generated. However, the economic experience of the last year has shown that the current coalition government and the larger opposition parties are unwilling to ensure that the wealth is shared and invested for the benefit of everyone in society.

They have left us in this new century with a nightmare health service and a road, rail and public transport network that is in crisis and verging on collapse. They have also left us with an under-funded energy system with no real long-term development strategy. The telecommunications network, one of the keys to our future prosperity, has been sold off to the highest bidders without any guarantees that the new owners are prepared to maintain the level of investment needed to ensure that Ireland can thrive in the emerging knowledge economy.

There are serious economic issues beyond the simple figure of how many jobs were created. Sinn Féin seeks an economy where those who work to generate wealth do so in the knowledge that they can afford housing and an economy where they don't have to be worried about the cost implications of being ill. Sinn Féin seeks an economy where parents can be assured that their children are getting the best possible education, no matter where they live or how much wealth their parents have.

The issues that need to be addressed include:
• Low pay;
• Working conditions;
• The role of the government in the economy;
• Regional and rural under-development;
• Developing the economy without creating more inequalities and divisions in society;
• Lack of affordable childcare. Sustainable Economic DevelopmentInward Investment

Over the past number of years inward investment has contributed the economic growth in the Irish economy.

However current government policy is over-dependent on inward investors. The last year has shown, once again, the impact that the closure of transnational companies can have on local economies. For example, the closure of GeneralSemi in Macroom,County Cork, and the loss of 670 jobs has the knock on effect oftearing d38 million (£30 million) out of the local economy. This experience has been repeated again and again over the past 18 months. Communities in Donegal, Sligo, Mayo, Dublin, Louth, Offaly and Wexford have all had to come to terms with the downsides of economic dependency on international investors.

Nearly ten thousand fewer new Industrial Development Authority (IDA) jobs were created in 2001 compared to 2000.

Indigenous Enterprise
The same quantity and quality of resources made available to inward investors should be made available to indigenous enterprises. The internationalisation of many industries, particularly food processing, has led to the shutting down of many smaller plants, often with dire consequences for the small towns and villages they are sited in. Local communities have found themselves powerless to prevent this.

We need an indigenous economic development strategy that focuses on overcoming this asset stripping of local and regional economies. Ireland needs a balance between inward and indigenous investment. We need to encourage both small and large-scale indigenous companies, with a research and development anchor. Although large-scale industries can drive the economy and will often develop and fund infrastructure.

We need to recognise that the bulk of employment in Ireland stems from small and medium-sized business and to support those niche industries that have been created.

The State Sector
State investment and State companies built the infrastructure on which recent economic growth has been based.

Sinn Féin deplores the moves in recent years to downgrade the State involvement in the economy. Sinn Féin is opposed to the privatisation of State enterprises. There is huge underdevelopment of State sector companies. Although we still have Aer Rianta, ESB, the CIE companies, Bord na Mona and Aer Lingus, employment in this sector has declined as a result of Government policy.

In a small economy like Ireland's we need to provide a sound economic base and infrastructure that is not dependent on the whims of international investors.

Social Economy and Small Businesses
As a society we need to move away from the notion that profit is the only reason for engaging in enterprise.

Social economy enterprises that fulfill a social need help make other businesses more profitable. We need to unblock institutional resistance in terms of funding and taxation in the social economy.

Funding should be made available for the establishment of community-based co-operative enterprises.

Rewarding Research and Investment
We need to support and reward indigenous industry when it engages in research and development strategies leading to long-term, sustainable employment.

Targeted and carefully monitored tax incentives have a role in developing business, safeguarding existing jobs and creating new ones. A creative corporate tax regime has an important part to play in funding and encouraging research and development by Irish businesses.

We need more financial support for research in universities and colleges and greater attention to building links between these institutions and industry.

Training
Training is an essential element of any regional development strategy. We need to target training in line with strategy, whether it is based on technology, agricultural, tourist, or other industrial sector.

There is also a need to redefine what makes up the skills pool. People bring different life-skills to the economy. We need to ensure that all contributions are recognised whether from the long-term unemployed, over-65s, lone parents, or mothers returning to work. These groups need to have the same access to training as those sectors of the workforce at whom most skills and educational investment is targeted.

A Knowledge-Based Economy
Creating new businesses and helping existing ones grow does not happen in a vacuum. It comes about in the context of the supply of skilled workers with access to transport and telecommunications infrastructures. The absence of any of these elements is a serious impediment to economic development.

In the modern international economy location is not a determinant to inward investment or employment opportunity. What matters is access to resources and infrastructure, especially in terms of the new information and communication technologies (ICT), as well as education, transport and energy. Access to ICT technology is a powerful force in creating a level playing field for future development and job-creation strategies.

The Western Development Commission has identified poor infrastructure as the main barrier to development in that region. But this infrastructural poverty is felt in varying degrees throughout the economy and must be tackled on an all-island basis.

In the last decade, governments have addressed the need for a greatly improved infrastructure in a piecemeal and poorly planned manner. While the Fianna Fáil/Progressive Democrats ‘National’ Development Plan provides for many major projects, it continues the piecemeal and poorly planned approach. Already the delivery of projects is behind schedule. Serious deficiencies in infrastructure exist that will impede future economic progress.

We need an urgent revaluation of our strategies in telecommunications, road, rail, energy, childcare, health and education. These strategies also need to be developed on an all-island basis. It makes no sense to develop strategies on a partitionist basis.

Secure Employment Strategies
In the field of new technologies, international companies lead much of the pace of development. However, a growing number of Irish companies have shown that they too can develop and successfully launch new products. The greater number of indigenous companies we create in the Irish economy, the better we can support the economy as a whole.

The downturn in the economy over the last year emphasises the need for a balanced approach in investment in indigenious and international companies.
Thousands of workers entered mortgage and other major life commitments in the belief that their jobs were secure in the long-term. With many of these workers losing their jobs there is a need at Government level to shoulder some of the financial responsibility now falling on families where key household members are now jobless.

We support the Irish Congress of Trade Unions demand for an increase in statutory redundancy from half a week per year of service to three weeks per year of service.

Sinn Féin Proposes:
• More support for Small Businesses. Many people have small business ideas that are in the embryonic stage and need funding as well as expert guidance. These businesses can often generate small profits but a lot of local employment. They are often overlooked by the industrial development agencies;
• Developing New Local Brands. Many small businesses are not, in themselves, large enough to enter export markets. With the right guidance and support from Enterprise Ireland they could begin joint ventures to develop, produce and market products outside of Ireland. Tourism is marketed outside of Ireland as one common brand - surely this idea can apply to other goods;
• Matching Funds for Local Business. The industrial development bodies should provide the same level of support and funding for indigenious business as is currently provided to inward investment projects;
• Long-term stability. The IDA currently considers ten years to be the shelf-life of the companies it brings to Ireland. New local Irish companies should be given at least the same level of time to develop themselves. We need to take the view that long-term stability is more desirable than short-term erratic "boom and bust" episodes;
• The inclusion of penalty clauses in all agreements with companies receiving government grants, in the event of the company pulling out;
• Support for enterprises in the Social Economy. Many communities have ideas and plans for socially valuable local businesses;
• Trade Union Recognition. Sinn Féin will make grants to business conditional on acceptance of the right of employees to join and to be represented by a trade union of their choice;
• Funding a Return to Education. In some cases of job losses there is a need for retraining of workers who will then be better placed to find other employment or perhaps start their own businesses. There needs to be a commitment to investing in education for all sectors of society now more than ever;
• Support for Agricultural Diversification. Funding should be made available to those farmers who wish to diversify their farm business. This will help to keep younger farmers on the land as well as create jobs in rural areas.

Get that into you sons.


And, I will be back with the request of another member.

Jonny Arson

I'll be voting Labour as my no.1 - I've a fantastic Labour TD in Tommy Broughan here in Dublin NE and he's the main reason I'm voting them. I'm unhappy with the party proposing to lower taxes and the Mullingar accord with FG but I still believe in what the party stands for and this country badly needs a left element in government. Greens have my no.2 vote and Fine Gael despite not being my cup of tea ideologically will be no.3 as I do respect them. The rest aren't even on my radar for obvious reasons aside from Socialist Party who unfortunately don't have a candidate in my constituency. If FF/PDs aren't gone by this summer I'm leaving this country!

marco murphy

Love the pic arson LOOOL.


Right here goes.

AIB profits as published today are 2.2B.
The current Corporation tax rate stands at 12.5%.

A person on 20,000 income is charged 35% or 42% tax.

How is the poor or working class benefitting?

The rich should be taxed more and the poor less.
17.5% is hardly marxist, it's european average for god sakes.
And the MNCs are leaving as it stands.

Poblachtach

Poblachtach wrote:

AIB profits as published today are 2.2B.
The current Corporation tax rate stands at 12.5%.

Ah yes nationalise them.

A person on 20,000 income is charged 35% or 42% tax.

Bull. No one on 20k is on the 42 rate.

The rich should be taxed more and the poor less.
17.5% is hardly marxist, it's european average for god sakes.
And the MNCs are leaving as it stands.

Uhm and why do you think we used get a lot of the DFI instead of Europe?
Imagines SF candidate at the doorstep of one of the 350,000 homes mentioned above...
We're going to send your employer away,we don't need them..
A few of them have left so we've decided to encourage the rest of them to upsticks.

What next-potteries and woolen mills to employ our engineers?

Perhaps we should burn everything capitalist except the coal :rolleyes:

Poblachtach you've not engaged previous posts at all and came out with twaddle.
Ibid already disected the sound byte ridden specifics shy quote from the SF website that you have posted.

Nearly ten thousand fewer new Industrial Development Authority (IDA) jobs were created in 2001 compared to 2000.

Let me mirror again what Ibid said about a similar quote ...
LoL

And as for

poblachtach wrote:

Get that into you sons.

:rolleyes:
post any more gibberish and you can take a hike,it's as simple as that.

Please discuss the points that are being put to you and if you cant do that please go away and come back at some point when you can.

I repeat this is a discussion forum and not a trolling soapbox.

ballooba

Tristrame wrote:

Imagines SF candidate at the doorstep of one of the 350,000 homes mentioned above...

In fairness we have had 5,173 redundancies since the beginning of the year.

(4,373 to 03.03.2007 + 800 announced today)

ballooba

ballooba wrote:

In fairness we have had 5,173 redundancies since the beginning of the year.

(4,373 to 03.03.2007 + 800 announced today)

I don't have a subscription to that.
but in fairness,I'll just pick one of the many jobs sites and you'll see theres thousands of jobs unfilled here too...

29,000 + on this site alone and they aren't all mickey mouse jobs either-have a gander.

By the way whilst I'm here,I think this policy investigation on SF deserves its own thread,I'll split the relevant posts tomorrow.

It would also be good to have a critique of the policies of various other parties in separate threads,comparisons allowed in each.

ballooba

Tristrame wrote:

I'll just pick one of the many jobs sites and you'll see theres thousands of jobs unfilled here too...

Quoting job advertisements does not show anything. A large portion of those would be agencies soliciting for business, others would have already been filled. That site also has significant market share and would have a large portion of current advertisements.

The labour force in this country is just over 2 million and is growing at 5% p.a.
The average employment turnover is 20% meaning 400,000 people p.a. change jobs.
Those 400,000 people have to find their jobs too.

marco murphy

Our future as a low tax economy is unsustainable in my opinion. We should have been building our indigenous industries for years rather than building an economy based on a property bubble.

True, I suspect it will go to a low single number.

All this profit being made by MNCs on low tax rates, Sinn Fein believe it would be better spent on housing, healthcare, schools.. etc
Poverty should be a main concern. Ireland was 17th(in a poverty index of 18 OECD countries) on the UN Human Development Report 2006.
It's clear that the profits of economic success are'nt being shared.

You will find no document on Sinn Fein websites, to state that it is POLICY to increase Corporation Tax to 17.5% .
SF taxation policy has stated that if they are in Government they will carry out an audit of the whole tax code with a view to reform within the system.
However, it is stated that it could be done without negative impact on the tax take from the sector.
I believe they would not propose to implement any tax changes that they thought would threaten the prosperity of the country.
Likely to see a coalition, the program of tax would also require to be agreed with Sinn Féin's coalition partners.

ballooba

Well what I really meant is that we cannot continue to compete solely on the basis of a low tax economy. The MNCs have concerns other than tax at the moment. As a FG member it may seem strange that I am agreeing with even a small part of a SF economic policy.

I have worked in a young Irish MNC though and really enjoyed the associated buzz. The guys who set up the company will no doubt go on to create several new successful indigenous enterprises when they exit. Being in their presence was inspiring and served to show me that it can be done. Even though that company wasn't actually that big (circa 150 employees).

Time Magazine

ballooba wrote:

I am not a public sector worker and have no desire to be one. If the only money coming into the country is in tax revenue then how is this supposed to help the private sector worker.

Public sector employees don't hide their money under the bed. They spend it on goods and services; on iPods and in Xtra-vision and on Premier Dairies milk.

P.s. The Sinn Fein Economic policy you spent so long reading is from 1998 and is completely out of date. The up to date one is on their website. I'm not a Shinner but I did them the courtesy of reading the correct one. As a result I found one or two roses in the thorn bush.

Feck. However the policies resemble each other I'm sure. I got that from sinnféin.ie -> policies -> economy. It was the first one that wasn't about water charges, which in fairness doesn't really matter that much.

In fairness we have had 5,173 redundancies since the beginning of the year.

Our unemployment rate is the lowest in Europe.

Poblachtach wrote:

AIB profits as published today are 2.2B.
The current Corporation tax rate stands at 12.5%.

That's fine. That money doesn't disappear. It's either saved which creates funds for investing, or spent, which provides employment.

A person on 20,000 income is charged 35% or 42% tax.

The lower tax-band is 20%, not 35%. FG/Lab suggest this be lowered. SF seem to suggest this should rise.

How is the poor or working class benefitting?

What's bigger, 12.5% of a lot or 17.5% of nothing? 0.6% of the population pay 33% of the income taxes - it's a progressive system.

The rich should be taxed more and the poor less.
17.5% is hardly marxist, it's european average for god sakes.

Taxing the rich more would not necessarily yield more taxes. It disturbs the economy and people stop working and thus you may yield less taxes. FG/Lab have suggested the lower tax-band be lowered to 18%.

And the MNCs are leaving as it stands.

Some are. Some are staying. Raising the rate would force more to leave. The net effect on corporation tax may be neutral, but I think the nature of the economy has changed since that ESRI report; i.e. jobs would be lost and thus income tax would fall.

Our tax system is generally working. A little bit of a break for low-earners sounds good. Ideally through increasing the bands, but lowering the rates will do fine. No need to touch the corporation tax rate. We need a rate lower than the European average for two reasons. Firstly, France and Germany have unemployment rates in or around 10% and thus are hardly great models. Secondly, they have established industries that are not footloose (e.g. the Rhineland industries) and are relatively insensitive to tax changes. Dell, on the other hand, can be gone in three days.

Poblachtach

Yes Ballooba but you are describing an exchange of jobs,and not an extinguishment of jobs.
You've accounted for 5000 odd job losses and been shown availability for 30k jobs.
Taking IT alone, there were at least 13k jobs available in january according to a reliably filtered survey , a rise of 74% on their last survey just 8 months ago.

Fact of the mater is,there is a surplus of job availability here when compared to job losses.
That is the current situation unless you have facts and figures to the contrary?

Now I realise you are an FG member/supporter and I'm perfectly willing to argue the toss with you on their policies versus reality (they'd come out with a radically higher score than SF imho) in a thread discussing their policies if you want but please start the relevant thread on that.
I'm not here to defend the current government in any way shape or form,I'm just pointing out what I see as the fallacies in SF's economic policies.
Theres plenty of reality to show that.
I'm not even debunking SF's grasp of socialist ideals,I'm just pointing out that it seems as plain as day that what they are presenting isn't as appealing when under the microscope as the sound bytes suggest.
Their policy engine needs a lot of fine tuning,I think.
This tangent having came about as a result of me indicating why I'd not be inspired to vote for them.

Poblachtach wrote:

Likely to see a coalition, the program of tax would also require to be agreed with Sinn Féin's coalition partners.

True if they go into coalition as with any party in a coalition, a government programme ends up being a negotiated compromise.

You've just done a far better post sir than your last few-thank you for making an effort, thats what discussion is all about.

SF taxation policy has stated that if they are in Government they will carry out an audit of the whole tax code with a view to reform within the system.
However, it is stated that it could be done without negative impact on the tax take from the sector.

Yes but that is wishy washy.You can't be expecting people outside your niche group to vote for an unknown and that is an unknown.
Thats what I was getting at,I need to have some idea what it is that they will do-percentages,numbers facts,figures and costings.
The other parties by and large do that SF don't and thats not good enough.

marco murphy

You've just done a far better post sir than your last few-thank you for making an effort, thats what discussion is all about.

I understand, and I will speak with a candidate for more clarification tomorrow.

ballooba

Tristrame wrote:

Yes Ballooba but you are describing an exchange of jobs,and not an extinguishment of jobs.
You've accounted for 5000 odd job losses and been shown availability for 30k jobs.

400,000 people will chage jobs this year. If that was spread evenly throughout the year it would mean that 33,333 jobs would be vacated every month. those 33,333 jobs then have to be advertised and filled.

The 30,000 jobs you linked are not real. Anyone who has sought a job through those sites will tell you that. A significant portion are agencies harvesting CVs, another significant portion have already been filled and not removed.

Tristrame wrote:

Fact of the mater is,there is a surplus of job availability here when compared to job losses.
That is the current situation unless you have facts and figures to the contrary?

If you want me to provide links for the above figures I can. I had to do a market analysis of the recruitment industry last week.

Tristrame wrote:

Now I realise you are an FG member/supporter and I'm perfectly willing to argue the toss with you on their policies versus reality (they'd come out with a radically higher score than SF imho) in a thread discussing their policies if you want but please start the relevant thread on that.

I was mainly pointing out that I don't agree with the whole policy and I won't be switching my allegiances to SF any time this lifetime. I think support for indiginous business is something that FG and PD would both advocate. I believe support for small firms is part of both their manifestos.

I'm not looking at this from the perspective of high taxes, high public services. I believe that the government is doing a good enough job of squandering the money it has without giving it more. The public sector have a poor record of delivering value for money.

My only concern is for indigenous businesses to get a fair chance. The current government is actively impeding them in numerous instances. I can think of three green initiatives that the government have failed to support and even impeded (Wind Power, BioDiesel, Reuse of Sewage Sludge).In the case of Wind Power I believe to protect a semi-state business.

We cannot continue to rely so heavily on FDI which is based mainly on our low tax economy. When other costs rise these companies are heading for the hills. The current administration have promoted these IDA firms over Enterprise Ireland and if it wasn't for Mary Harney maybe EI wouldn't even exist.[/QUOTE]

ballooba

From today's Irish Times in an article written by Arthur Beesley:

If all of that suggests Ireland will continue to play a highly profitable role in Procter and Gamble's international business, it will not be of any comfort to staff in Nenagh. With the general election only weeks away, it raises fundamental questions about a Government inward investment strategy that encourages global organisations to funnel billions through Irish holding companies while hundreds of workers lose their jobs.

ballooba

ballooba wrote:

The 30,000 jobs you linked are not real. Anyone who has sought a job through those sites will tell you that. A significant portion are agencies harvesting CVs, another significant portion have already been filled and not removed.

That bit I will tell you is rubbish as I work for an employment agency.

A KEY driver of the Celtic Tiger economy is in crisis, because it can't fill record numbers of job vacancies.

The Information Technology (IT) sector - which the Government sees as vital to future economic growth - has an unprecedented 14,000 unfilled jobs.

The number of vacancies has shot up 26pc in just seven months and by a worrying 74pc since May 2005, according to the latest in a series of surveys. This has serious implications for the entire economy, as rising wages could undermine competitiveness and frighten off new investors.

All the predictions are that the gap between supply and demand is widening, as young Irish people shun careers in the sector. Seven of the world's 10 software giants have plants here. Increasingly, they are relying on non-nationals to fill highly skilled jobs.

The surveys, carried out by Dublin City University (DCU), are backed by the latest National Skills Bulletin, which confirms that employers are increasingly relying on non-EU nationals to fill IT jobs. DCU professor of computing, Michael Ryan, said the news about software giant Motorola could not have come at a worse time, just as students were rushing to fill in CAO forms. The Cork-based firm has refused to confirm fears of a total shutdown of its Mahon plant.

He suggested young people should look at the wider picture. "They seem to be stuck in (memories of) the dot.com fiasco, now ancient history in this business."

The dot.com collapse resulted in a halving of the numbers enrolling on honours computing degrees - down from 1,809 in 2000 to 995 last year. Numbers entering engineering degrees dropped from 1,664 to 1,206 in the same period.

Yet, despite occasional problems like that at Motorola, vacancies in the IT sector have been rising ever since. The first DCU survey in May 2005 revealed 8,000 IT vacancies, and this has increased rapidly to 13,900 at present.

The DCU figures are based on 16,300 internet advertisements for IT jobs in Ireland, adjusted for multiple advertisements for some jobs and multiple jobs in some advertisements. The jobs cover a wide spectrum of roles. Prof Ryan said: "It is paradoxical that having put such effort into creating high level attractive jobs, now that we have succeeded, we cannot find Irish people to fill them."

Government agencies are stepping up their campaign to attract more students into science, engineering and technology courses.

Link

ballooba wrote:

We cannot continue to rely so heavily on FDI which is based mainly on our low tax economy. When other costs rise these companies are heading for the hills. The current administration have promoted these IDA firms over Enterprise Ireland and if it wasn't for Mary Harney maybe EI wouldn't even exist.

What is the point in telling me that when (a) what we are discussing here is how it is likely that a rise in corporation tax would speed up the movement of existing FDI out of the country and (b)We're both of the same opinion that it shouldn't be risen.

Gerry Adams was asked by Bryan Dobson last sunday night whether he would raise it to 17.5% and was he concerned about the job losses that might occur.
He dodged and dodged and dodged untill Dobson said"we're clearly not going to get an answer on that".

Thats not good enough Balooba.I'd be saying the same of Enda Kenny if he came out with that type of response but of course he wouldn't.
He fleshes out his economic policies as you know.

ballooba

Tristrame wrote:

That bit I will tell you is rubbish as I work for an employment agency.

Well, I can tell you as a jobseeker that it's not. I can even tell from the ads now when they are BS. Typically they are vague on how many people required if they are bogus.

Tristrame wrote:

Link

That article is BS and has been discussed many times on other forums here. it crops up once a year to sell IT courszes to grads. Then when you graduate there are no quality jobs.

Tristrame wrote:

What is the point in telling me that when (a) what we are discussing here is how it is likely that a rise in corporation tax would speed up the movement of existing FDI out of the country and (b)We're both of the same opinion that it shouldn't be risen.

You may be talking about tax rates. I am talking about the benefits of EI investment over IDA investment.

Tristrame wrote:

Thats not good enough Balooba.I'd be saying the same of Enda Kenny if he came out with that type of response but of course he wouldn't.
He fleshes out his economic policies as you know.

FG and PDs advocate more support for small businesses. They might not mean it in the same sense as I do. Fianna Fail on the other hand have no interest in SMEs. I was in the company of a FF electioneer in Dublin North a few eeks back when he told small businessmen as much. They specifically asked him what FF was going to do for them.

Time Magazine

ballooba wrote:

I think support for indiginous business is something that FG and PD would both advocate.

Can you give a sound reason for this?

We're a high-value economy, as you continually state. Small firms do not hire people with PhDs, we require economies of scale. In this globalised world this means MNCs. We do not have many indigenous MNCs, particularly in our niche areas of ICT and pharmaceuticals. It is far more reasonable, I assert, to get foreign firms here and get them to stay than to manage to get Irish firms as world leaders and have the scale economies to employ a million high-skilled people.

Furthermore the high-skilled economy cum MNC argument extends to the reality that simply because a firm was founded in Ireland does not mean it too will jump ship.

We are currently raking in corporation taxes. We're losing competitiveness. Why on earth do people then argue for higher corporation taxes?

My only concern is for indigenous businesses to get a fair chance.

They do. They get the more breaks (proportional to size) as foreign firms.

We cannot continue to rely so heavily on FDI which is based mainly on our low tax economy.

If not FDI, what? Where will Intel's 5000 employees go?

The answer is probably wherever Intel go.

Villain

Small firms also don't jump to India as soon as their Software Graduates are willing to work for the half the price of Software Graduates here Ibid

ballooba

ballooba wrote:

Well, I can tell you as a jobseeker that it's not. I can even tell from the ads now when they are BS. Typically they are vague on how many people required if they are bogus.

I wouldnt agree entirely.

That article is BS and has been discussed many times on other forums here. it crops up once a year to sell IT courszes to grads. Then when you graduate there are no quality jobs.

I wouldn't agree in total there either-there are good experiences and bad.
For what its worth I prefer looking at things positively rather than negatively.
Thats all I can say really on conflicting opinions.I can comment better on facts.
I found one usefull comment when looking for a discussion on that DIT survey though here .
Theres a lot of merit in that comment.
Being positive is half the battle, it helps no end in interviews too as you know.It's a likeable trait.

Broadening out the discussion somewhat,I'd be of the view that you need to keep incentive in the job market and the part of that working at the moment is lower personal taxation relative to what it was like back in the 80's and early 90's.
Of course the development of the EURO and uber low interest rates and the associated easy availability of borrowed money and the associated consumer boom also helped a lot.
That advantage is waning a bit at the moment which is why care is needed before too much tinkering does more damage.

Of course there is the issue of what have been popularally described as taxes creeped in by stealth ie charges for services.
You could look at them but look at them in detail though explaining how they are to be paid for if some of them are removed.
Replacing them with a percentage or two on everybodies taxes wouldnt be acceptable psychologically to a lot of the electorate either (mind you sometimes I think some people expect funding to appear like manna from heaven-it does not it has to be found- but found in a way that wont interfere with incentives)
That means climbing the income ladder quite high before looking at higher taxes untill you are out of where the majority of people even what to attain to be-the problem is,that level mightn't compensate for dropping the charges.
Catch 22.

I might add it could also be found by effeciencies but that ain't easy either as you will have public service unions to deal with.

You may be talking about tax rates. I am talking about the benefits of EI investment over IDA investment.
FG and PDs advocate more support for small businesses. They might not mean it in the same sense as I do. Fianna Fail on the other hand have no interest in SMEs. I was in the company of a FF electioneer in Dublin North a few eeks back when he told small businessmen as much. They specifically asked him what FF was going to do for them.

I'll let you discuss that last part with an FF hack of your choice,but whilst I'm here could you lead me to the specefics of what FG propose to do with SME's thats not being done already.
The more information the better.

Ibid do you have anything on that?

Time Magazine

irish1 wrote:

Small firms also don't jump to India as soon as their Software Graduates are willing to work for the half the price of Software Graduates here Ibid

I'm well aware of that. So small firms should be encouraged - and as I mentioned - they already are. They should also be targeted for certain areas that are not hubs of high-skilled workers etc.

However the bulk of future employment in our upper-value-chain economy will be from firms with the size to employ fourth level graduates. Certainly some small firms can do this. But the way e.g. pharma companies operate is non-compatible with the SME model. You need massive R&D departments and five thousand employees. Ditto, to a lesser-yet-large extent, ICT.

Huge numbers of employment here comes from MNCs. The way the globalised world is going it's becoming increasingly economical to have large enterprises. Thus we should be aiming for large MNCs. Yes there is the problem with our competitive edge, absolutely. However it is ludicrous to suggest that this is best abated with putting emphasis on the romantic notion of SMEs. The fact is that if these were to grow to the extent that is required, they too would jump ship.

I'm not saying we should neglect SMEs. By all means we should foster them and Enterprise Ireland do a great job. I'm simply saying that it is preposterous to suggest we should shift from MNCs.

Tristrame wrote:

Ibid do you have anything on that? [FG's policy on SMEs]

Policy to focus on SMEs in the North-west
Something on FF's SME plan (I haven't read this)

Villain

Ibid wrote:

I'm well aware of that. So small firms should be encouraged - and as I mentioned - they already are. They should also be targeted for certain areas that are not hubs of high-skilled workers etc.

However the bulk of future employment in our upper-value-chain economy will be from firms with the size to employ fourth level graduates. Certainly some small firms can do this. But the way e.g. pharma companies operate is non-compatible with the SME model. You need massive R&D departments and five thousand employees. Ditto, to a lesser-yet-large extent, ICT.

Huge numbers of employment here comes from MNCs. The way the globalised world is going it's becoming increasingly economical to have large enterprises. Thus we should be aiming for large MNCs. Yes there is the problem with our competitive edge, absolutely. However it is ludicrous to suggest that this is best abated with putting emphasis on the romantic notion of SMEs. The fact is that if these were to grow to the extent that is required, they too would jump ship.

I'm not saying we should neglect SMEs. By all means we should foster them and Enterprise Ireland do a great job. I'm simply saying that it is preposterous to suggest we should shift from MNCs.

Policy to focus on SMEs in the North-west
Something on FF's SME plan (I haven't read this)

I agree with most of what you have said Ibid and I'm not for a minute saying MNC's should be forgotten or excluded in anyway but I think we are now in a position to try and control somehow any new MNC's that we try and bring here by putting in some kind of clause which means they have to pay extra tax if they decide to pull out within say the first 10 years, obviously I'm not saying a huge penalty should be applied that would put them off coming altogether, but I don't think we sould let MNC's come in reap the benefits of grants and low taxation then as soon as they see better profits to be made elsewhere they can just jump ship leaving the workers behind and taking all the profits with them.

Also we are an exporting nation there is no reason why properly funded and managed SME's can't grow to provide 4th level jobs.

ballooba

Ibid wrote:

We're a high-value economy, as you continually state. Small firms do not hire people with PhDs, we require economies of scale. In this globalised world this means MNCs.

The focus on PhDs is something quite new here. It's being touted as a silver bullet to solve all of our problems. We have never had much R&D in Ireland. Personally I have thought about the PhD route as i'm studying a masters at the moment. I decided it doesn't appeal to me.

I am however looking at setting up a new business at the moment based on R&D carried out at University of California. I'm working on business plans for that at the moment and hope to submit it to EI shortly. I do know from experience that it will be very difficult to get government support for this business because it might upset some of the incumbents.

Ibid wrote:

We do not have many indigenous MNCs, particularly in our niche areas of ICT and pharmaceuticals. It is far more reasonable, I assert, to get foreign firms here and get them to stay than to manage to get Irish firms as world leaders and have the scale economies to employ a million high-skilled people.

That is exactly what I am saying, there is no reason why we shouldn't have more Irish MNCs. The experience gathered in building a successful company usually gives rise to a multiple of new businesses which may or not successful. The experience of being involved in the initial successful venture will give these entrepreneurs a better chance of success in their own ventures. I have seen this in my own work experience and will be looking at joining one of these spin-offs in september as one of my options.

Ibid wrote:

Furthermore the high-skilled economy cum MNC argument extends to the reality that simply because a firm was founded in Ireland does not mean it too will jump ship.

Indigenous firms are less likely to jump ship because of the culture instilled by the entrepreneur and will typically only leave the local economy as a last resort rather than an opportuntity. I can provide academic papers on this if you have access to the databases.

Ibid wrote:

They do. They get the more breaks (proportional to size) as foreign firms.

I have pointed out plenty of examples where the government has actively impeded Irish enterprises including most recently and high profile Airtricity. They talk the talk but they don't walk the walk. To use Microsoft terminology they don't "eat their own dogfood".

Ibid wrote:

If not FDI, what? Where will Intel's 5000 employees go?

The answer is probably wherever Intel go.

There is no guarantee of Intel or HP staying in Ireland. Twelve months ago I might have included Dell in the previous sentence. It is however very clear that they are moving to Poland. I even know people working on that project.

Time Magazine

irish1 wrote:

I don't think we sould let MNC's come in reap the benefits of grants and low taxation then as soon as they see better profits to be made elsewhere they can just jump ship leaving the workers behind and taking all the profits with them.

It would be literally impossible to implement such a scheme. We can no longer give direct grants to foreign companies like that, half-link here. We cannot make firms stay for x years contracts for subsidies anymore.

If we tried to tie them for x years down by law, that would go completely against EU laws on freedom of capital. We cannot punish someone for upping sticks either, for several reasons, not least of which is how the hell would you pursue it if they went to India. Such moves would also scare just about anyone off investing.

Certainly we should only help companies, say build roads near their factories, that are going to stay. But that has nothing to do with this debate, we can and of course do, implement such schemes already.

Firms are no different to EU citizens insofar as if they want to come when we have low taxes and high growth and feck off when the going gets tough we cannot stop them.

Also we are an exporting nation there is no reason why properly funded and managed SME's can't grow to provide 4th level jobs.

My argument is that if that is the case, an Irish firm is no different to an American one. If you get big by exporting, you can export from India just as easily. By that stage "home roots" mean f*ck all in business.