Post Cowen Plan debate:

P. Breathnach

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

There really should be a ban on those who are too young to work lecturing the rest of us like that.

If we excluded idiots from boards.ie then there would be very little traffic. How, then, might we waste our time?

Dr Galen

The problem with these measures is they are simply not enough. As the other gob****e in Fine Gael said "a sticking plaster".

We all know that we are in trouble. The vast majority of people will accept some pain in terms of tax increases etc.

The big stumbling block with placing a increasing the tax burden on the private sector is that we believe that we don't obtain value for money.

completely agree with this. pretty much everyone is happy to do their bit.........but it feels to me like we're throwing good money after bad. We're not seeing anything tangible at all from all of the millions going into the governement/banks/PS.

its this lack of ideas and plans from the government that is the really galling part.

Imagine the following:
- fire those who bring the public service into disrepute

well depending on your definition this already happens. But what really needs to happen is that the Golden Handshake culture as happened with FAS goes.

- jail and confisicate assets from those involved in corruption

government and politicians should stay well clear of matters involving this kind of thing. we have the Gardai and the courts for that. But your idea is sound, and realistically happens anyways once a case can be made. Unfortunatley some of thses fly boys that we red about in the papers are very good at getting very close to breaking the rules/laws without actually tchnically doing that.

- force the nationalisation of the banks and allow the public to buy shares

interested to know why?? And if the bansks were to become nationalised then there would be no shares to buy so to speak. We as the population would de facto own the banks anyway. Maybe a public bond type of scheme is more what you mean, but sure then, i'd be be paying twice for the same thing.

- jail and fine bank officials who acted improperly during boom years

same as above. Take Anglo for example, looks like the person in question didn't break any actual laws, just was a creative in the accounting. The Office of Corporate Enforecement are looking into this though and I'd imagine given the public opinion on this case, they'll be using a fine tooth comb.

- allow the renegotiation of mortgages

a possible benefit really only possible if the banks were nationalised, otherwise, the privately owned banks would end up with huge huge writedowns, virtually crippling them

- increase the quantity and quality of front-line public service employees

how can we fund that? Borrowing? Increased Taxation?

- tax investigatation for people who gained significant wealth in last 10 year

Im not sure I'd like this sort of thing to creep in. I understand and partly share the sentiments behind the idea, not every rich person is corrupt or crooked. Now what might be an idea is giving certain bodies stronger powers and putting people in charge who will ferret out all details of cases and make people PROVEN of tax dodging in an illegal manner pay for it.

Don't forget that is was this government party that introduced many of the tax breaks for the rich over the 3 terms. The electorate turned a blind eye during the good times and voted em in again and again.

- Increase tax by 5% across the board; everybody; no exceptions

some form of direct taxation increase is needed for sure, looking at how this can be acheived is much harder than blanket tax rates etc. Widening the tax bands even slightly to include more workers could help, sure something like 34% of the popualation pay no tax at all!

Tripmann

On the maggie tatcher thing. She actually destroyed more of britains manufacturing industry than hitler managed to during WWII. Fact.

thebman wrote: »

Some businesses have not cut costs yet but they are on the way, make no mistake about that. Once private sector employers see there are more employees than jobs and that the cost of living has gone down, they will reduce pay for their workers.

The mockery IBEC made of the talks process and the smugness of turlough o sullivan is disgusting. They were part of the same process, yet go off scott free in the end. Its blindly obvious, given the lateness of presenting the pensions proposals to ICTU, that IBEC and the government were in bed before the process began. We witnessed a fortnight long PR exercise.

OhNoYouDidn't

P. Breathnach wrote: »

If we excluded idiots from boards.ie then there would be very little traffic. How, then, might we waste our time?

How true. But it is galling.

Dotsie~tmp

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

A very resonable post (for D7 vermin ) from someone down 500 lids a month gets this:



There really should be a ban on those who are too young to work lecturing the rest of us like that.

28yr. Electrical contacting business owner.

Tripmann

Dotsie~tmp wrote: »

28yr. Electrical contacting business owner.

Really? I though from your incredibly intelligent and well informed post you were an economist of at least 40 years.......

Dotsie~tmp

Tripmann wrote: »

Really? I though from your incredibly intelligent and well informed post you were an economist of at least 40 years.......

You dont need to be an economist of 40yrs to know you cant spend more than you take in.

Dr Galen

this be the politics forum people, save the inane childish slagging for AH

Tripmann

Dotsie~tmp wrote: »

You dont need to be an economist of 40yrs to know you cant spend more than you take in.

You also don't need to be one to know taking money from people who have to spend it to survive will not stimulate the economy.

Public servants are looking for fairness in solving the problem, nothing more. That everyone contributes an equal percentage of what they can afford to solve the crisis.

The people who can most afford it have been asked to make no additional sacrifices, meanwhile teachers, nurses and other normally waged public servants have been told to give €40-60 per week of the pittence they have left after they pay for accomodation, bills, food, clothing, transport etc. to solve the problem.

Mr.Micro

There are advantages to working in the public sector and private sector. When times are good the private sector can be very lucrative and rewarding, in bad times like now it is dog eat dog. The former on the otherhand is steady, secure mostly and reliable. One makes a choice.

OhNoYouDidn't

Mr.Micro wrote: »

There are advantages to working in the public sector and private sector. When times are good the private sector can be very lucrative and rewarding, in bad times like now it is dog eat dog. The former on the otherhand is steady, secure mostly and reliable. One makes a choice.

Nail on head. What bit of the above are people struggling with? Public servants earn less because they are (well, were up until yesterday) 'recession proof'.

thebman

Tripmann wrote: »

On the maggie tatcher thing. She actually destroyed more of britains manufacturing industry than hitler managed to during WWII. Fact.

The mockery IBEC made of the talks process and the smugness of turlough o sullivan is disgusting. They were part of the same process, yet go off scott free in the end. Its blindly obvious, given the lateness of presenting the pensions proposals to ICTU, that IBEC and the government were in bed before the process began. We witnessed a fortnight long PR exercise.

I agree to a certain extent. I listened to IBEC representatives on the last word a few times and they sound very smug and condescending and just fooking lying at times as some companies are doing fine and don't seem to be affected and I god damn wish I worked for one of them I might add :P

We can't afford to have the majority of the private sector going to wall either though.

I think cuts are needed in the public sector spending but we should be working towards keeping as many people working as possible in both sectors obviously and that pay cuts are better than job losses which benefit nobody in the long run (the private sector will find out that person they let go was actually doing a job and not just an expense in the budget eventually).

I think the public sector will do that. I think the private sector is favouring job losses and trying to restructure their business to make it more efficient and I think that is part of the problem we face. As well as having companies going to the wall, companies performing well are using this as a way to cut jobs. I have no problems with a company restructuring to be more efficient but we have no jobs for these people now so it is bad for the economy in general that this is happening as there are less people spending and so more retailers will go under because of company restructures than actually need to.

There are a number of problems we face really. The worse being Anglo's debt at the moment IMO since we shouldn't have to deal with it in the first place.

bohsfc

Padraig Mor wrote: »

The simple reality is that without cuts such as this (and there will be far worse to come) you will have NOTHING coming into your house per month - the govt is facing bankruptcy within the year which may mean NO pay to you, NO dole, nothing. You should be damn glad to have a job at all. It's time you and those like you quit bitching and realised how lucky you are.

BTW I will also be paying this levy and am bloody happy to do so if I keep my job (although am on contract so could go at any stage). I also recognise that public pay WILL be cut at least another 15%+ and am prepared to do my bit, despite the hardship it will cause my family. (And no, I don't support the bank bailouts.)

So as a civil/public servant do you think it is fair that we are the only ones been hit cause I don't.

I would probably accept the same size cut if it affected everyone who is a PAYE worker.

As regards your bitching remark, its not, its simple anger!

gnxx

To be honest, I listed a set of items from the top of my head. My general point, is that a set of harsh measures againsts the parties seen to have benefited from the mess would lead to greater acceptance to tax increases and cutbacks by the general population.

Specifically, I mentioned that the banks should be nationalised. The government is right -- we need a stable banking sector. I believe that the banks are a house of horrors in terms of the economy. I think that maybe in 6 months or maybe even in two years, we could see disclosures that result in Mr. IMF paying us a visit.

I think that the governent need to take control of the banking sector -- and fast. This is obviously going to require short-term capital.

I would suggest that the cost of nationalisation is offset with a bond issue that the average person can buy into. Once stablised, the banks could again be privatised -- with those would bought into the bonds benefiting.

Mystik Monkey wrote: »

interested to know why?? And if the bansks were to become nationalised then there would be no shares to buy so to speak. We as the population would de facto own the banks anyway. Maybe a public bond type of scheme is more what you mean, but sure then, i'd be be paying twice for the same thing.

bohsfc

Dotsie~tmp wrote: »

I picture you as a poster boy for whats wrong with the public service.

This country doesn't owe you a living and money doesn't grow on trees. If you aren't happy with your lot go out into the real economy and see what its like. Striking is pointless as the is nothing to gain (see no money trees).

I have no need to go out into the real economy as I have a gauranteed job for the moment. But even while it was all good out there I still chose to stay in an average paid job with no bonuses or luxeries while the private sector was creaming the boom.

On the other hand why didn't all those people in the private sector who have such a chip about us now come into the public service while the boom was on.

bohsfc

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

A very resonable post (for D7 vermin ) from someone down 500 lids a month gets this:



There really should be a ban on those who are too young to work lecturing the rest of us like that.

Must be a homeless hoop.;);)

Dr Galen

gnxx wrote: »

To be honest, I listed a set of items from the top of my head. My general point, is that a set of harsh measures againsts the parties seen to have benefited from the mess would lead to greater acceptance to tax increases and cutbacks by the general population.

Specifically, I mentioned that the banks should be nationalised. The government is right -- we need a stable banking sector. I believe that the banks are a house of horrors in terms of the economy. I think that maybe in 6 months or maybe even in two years, we could see disclosures that result in Mr. IMF paying us a visit.

I think that the governent need to take control of the banking sector -- and fast. This is obviously going to require short-term capital.

I would suggest that the cost of nationalisation is offset with a bond issue that the average person can buy into. Once stablised, the banks could again be privatised -- with those would bought into the bonds benefiting.

sorry if it seemed I was picking on you or your post. I wasn't at all. It just appeared to a decent one in amongst all the back stabbing drivel thats going on.

I agree with you on the point that the banks need to be shored up, and a bond issue type thing may be the answer, though as i pointed out it might be a hard sell, given the choice between that and the IMF :eek: i know what i'd pick

OhNoYouDidn't

bohsfc wrote: »

Must be a homeless hoop.;);)

Not anymore thanks to the public sector.....

gnxx

I'm not really sure that this does happen. Based on recent news items I would expect a lot of heads rolling at FAS, Central Bank, Financial Regulator, Dept. Of Finance etc.

Mystik Monkey wrote: »

well depending on your definition this already happens. But what really needs to happen is that the Golden Handshake culture as happened with FAS goes.

Dotsie~tmp

gnxx wrote: »

To be honest, I listed a set of items from the top of my head. My general point, is that a set of harsh measures againsts the parties seen to have benefited from the mess would lead to greater acceptance to tax increases and cutbacks by the general population.

Specifically, I mentioned that the banks should be nationalised. The government is right -- we need a stable banking sector. I believe that the banks are a house of horrors in terms of the economy. I think that maybe in 6 months or maybe even in two years, we could see disclosures that result in Mr. IMF paying us a visit.

I think that the governent need to take control of the banking sector -- and fast. This is obviously going to require short-term capital.

I would suggest that the cost of nationalisation is offset with a bond issue that the average person can buy into. Once stablised, the banks could again be privatised -- with those would bought into the bonds benefiting.

You know what happens why the IMF is called in? Their help is conditional on public services/workers/wages being slashed massively. Nobody wants that. Another €16bln is needed over the next 4 years (almost certainly more). Can anyone here in the PS who is against any PS cuts tell me where its going to come from solidly. Not through large scale job creation which wot be possible until we get our current account fixed and costs under control. And if not tel me how bankruptcy will be staved off.

bohsfc

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

Not anymore thanks to the public sector.....

Through getting a job, or the housing sector?:D

Dr Galen

gnxx wrote: »

I'm not really sure that this does happen. Based on recent news items I would expect a lot of heads rolling at FAS, Central Bank, Financial Regulator, Dept. Of Finance etc.

well you see i don't believe everything i read in the paper or hear on the news for a start. But, it does appear that there were defo some dodgey dealings going on in certain areas.

As for the financial regulator, Central Bank and Dept of Finance, whose head would you like to see roll?

While I totally agree that they dropped the ball, things like what happened at Anglo don't appear to be illegal. Don't forget we have pretty lax regulations here, so in a lot of cases you can get away with an awful lot.

I'm not defending these actions at all. I agree all things being equal a lot of dead wood needs to be shifted, but how we are actually going to acheive this is not as simple as it might first appear.

gnxx

In absolute agreement that the Gardai should lead these investigations. No more tribunals.

CAB should be freed of political interference and allowed to investigate any fraud or corruption. There are a large number of recent cases that should be investigated by the Gardai.

Any asset developed based on corruption should be seized by the CAB. This includes buildings when the planning process was tainted or even an entire business if its operation was founded on a corrupt process.

If a drug dealer said "I got the envelope from my mates because I was going through a rough patch", CAB would seize the money :-)

Mystik Monkey wrote: »

government and politicians should stay well clear of matters involving this kind of thing. we have the Gardai and the courts for that. But your idea is sound, and realistically happens anyways once a case can be made. Unfortunatley some of thses fly boys that we red about in the papers are very good at getting very close to breaking the rules/laws without actually tchnically doing that.

OhNoYouDidn't

bohsfc wrote: »

Through getting a job, or the housing sector?:D

Its all about the council accomodation. Beats getting chewed up by the private sector anyway!! :pac:

madmoe

I could not agree more!!

Tripmann

Dotsie~tmp wrote: »

You know what happens why the IMF is called in? Their help is conditional on public services/workers/wages being slashed massively. Nobody wants that. Another €16bln is needed over the next 4 years (almost certainly more). Can anyone here in the PS who is against any PS cuts tell me where its going to come from solidly.

Link please, I haven't heard of this one before. In fact, Irelands public sector has been deemed to be relatively small and represent good value for money. Controlling finances is not the same as slashing public sector jobs.

I'm PS and I don't have a problem with cuts, once they're relative and fair for EVERYONE. Direct taxation or a proportionate levy for everybody thats paying tax is a start.

truthflyer

The public sector have been ripping the rest of us off for years. Now they are crying like a bunch of spoiled brats - when they are asked to pay for their pensions. Public sector pensions are absolutely ludicrous. A retired public servant gets a pension equal to the salary of his replacement. If his replacement gets a payrise for that elusive concept called 'public sector productivity improvement' then the retired public servant will get a pension increase of the same amount. Then we have the ESB. The ESB have the highest paid employees in Europe in the sector. And how do they accomplish this, when half of them are idle-very simple - they charge the most expensive electricity in Europe. If you set up a windmill and asked to get paid for unused power, you would get a payment equal to 40% of what you get charged by the ESB - and you would have to pay a 200K "connection fee" even though you would have already been connected to the network in the first place - and even though in countries like Germany and Denmark there is none of this connection fee nonsense - to sell electricity to the grid. The system is completely rigged by vested interests in Ireland - including public sector trade unions and the interests of their careers....

Padraig Mor

bohsfc wrote: »

So as a civil/public servant do you think it is fair that we are the only ones been hit cause I don't.

I would probably accept the same size cut if it affected everyone who is a PAYE worker.

'Fair' doesn't come in to it. The govt pays our wages. It CANNOT afford to keep doing this at current rates without going bankrupt within months and then noone gets paid. It HAS NO CHOICE but to cut expenditure.

The reasoning behind a 'pension levy' on the PS also holds - public sector pensions cost the exchequer a ruddy fortune - why should we not contribute more towards it? TBH I would prefer if they had simply cut salary scales so that payments to current pensioners were also reduced - but they don't have the balls to do this....yet.

BTW have no doubt that PAYE increases for all will be on the way soon as well....

bohsfc

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

Its all about the council accomodation. Beats getting chewed up by the private sector anyway!! :pac:

Still have to get a UEFA licence for tallaght. Will it happen before the March season, I doubt it?

Anyway enough of the off topic conversation!:)

OhNoYouDidn't

bohsfc wrote: »

Still have to get a UEFA licence for tallaght. Will it happen before the March season, I doubt it?

Anyway enough of the off topic conversation!:)

No we don't.....