why so afraid to go it alone

kevteljeur

Seanies32 wrote: »

I'd check my facts on the 10% rate, if I were you.

What happened to the 32% ( IIRC) as well?

I suppose we have got no return on our investment either! I'd regard our very successful tax rate as an incentive to invest, not a subsidy.

To be fair, as I pointed out earlier, it was a short-term fix for a long-term problem and I would say that it was viewed as such in the larger EU countries. The recession we are heading into is probably an equalisation, where Ireland's economy will adjust to where it would have been without the incredibly rapid growth. Unfortunately, it will mean several years of painful adjustment.

The problem with a strategy like this is that it is very hard to pull the tax rates back up again later, but it needs to be done. Low tax rates win elections in the short-term (directly and indirectly), but screws the country as whole in the long term.

K-9

thehighground wrote: »

So you think it is easy for your average citizen to challenge a government in the courts? I can't agree with you there. I have no idea where Libertas gets its money from and don't really care as just because I may have the same views on one particular issue like supporting the Lisbon Treaty, it doesn't mean I support the US Arms Industry, though to be quite honest, I have quite forgotten why the US arms industry is meant to be against the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty, if Lisbon is as harmless as you all make out.

Barring that, they could organise some popular support, which sadly has been lacking up to now!

Maybe one of the guys here might have a link to the original paper Ganley wrote on Libertas and what body he was writing to on it. I'll dig it out later if nobody has it. The Americans haven't forgiven France and Germany for Iraq and they want to put Missiles in Poland.

They are actually worried that the EU would have power to stop this, not some European Army that the No side worry about.

thehighground wrote:

Its irrelevant to me who is President - I won't get a chance to have a say who it is.

You wouldn't have much say even if he was elected. 4 million Irish V. 88 Million Germans, 60 odd million British etc.

thehighground wrote:

I'd say they would do quite badly. But you have to agree, a lot of money is wasted - particularly on consultant's report, after consultant's report dust catchers.
Seems they earn on average 15K a month. ! Good, if you can get it. So we want to hand over our hard earned cash to those of questionable morals?

I think nearly everybody would agree on that. The above could be used to describe our own Govt. and we can't do much about that, never mind the EU!

K-9

kevteljeur wrote: »

To be fair, as I pointed out earlier, it was a short-term fix for a long-term problem and I would say that it was viewed as such in the larger EU countries. The recession we are heading into is probably an equalisation, where Ireland's economy will adjust to where it would have been without the incredibly rapid growth. Unfortunately, it will mean several years of painful adjustment.

The problem with a strategy like this is that it is very hard to pull the tax rates back up again later, but it needs to be done. Low tax rates win elections in the short-term (directly and indirectly), but screws the country as whole in the long term.

I'd agree with you on that argument as regards Income Tax. Seems to be a fuzzy haze in this country about better public services and no tax increases!

However, for our economy and our position in the EU as a high cost economy we need an advantage like 12.5% tax for Companies.

K-9

thehighground wrote: »

Its averaged out at 3% of our economy over the years. Anyway, what do you think of a poster here who commented that the Marshall Aid was worth nothing to France (2296 mil. Dollars) & Germany (1448 million) after the war. according to them it was irrelevant as to why Ireland wasn't as well developed.



Bl***dy Spanish fishing fleet !




I'm not disputing that Ireland is not yet a net contributor - but I've only seen the one link that you have produced (which didn't work for me initially). Have you other references like the Dail Q&A?

I agree the subsidies aren't as important as they once were, but a part of the reason they aren't is we because we got high subsidies and development funds in the 80/90's.

€1 Billion a year was massive money to Ireland in the early 90's, you agree?
Remember high tax rates, high debt etc. We needed anything we could get.

True about the Spanish, not much point moaning about spilt milk now. Over fishing is a major worry, indeed it's a worldwide problem.

You should Google the other references, shouldn't take too long.
You have any links that we a contributor?

K-9

thehighground wrote: »

OK, I was a year out. The point I'm making is that the IFA went for the best people right from the very beginning. I have heard Alan Dukes say he took the job in the IFA because it paid more than the Civil Service, where he also had a job offer. What other trade union, business, IBEC etc. had employed an Economist back in 1969 prior to our entry to the EEC?

You can be well sure that he was replaced by someone equally good, who didn't end up going into politics.


Not all, we've had some very good people who I would rate (though some may have had their faults) - Ray McSharry, Peter Sutherland and Dick Spring come to mind as opposed to P Flynn, Ray Bourke ... I won't start now.

The pay problem exists in our own civil service, never mind the EU! IMO, our officials more than hold their own but you mighn't agree, not much I can do on that one!

I'm talking more about McSharry etc. advisors, not so much Commissioners.

djpbarry

thehighground wrote: »

Yes, all corporations are being subsidised if they are getting preferential treatment as regards tax...

Eh? Which corportations are getting preferential treatment?

thehighground wrote: »

...not to mention the use of all the IDA built factories around the country. Irish Gov. (taxpayer) probably paid for those, though.

Which factories are these?

thehighground wrote: »

Supply & demand again.
...
Please bear in mind that a warning has been given that there is a world food shortage due to climate change mainly.

We're going to feed the starving across the world with Irish beef, are we? I don't think they're going to be able to afford it...

thehighground wrote: »

So you think it is easy for your average citizen to challenge a government in the courts?

This guy did.

thehighground wrote: »

I have quite forgotten why the US arms industry is meant to be against the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty, if Lisbon is as harmless as you all make out.

You think the US military is (supposedly) against the Lisbon Treaty because it's (apparently) harmful to Irish interests? While I am not sure if the US military was involved in the 'No' campaign here, I would not imagine that a strong, unified (politically, not literally) Europe would be desirable in The Pentagon.

irish_bob

Seanies32 wrote: »

I'd agree with you on that argument as regards Income Tax. Seems to be a fuzzy haze in this country about better public services and no tax increases!

However, for our economy and our position in the EU as a high cost economy we need an advantage like 12.5% tax for Companies.

its hardly surprising irish people are reluctant about more of there taxes being pumped into the public service when the money goes on wages to surplus staff rather than beds or schools
i dont believe for a second that raising taxes would reduce the problem of people lieing on trolleys

K-9

Indeed, but it's interesting that the countries with the best Health systems like France, Germany and Sweden have high rates of tax and PRSI, whereas ourselves and America have crap systems.

I'm sure the best systems aren't perfect either!

IRLConor

irish_bob wrote: »

its hardly surprising irish people are reluctant about more of there taxes being pumped into the public service when the money goes on wages to surplus staff rather than beds or schools
i dont believe for a second that raising taxes would reduce the problem of people lieing on trolleys

And that's precisely why many Irish people oppose tax increases. Whether true or not (and my opinion on the matter is immaterial) until the Irish people believe that increasing taxes will improve public services we'll largely vote against anyone who will raise them.

I have to say I'm not convinced either way on the matter. On the one hand, our public services seem to be more expensive and less effective than in many other countries. On the other hand, one of my parents is a civil servant and the other works in the health system and I see how hard they work (both of them work more hours than they're paid for) and how understaffed their workplaces are and I wonder "where are all the surplus staff?". I'm torn between resenting having to pay both for a public health system that doesn't work properly and for health insurance to avoid having to use it and worrying that unless I pay more tax odds are I'll continue to get bad value for what I am paying for.

thehighground

IRLConor wrote: »

How much food do we import from outside the EU again?

When you say 'we' I presume you mean the EU - I don't know how much food the EU imports, but I would presume it is sufficient to make sure that there is sufficient food for the 500m people living in Europe (even if they are not in the EU ) plus a bit over.

That 5% aren't producing anything that we can't import for cheaper from elsewhere. Not just that, but I'm willing to bet that we can get the same quality from elsewhere for cheaper too.

Food is essential. Producing it in the EU is not.

Thank you for conceding that food is essential.

As regards producing food in the EU - coupel of considerations:

1) Climate change/global warming. Ireland is getting warmer. (In another couple of years we'll have a wine industry!!!) In the meantime, further south will be turning into dessert. Water shortages will be a major problem. You can't grow food without water.
2) Oil crisis - the further you travel the more expensive it will be. Being out on the edge of Europe is costly enough - being in the southern hemisphere trying to export to Europe!!!
3) Bringing milk from South Amercia/New Zealand is downright immoral considering the problems with global warming and that it can be got a lot closer.
3) How would the EU import food from poorer countries, knowing that the people in these countries would probably have to go short. (This has been reported already by WFO).

1. There are no direct subsidies to the software industry.
2. That 12.5% corporation tax rate applies to all companies (including companies in the agricultural sector) and hence is a level playing field.

Yes, you are right, no DIRECT subsidies to software industry (Foreign companies may have been helped with factory space in an IDA Office Park, though!). New indiginous companies would also have received help.

If the entire Irish farming sector went away tomorrow, it would be a dent to our economy but we'd survive. Ironically, if the entire tech or pharma sectors disappeared people would go hungry since they couldn't afford to buy the food produced by our agriculture sector.

You may view this as a bad thing, but the farming sector can't walk out the door like the Hibernian jobs to India (and I do think you might notice a difference in your wallet if all food had to be imported into Ireland.

Interesting paragraph in today's Sunday Tribune about exports here:

Ireland's biggest firms hit by 25% sales slump

Computer equipment was the worst affected sector in the first quarter of the year. Exports in the sector fell from €3.3 bn in the first quarter of 2007. Those figures will be extremely worrying for the government because Dell alone accounts for about 6% of gross national product. Much of the manufacturing is value-added, with the parts being imported, assembled and then exported. As a result, the import of computer equipment also dropped in Q1 to €1.8bn, a fall of 26%.

Information and communications technology is hugely important in Ireland as companies such as Dell, Apple, Intel, HP and Cisco employ thousands here, producing equipment for export.

Other sectors to see a sharp decline in exports, according to the Central Statistics Office, were chemical materials and products, which saw sales fall 11% to €4.73bn, and metal ores, where sales fell 24% to €209m. Imports fell 7% in the first quarter of the year with the value of road vehicles falling 14% to €1.3bn and electrical machinery imports dropping 20% to €719m.

Ireland's biggest firms hit by 25% sales slump
http://www.tribune.ie/business/news/article/2008/jun/29/irelands-biggest-firms-hit-by-25-sales-slump/

thehighground

Seanies32 wrote: »

Strangely, from the wiki page on Dukes

In 1969 he became an economist with the Irish Farmers Association (IFA) in Dublin. After Ireland joined the European Economic Community (EEC) in 1973, he moved to Brussels where he was part of the IFA's delegation. In this role he was influential in framing Ireland's contribution to the Common Agriculture Policy.
He moved on from this IFA position to become chief of staff to Ireland's EEC commissioner Dick Burke, a former Fine Gael politician.

Dukes moved from the private sector to the public sector in support of Dick Burke.

Obviously your lack of respect for politicians extends to our officials in Brussels.

He did - obviously when the Government realised that - buy guess who employed him in the first place.

You pointed out that I obviously had no respect for politicians - I'm pointing out that there are a few who I think were good.

As regards the officials, can you explain to me how come Irish farmers did very well out of the EU in comparison to everyone else ?

thehighground

Seanies32 wrote: »

Is is really? You do know by that logic, all Corporations are subsidised?

Can you explain to me how we have lost tax by reducing the Corporation tax rate to 12.5%?

OK, Corporation are building a factory to sell their products in Europe. Mainland Europe would save on transport costs to their main market of about 430 m (leaving out UK & Ireland).

Corporation Tax rate on mainland Europe varies 30%-40%.
Corporate Tax Rate Ireland 12.5%

Up to lately it was a no brainer - now it might change a bit.

---

If Irish Gov. charged 24% CTR, Irish Gov. would have double (12.5 x2) what it does take. Could mean more roads, schools, LUAS, buses, more social housing, better education grants etc. We (Ireland Inc) have lost out a bit if you think about it.

thehighground

Seanies32 wrote: »

And in a world food shortage, Beef especially expensive beef will be a luxury.

You know what happens to luxury items when a recession happens?

Meat isn't a luxury item (BMWs/Mercs etc. champagne, chocolate, Hugh Boss suits - they are luxury items). Meat prices vary in the supermarkets from about €8 to €34 per kilo (depending on cut). Its worth noting as well that farmers receive about €3.30 per kilo at the moment so the middleman does extremely well out of it. Also worth noting is that Irish beef is cheaper in the supermarkets than French & German beef at the moment - about €2 per kilo - I heard that on the radio yesterday.

Oh, and a litre of milk is cheaper than a litre of water.

thehighground

marco_polo wrote: »

You are pretty much at square one with regards to EU protection of it agricultural sector. If you can show me just even one example of a trade agreement where the EU has agreed a tariff free arrangement with another developed country it might be at least some help to your argument."

Here are some example I dug out for agricultural exports from Turkey into the EU to see what benifits we could look forward to under such a good deal.

Cheeses subject to tariffs of 144 EUR / 100 kg

http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/dds/cgi-bin/tarduty?Taric=0406301090&SimDate=20080627&Action=1&ProdLine=80&Country=TR/0052&Type=0&Action=1&YesNo=1&Indent=-1&Flag=1&Test=tarduty&Periodic=0&Download=0&Lang=EN&Description=yes

0406 Cheese and curd
- 0406 30 Processed cheese, not grated or powdered
- - 0406 30 10 In the manufacture of which no cheeses other than Emmentaler, Gruyère and Appenzell have been used and which may contain, as an addition, Glarus herb cheese (known as Schabziger); put up for retail sale, of a fat content by weight in the dry matter not exceeding 56 %
- - - 0406 30 10 10 Processed Emmentaler
- - - 0406 30 10 20 Processed Gruyère

Seems to be exceptions (Processed cheese, not grated or powdered).

Also, considering retail price of cheese is an average of about €14 a kilo, €144 out of product worth €1400 is not a huge tarif).

If even if we did by some miracle have some sort of a tariff free arrangement that is just one aspect of the many benefits of EU membership.

No one expects anything for nothing - there are downsides to EU membeship as well (such as quotas for fish and most agricultural produce).

thehighground

The Corinthian wrote: »

Fair enough, I didn't see it. However, given your reply:

All this story do is confirm that prior to the Celtic Tiger, Ireland was an economic shìthole.

Your not very good at reading stuff are you? I worked for a BRITISH owned company that went bust in the UK because of the downturn of business in the UK as a result of the Gulf War. The Irish division was doing well and was VERY profitable).

Of course, but if the jobs aren't there, or more correctly are not good enough, the Irish will vote with their feet as they did before. So far, all you and other Eurosceptics have been able to suggest is a fuzzy return to an agricultural based economy and protectionism, which was essentially what we had back when the Irish economy encouraged emigration.

Jumping to conclusions and getting it wrong again - no one here has advocated a return to an agricultural based economy and protectionism. All I advocate is that it is ONE of our main NATURAL RESOURCES that can't be moved to India and we should try and use it a bit better - for instance growing oilseed rape as fuel etc., whey (waste from cheese) can be made into ethanol. Just a lot more research has to be done to make them more viable. And food is important.

I worked and even ran a business in the late eighties / early nineties. For a start, the Irish market is too small, which means that you'll always be stuck scratching a living if you're limited to it. If you look afield and there are trade barriers or tariffs, then this will get in the way of making that living.

Half of my friends around that time emigrated. All they could get here upon leaving college was a £9k p.a. job at best, and that only if they had at least a 2.1+ in their finals. Needless to say, the opportunities were elsewhere and that's where they went - even those with 2.1+ results how got better offers than here. That the dole (with rent allowance) amounted to just under that level of salary, added insult to injury, BTW.

I remember the receptionist in the company I worked in had a 2.1 degree. Unfortunately, she was unable to take a phone message correctly (thought she was above it). [/QUOTE]

So Irish food would become more expensive, but at least it won't be as expensive as foreign food. Please explain where the win is in this.

You seem to totally disregard the middleman and the supermarkets in particlar. The farmer gets about 33c for a litre of milk. Now, how much does it cost from Tesco/Dunnes?

thehighground

Seanies32 wrote: »

Maybe one of the guys here might have a link to the original paper Ganley wrote on Libertas and what body he was writing to on it. I'll dig it out later if nobody has it. The Americans haven't forgiven France and Germany for Iraq and they want to put Missiles in Poland.

They are actually worried that the EU would have power to stop this, not some European Army that the No side worry about.

So, from that do I deduce that the US don't need Ireland to be a member of the EU to sell software/hardware into the EU, whose parent company is in the US.

Considering the amount of trade we have with the US, should we be worried about our relations with the US, taking into account the issues the US have with the EU?

In 2006, US firms paid over €2.4b to the Irish Exchequer in Corporate Tax (or approx 40% of total corporate tax take in 2006[x]) and contributed a further €13b in expenditure to the Irish economy in terms of payrolls, goods and services employed in their operations[xi].

Irish companies directly employ an estimated 74,000 in 50 States across the USA The cumulative stock of Irish FDI in the US stood at €21b in 2005[xii].

From American chamber of Commerce

http://www.amcham.ie/article.cfm?idarticle=461

thehighground

djpbarry wrote: »

He's not appointed by the British electorate, so what they want is irrelevant. Was everything that Charlie McCreevy did popular among the Irish electorate?

He is a Labour Party Member whose party will be trying to win a general election shortly, so what the electorate want is very relevant imo.

Charlie fought off the EU about the tax harmonisation - I don't think our new Finance Minister will be able to hold them off like he could. Other than that I think we were delighted to get rid of him.

There's no point increasing production if nobody is going to buy it. You're assuming that demand for Irish beef will remain constant (in the EU in particular) if we leave the EU, which is very unlikely considering there will be tariffs slapped on it.

I'll say it one more - (1) there is a World Food Shortage. This is reported extensively in the media. (2) There is more to Irish farming than Irish beef - we have milk (cheese, eggs), grain, chickens, pigs ..... . (3) Tarriffs (if they are the same as Turkey - are not that much). (4) See my comments on middle men, supermarkets etc in previous posts. (5) No EU quotas - will be able to produce more and so more economical.

If we leave the EU, we are going to be worse off economically and so, increases in food prices will hit harder.

Prove it.

Doesn't the EU produce far more dairy products than it consumes? Euromilk seem to think so.

No it doesn't - it is producing nearly exactly what it needs. So, if there is any shortages (draught, another episode of foot & mouth), there could be a problem. An example of how it is managed is for example - milk quota - and you are fined if you go above that. Most Irish farmers dry off their cows now for a couple of month every year.

I'm not sure what mess you're referring too? People getting themselves into huge debt? I'm not sure how that's the government's fault; people are responsible for their own finances.

I'd agree with you about the debt for the cars, holidays and handbags, but the Irish Gov. have a huge resposibility for those young people who have taken out mortgages in the last couple of years. Its a disgrace that they didn't intervene.

And I'm not sure what you mean by "believe"? As has been said numerous times already on this forum, a vote based on ignorance is a vote not worth having.

A lack of information 22% about the Treaty was the main reason for voting against the treaty. I also believe that a similar percentage voted 'Yes' for the same reason. So maybe they just cancelled each other out.

Referenda are illegal in Germany and it is illegal to ratify international treaties by referendum in Italy; they can't ratify the Lisbon Treaty by popular referendum. Together they comprise 28.5% of the EU's population.

So, we must 'respect' how some European countries as to how to do things when it suits your argument, but if you don't agree with the outcome of another country, you don 'respect' that outcome. Interesting. Just change the criteria until you get the right answer.

Oh, and I know about the referendum issue with Germany.

How?
How? I've no idea what this means or what it has to do with the auditing of EU accounts. Can you explain what this "problem" is? .

There is a problem with accounting for EU money which has been lighligted by the auditor of the EU accounts. Here is link for EU Financial Reports - its pdf format. Part you want is 'Information note on Annual Report." Pick Year 2006.

http://eca.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/publications/auditreportsandopinions/annualreports

I doubt if the MEPs started recently claiming expenses for Friday even though not attending Parliament. This was happening right under their noses for years probably. It took a Germany TV station to highlight the fraud, not the 'accountable' EU.

Are you one of these people that stuff like this doesn't bother you?

thehighground

Seanies32 wrote: »

However, for our economy and our position in the EU as a high cost economy we need an advantage like 12.5% tax for Companies.

Hope the rest of the 24 member states don't mind if we hold onto that advantage and that they don't bow to the French & German demands.

IRLConor

thehighground wrote: »

When you say 'we' I presume you mean the EU - I don't know how much food the EU imports, but I would presume it is sufficient to make sure that there is sufficient food for the 500m people living in Europe (even if they are not in the EU ) plus a bit over.

You said that "So, 5% of the EU population has to produce all the food for the rest!" which to me implies that you believe that the 5% are providing a critical service unavailable elsewhere.

I simply countered by asking how much food we import. Any non-zero amount given in your answer implies that food is available elsewhere. Not just that, but the food from elsewhere is often cheaper even when you take into account the tariffs and protectionism which stacks the deck massively in the EU-based farmer's favour.

Food production in Ireland (and I presume the rest of the EU, based on the subsidy system) is fundamentally not economically viable. You can juggle the figures all you like, but we pay more than we should for our food one way or another.

thehighground wrote: »

Thank you for conceding that food is essential.

I never claimed or implied that food was not essential. What I'm saying is that it is not essential (or economical) to grow it ourselves.

thehighground wrote: »

1) Climate change/global warming. Ireland is getting warmer. (In another couple of years we'll have a wine industry!!!) In the meantime, further south will be turning into dessert. Water shortages will be a major problem. You can't grow food without water.

Mmm, dessert.

Anyway, if the climate on the planet changes to the point at which our farms are economically viable then I'm sure we can re-examine agriculture as a significant player in our economy. The only way our farms are going to become economically viable is if either the cost of production goes down or if everyone else's cost of production goes up.

As it stands, if we left the EU or the EEA we'd be rightly buggered because the only parts of our economy that wouldn't/couldn't emigrate aren't enough to prop it up.

thehighground wrote: »

2) Oil crisis - the further you travel the more expensive it will be. Being out on the edge of Europe is costly enough - being in the southern hemisphere trying to export to Europe!!!

How the hell is food from the other side of the world still cheaper when you take into account current fuel prices AND the tariffs? Oh yeah, it's because their cost of production is much, much lower.

thehighground wrote: »

3) Bringing milk from South Amercia/New Zealand is downright immoral considering the problems with global warming and that it can be got a lot closer.

Making people pay more for their food than is necessary is a greater evil IMO.

thehighground wrote: »

3) How would the EU import food from poorer countries, knowing that the people in these countries would probably have to go short. (This has been reported already by WFO).

One of the biggest things keeping poor countries poor are the tariffs (on all products, not just food) that first world countries use to prop up uneconomical industries.

thehighground wrote: »

Yes, you are right, no DIRECT subsidies to software industry (Foreign companies may have been helped with factory space in an IDA Office Park, though!). New indiginous companies would also have received help.

In 2006 the average direct aid payment per farm worker was €10,577.

How much direct EU aid did any other industry get that even approaches that?

Other industries got precious little more than what the farmers got and the farmers got a hell of a lot more than everyone else.

thehighground wrote: »

You may view this as a bad thing, but the farming sector can't walk out the door like the Hibernian jobs to India

Why not?

irish_bob

IRLConor wrote: »

You said that "So, 5% of the EU population has to produce all the food for the rest!" which to me implies that you believe that the 5% are providing a critical service unavailable elsewhere.

I simply countered by asking how much food we import. Any non-zero amount given in your answer implies that food is available elsewhere. Not just that, but the food from elsewhere is often cheaper even when you take into account the tariffs and protectionism which stacks the deck massively in the EU-based farmer's favour.

Food production in Ireland (and I presume the rest of the EU, based on the subsidy system) is fundamentally not economically viable. You can juggle the figures all you like, but we pay more than we should for our food one way or another.



I never claimed or implied that food was not essential. What I'm saying is that it is not essential (or economical) to grow it ourselves.



Mmm, dessert.

Anyway, if the climate on the planet changes to the point at which our farms are economically viable then I'm sure we can re-examine agriculture as a significant player in our economy. The only way our farms are going to become economically viable is if either the cost of production goes down or if everyone else's cost of production goes up.

As it stands, if we left the EU or the EEA we'd be rightly buggered because the only parts of our economy that wouldn't/couldn't emigrate aren't enough to prop it up.



How the hell is food from the other side of the world still cheaper when you take into account current fuel prices AND the tariffs? Oh yeah, it's because their cost of production is much, much lower.



Making people pay more for their food than is necessary is a greater evil IMO.



One of the biggest things keeping poor countries poor are the tariffs (on all products, not just food) that first world countries use to prop up uneconomical industries.



In 2006 the average direct aid payment per farm worker was €10,577.

How much direct EU aid did any other industry get that even approaches that?

Other industries got precious little more than what the farmers got and the farmers got a hell of a lot more than everyone else.



Why not?

your so right about tarrifs keeping developing countries poor
the CAP has been one of the biggest obstacles to farmers in africa becoming prosperous , the cap exists to satisfy the powerfull farmer lobby in europe

djpbarry

thehighground wrote: »

Climate change/global warming. Ireland is getting warmer. (In another couple of years we'll have a wine industry!!!) In the meantime, further south will be turning into dessert.

How about we deal with the here-and-now, rather than speculating about the future effects of climate change?

thehighground wrote: »

Oil crisis - the further you travel the more expensive it will be. Being out on the edge of Europe is costly enough - being in the southern hemisphere trying to export to Europe!!!

But you're forgetting about the cost of production; as oil prices go up, so does the cost of production in Ireland. Even factoring in transport costs, imported food from South America will still be cheaper than Irish-produced food.

thehighground wrote: »

Bringing milk from South Amercia/New Zealand is downright immoral considering the problems with global warming and that it can be got a lot closer.

I'm with IRLConor on this one; morals are not something that the European farming lobby have in great abundance.

thehighground wrote: »

How would the EU import food from poorer countries, knowing that the people in these countries would probably have to go short.

No, they probably would not. As has been shown time and time again, trade is an almost guaranteed means of stimulating economic growth and dragging a country out of poverty. How else is a poor country going to generate income other than selling produce?

thehighground wrote: »

...I do think you might notice a difference in your wallet if all food had to be imported into Ireland.

I certainly would, especially if the tariffs were removed!

thehighground wrote: »

...can you explain to me how come Irish farmers did very well out of the EU in comparison to everyone else ?

Did they?

thehighground wrote: »

If Irish Gov. charged 24% CTR, Irish Gov. would have double (12.5 x2) what it does take. Could mean more roads, schools, LUAS, buses, more social housing, better education grants etc. We (Ireland Inc) have lost out a bit if you think about it.

If Ireland's corporation tax was double what it currently is, we most likely would not have attracted the investment we did and so there would, in all likelihood, have been less tax (both CT and income tax) going into the state coffers. To suggest (as a matter of fact) that more tax would have been generated is a complete fallacy.

thehighground wrote: »

Meat prices vary in the supermarkets from about €8 to €34 per kilo (depending on cut)...

...whereas a 10kg bag of rooster potatoes will currently set you back €6.99 in Superquinn - that's about €0.70 per kilo.

thehighground wrote: »

Oh, and a litre of milk is cheaper than a litre of water.

Is it? Don't know about you, but I get my water direct to my house for free. If you're referring to bottled water, well, I think it's fair to regard that as a luxury item.

thehighground wrote: »

Also, considering retail price of cheese is an average of about €14 a kilo, €144 out of product worth €1400 is not a huge tarif

I'm not sure where you're getting the €14 per kilo from, but it's irrelevant; a 10% increase in the price of any item is significant.

thehighground wrote: »

All I advocate is that it is ONE of our main NATURAL RESOURCES that can't be moved to India and we should try and use it a bit better...

...if it is economically viable to do so. If it is cheaper to import from elsewhere, then it makes sense to go with that option.

thehighground wrote: »

You seem to totally disregard the middleman and the supermarkets in particlar. The farmer gets about 33c for a litre of milk. Now, how much does it cost from Tesco/Dunnes?

I'm not sure what that has to do with anything? The supermarkets are going to charge a huge mark-up on imported goods too.

thehighground wrote: »

So, from that do I deduce that the US don't need Ireland to be a member of the EU to sell software/hardware into the EU, whose parent company is in the US.

I have no idea how you arrived at that deduction. If Ireland is outside the EU, our exports to the EU will most likely have tariffs imposed on them, regardless of the origins of the parent company manufacturing said exports.

thehighground wrote: »

Considering the amount of trade we have with the US, should we be worried about our relations with the US…

Absolutely, but not at the expense of our relations with our EU partners, who together represent a much larger share of our export market.

thehighground wrote: »

There is more to Irish farming than Irish beef…

I am well aware of that, but you have been harping on about how Irish beef can be used to fill any voids created in a world food shortage. I, and others, have consistently pointed out that beef is a luxury product for most of the world’s population and increasing it’s production is not going to save the poor from starvation.

thehighground wrote: »

Prove it.

:rolleyes: How can I prove a hypothetical situation to be true or false? That makes no sense.

thehighground wrote: »

No it doesn't - it is producing nearly exactly what it needs.

In 2006, the EU produced:

• 4% more cheese than it consumed
• 5% more milk powder than it consumed
• 8.7% more butter than it consumed

thehighground wrote: »

…but the Irish Gov. have a huge resposibility for those young people who have taken out mortgages in the last couple of years. Its a disgrace that they didn't intervene.

Intervene? How?

thehighground wrote: »

A lack of information 22% about the Treaty was the main reason for voting against the treaty. I also believe that a similar percentage voted 'Yes' for the same reason. So maybe they just cancelled each other out.

That’s not the point; “belief” or trust in a politician is not a necessity in voting one way or the other.

thehighground wrote: »

So, we must 'respect' how some European countries as to how to do things when it suits your argument, but if you don't agree with the outcome of another country, you don 'respect' that outcome.

I have no idea what you’re talking about here.

thehighground wrote: »

There is a problem with accounting for EU money which has been lighligted by the auditor of the EU accounts. Here is link for EU Financial Reports - its pdf format. Part you want is 'Information note on Annual Report." Pick Year 2006.

Hang on a tick; you said in a recent post that EU accounts have not been audited for 13 years?

thehighground wrote: »

Hope the rest of the 24 member states don't mind if we hold onto that advantage…

Who cares whether they mind or not; we have a veto, remember?

IRLConor

irish_bob wrote: »

your so right about tarrifs keeping developing countries poor
the CAP has been one of the biggest obstacles to farmers in africa becoming prosperous , the cap exists to satisfy the powerfull farmer lobby in europe

The disgusting thing is that we're paying to keep them poor.

thehighground

Seanies32 wrote: »

I'd check my facts on the 10% rate, if I were you.

What happened to the 32% ( IIRC) as well?

I suppose we have got no return on our investment either! I'd regard our very successful tax rate as an incentive to invest, not a subsidy.

Quick reference - there are lots of others besides wiki, but this is the handiest. In 1981, Ireland was pursuing the likes of Apple, Digitel etc. to manufacture in Ireland. (I did say selected industries and places for 10% rate - Shannon was Tax Free as far as I can remember).

The introduction in 1981 of the 10% tax on manufacturing was simply the easiest way to adjust to the demands of the EEC to abolish the export relief, which the EEC viewed as discriminatory. With the accession to the EEC, the advantages of this policy became increasingly obvious to both the Irish government and to foreign multi-nationals, by 1982 over 80% of companies who located in Ireland cited the taxation policy as the primary reason they did so.

During the Rainbow Government of 1994-7, Minister of Finance Ruairi Quinn reduced corporation tax to 12.5% on trading income, a policy that has been continued by subsequent Ministers of Finance. This is generally believed to have been an important stimulus for the Celtic Tiger.

In the 1998 Budget (in December 1997) Finance Minister, Charlie McCreevey intrduced the legislation for a new regime of corporation tax that led to the introduction of the 12.5% rate of corporation tax for trading income from 1st January 2003. The legislation was contained in section 71 of the Finance Act 1999 and provided for a phased introduction of the 12.5% rate from 32% for the financial year 1998 to 12.5% commencing from 1 January 2003. A higher rate of corporation tax of 25% was introduced for passive income, income from a foreign trade and some development and mining activities. Manufacturing relief, effectively a 10% rate of corporation tax, was on 31 December 2002. For companies that were claiming this relief before 23 July 1998 it will still be available until 31 January 2010. The 10% rate for IFSC activiites ended on 31 December 2005 and after this date these companies moved to the 12.5% rate provided their trade qualified as an Irish trading activity.[/B]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_of_Ireland_corporation_tax

djpbarry

thehighground wrote: »

If Irish Gov. charged 24% CTR, Irish Gov. would have double (12.5 x2) what it does take. Could mean more roads, schools, LUAS, buses, more social housing, better education grants etc. We (Ireland Inc) have lost out a bit if you think about it.

thehighground wrote: »

...by 1982 over 80% of companies who located in Ireland cited the taxation policy as the primary reason they did so.

Bit of a contradiction there, don't you think?

Scofflaw

thehighground wrote:

If Irish Gov. charged 24% CTR, Irish Gov. would have double (12.5 x2) what it does take. Could mean more roads, schools, LUAS, buses, more social housing, better education grants etc. We (Ireland Inc) have lost out a bit if you think about it.

That's a very basic error. It is quite possible to drop your tax rate and increase the take - indeed, this is what happened in Ireland. One is not taxing some immutable process, but people and their businesses - and they can, and do, make decisions based on tax rate. Higher tax rates are a disincentive to increased effort and investment.

cordially,
Scofflaw

kevteljeur

Scofflaw wrote: »

That's a very basic error. It is quite possible to drop your tax rate and increase the take - indeed, this is what happened in Ireland. One is not taxing some immutable process, but people and their businesses - and they can, and do, make decisions based on tax rate. Higher tax rates are a disincentive to increased effort and investment.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Once again, I add this regarding Ireland's cutting of corporate tax rates, though it's not backed up by hard figures (Which makes it a little weaker than with figures, I grant you.) but we'll see:

kevteljeur wrote: »

To be fair, as I pointed out earlier, it was a short-term fix for a long-term problem and I would say that it was viewed as such in the larger EU countries. The recession we are heading into is probably an equalisation, where Ireland's economy will adjust to where it would have been without the incredibly rapid growth. Unfortunately, it will mean several years of painful adjustment.

The problem with a strategy like this is that it is very hard to pull the tax rates back up again later, but it needs to be done. Low tax rates win elections in the short-term (directly and indirectly), but screws the country as whole in the long term.

The theory is to encourage business, and so employment. But this is really about creating personal wealth quickly in an unstable business environment, rather than a strong, wealthy state and fewer, stronger indigenous businesses. Good cars on bad roads, vs good busses on good roads; democracy at work, but if you can't pay for the car you'll be going nowhere.

The EU will harmonise corporate and other tax rates sooner rather than later; tax rates enable another form of direct government subsidy for business, which as we know is disallowed under EU rules (and I'm happy to stand corrected, but I believe I'm right about that).

Again, a belief that Ireland can be self-sufficient is false; we are a heavily import-reliant economy, and remember that little technology you possess has been manufactured in Ireland, nor can it be. If we were to rely on unsubsidised Irish produce with foreign imports regulated through tariffs then you would see your cost of living soar rapidly since you would be a captive market; choice is competition which lowers costs, and there would be none.

K-9

thehighground wrote: »

As regards the officials, can you explain to me how come Irish farmers did very well out of the EU in comparison to everyone else ?

Ah sure you know the answer already, Dukes and the IFA!
Some power they have over the other EU countries! :eek:

Sure, we'll have no problems with the WTO then!

thehighground wrote:

OK, Corporation are building a factory to sell their products in Europe. Mainland Europe would save on transport costs to their main market of about 430 m (leaving out UK & Ireland).

Corporation Tax rate on mainland Europe varies 30%-40%.
Corporate Tax Rate Ireland 12.5%

Up to lately it was a no brainer - now it might change a bit.

---

If Irish Gov. charged 24% CTR, Irish Gov. would have double (12.5 x2) what it does take. Could mean more roads, schools, LUAS, buses, more social housing, better education grants etc. We (Ireland Inc) have lost out a bit if you think about it.

OK, say that's true, what the hell happened when McCreevy halved CGT? :eek:

thehighground wrote:

Meat isn't a luxury item (BMWs/Mercs etc. champagne, chocolate, Hugh Boss suits - they are luxury items). Meat prices vary in the supermarkets from about €8 to €34 per kilo (depending on cut). Its worth noting as well that farmers receive about €3.30 per kilo at the moment so the middleman does extremely well out of it. Also worth noting is that Irish beef is cheaper in the supermarkets than French & German beef at the moment - about €2 per kilo - I heard that on the radio yesterday.

But as you say prices will rise so................
BMW's aren't luxuries to most people, they are unaffordable.
Meat is affordable now, but for how long for large sections of our population!

thehighground wrote:

Oh, and a litre of milk is cheaper than a litre of water.

I just had a pint of water there, no charge!

thehighground wrote:

So, from that do I deduce that the US don't need Ireland to be a member of the EU to sell software/hardware into the EU, whose parent company is in the US.

Eh, don't how you deduced that from this:

Seanies32 wrote:

Maybe one of the guys here might have a link to the original paper Ganley wrote on Libertas and what body he was writing to on it. I'll dig it out later if nobody has it. The Americans haven't forgiven France and Germany for Iraq and they want to put Missiles in Poland.

They are actually worried that the EU would have power to stop this, not some European Army that the No side worry about.

Can you explain?

thehighground wrote:

Considering the amount of trade we have with the US, should we be worried about our relations with the US, taking into account the issues the US have with the EU?

Quote:
In 2006, US firms paid over €2.4b to the Irish Exchequer in Corporate Tax (or approx 40% of total corporate tax take in 2006[x]) and contributed a further €13b in expenditure to the Irish economy in terms of payrolls, goods and services employed in their operations[xi].

Irish companies directly employ an estimated 74,000 in 50 States across the USA The cumulative stock of Irish FDI in the US stood at €21b in 2005[xii].

What does cumulative stock mean?
I wonder what percentage of the US economy we supply!

Are you suggesting US companies would have pulled out because of a Yes vote?

thehighground wrote:

Charlie fought off the EU about the tax harmonisation - I don't think our new Finance Minister will be able to hold them off like he could.

Well I don't think anybody is going to convince you on that one, despite it being shown it's a non runner.

K-9

thehighground wrote: »

Hope the rest of the 24 member states don't mind if we hold onto that advantage and that they don't bow to the French & German demands.

Back to Wiki for Thehighground!

Seriously, brush up on some basic EU facts like 27 member states, no Ministers, vetoes etc.

K-9

Your original quote was:

thehighground wrote: »

Yes, all corporations are being subsidised if they are getting preferential treatment as regards tax, though to be strictly accurate, the Corporation Tax was increased to 12.5% from 10% in 2002 (causing ructions in Europe - fair play to Charlie McCreevy - he held them all off).

In the early 80s the tax rate of 10% was applicable to SELECTED services & manufacturing - and as one of our major developing industries of that time, I'm pretty certain that the Dells, Apples etc. would have benefited - not to mention the use of all the IDA built factories around the country. Irish Gov. (taxpayer) probably paid for those, though.

You then said:

thehighground wrote:

Quick reference - there are lots of others besides wiki, but this is the handiest. In 1981, Ireland was pursuing the likes of Apple, Digitel etc. to manufacture in Ireland. (I did say selected industries and places for 10% rate - Shannon was Tax Free as far as I can remember).

Quote:
The introduction in 1981 of the 10% tax on manufacturing was simply the easiest way to adjust to the demands of the EEC to abolish the export relief, which the EEC viewed as discriminatory. With the accession to the EEC, the advantages of this policy became increasingly obvious to both the Irish government and to foreign multi-nationals, by 1982 over 80% of companies who located in Ireland cited the taxation policy as the primary reason they did so.

During the Rainbow Government of 1994-7, Minister of Finance Ruairi Quinn reduced corporation tax to 12.5% on trading income, a policy that has been continued by subsequent Ministers of Finance. This is generally believed to have been an important stimulus for the Celtic Tiger.

In the 1998 Budget (in December 1997) Finance Minister, Charlie McCreevey intrduced the legislation for a new regime of corporation tax that led to the introduction of the 12.5% rate of corporation tax for trading income from 1st January 2003. The legislation was contained in section 71 of the Finance Act 1999 and provided for a phased introduction of the 12.5% rate from 32% for the financial year 1998 to 12.5% commencing from 1 January 2003. A higher rate of corporation tax of 25% was introduced for passive income, income from a foreign trade and some development and mining activities. Manufacturing relief, effectively a 10% rate of corporation tax, was on 31 December 2002. For companies that were claiming this relief before 23 July 1998 it will still be available until 31 January 2010. The 10% rate for IFSC activiites ended on 31 December 2005 and after this date these companies moved to the 12.5% rate provided their trade qualified as an Irish trading activity.[/b]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republi...orporation_tax

So the Corporation tax rate was not increased from 10%. The rate was 32% with exceptions for selected industries.
You weren't being strictly accurate!

The legislation was contained in section 71 of the Finance Act 1999 and provided for a phased introduction of the 12.5% rate from 32% for the financial year 1998 to 12.5% commencing from 1 January 2003.

These companies that still have the 10% rate that will end in 2010 are lobbying the Govt. to reduce it the rate from 12.5 to 10%. I wonder why, if tax isn't an important issue to them?

I can't believe some of the people who voted No, are saying if we had a 24% CT rate we'd get extra tax revenues! I thought these people voted no to stop France and Germany making us higher it?

K-9

thehighground wrote: »

No one expects anything for nothing - there are downsides to EU membeship as well (such as quotas for fish and most agricultural produce).

I don't think even Europhiles would have a problem with saying the EU was bad for fishing.

Now, let's turn the question around.

What would be the downsides of us not being EU members, In your opinion?