Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Some Questions for The Public Sector Bashers

Options
12467…10

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    drkpower
    Registered Users Posts: 5,475 ✭✭✭drkpower


    Remarkable how so many idiots from both sides continue to discuss this issue as if its a competition as to who should suffer more pain, or who deserves it, or whose fault it is.....

    Its well past that. Yet ye all squabble like schoolchildren... Ah well.


  • Options
    #93
    diverdriver
    Closed Accounts Posts: 987 ✭✭✭diverdriver


    I kind of knew, even putting in big red letters wouldn't get the message across. Dresden persists in comparing private sector conditions as if that had any relevancy at all. There is only one employer for the PS. There are thousands in the private sector. They make their money in any number of ways. The PS runs entirely on tax revenue provided by the private sector. Tax revenue is down. Something has to give. It really is as simple at that.

    I'm not really sure why people cannot take that in? I know why the unions act like they're stupid and pretend there is some airy fairy solution other than pay cuts. But the average person cannot fail to have noticed that it's all gone wrong. Even Dresden?


  • Options
    #94
    diverdriver
    Closed Accounts Posts: 987 ✭✭✭diverdriver


    Plenty of full time temporary staff have been laid off.
    No full time permanent staff have been laid off, none zero, zilch. People on temporary contracts are just that; temporary.


    Sections of the well paid in the public sector might have to give up some of their massive wages (100K and over), but so too should those in the private sector earning similar sums.
    Why? That is typical Irish begrudgery. No one has any business telling a private company what they can or cannot pay their staff. All their profits come from earnings not taxation. If I own a company, I can pay my staff anything I want to if I think they are worth it to my company and if I can afford it. In many cases high earners make more money for the company than they cost. Plus if you don't pay the going rate. They will leave and go to your rival.

    Restricting salaries in private companies not in receipt of public is basically Communism. We really don't want that.:eek:


  • Options
    #95
    dresden8
    Registered Users Posts: 3,290 ✭✭✭dresden8


    diverdriver wrote: »
    Dresden persists in comparing private sector conditions as if that had any relevancy at all.

    I think you'll find there's quite a bit of comparison of public and private sector pay and conditions and I think you'll find I didn't start it.

    Comparisons are trotted out until they are countered and then suddenly it's irrelevant.

    Carry on.


  • Options
    #96
    gerry28
    Closed Accounts Posts: 438 ✭✭gerry28


    diverdriver wrote: »
    No full time permanent staff have been laid off, none zero, zilch. People on temporary contracts are just that; temporary.

    Alot of these people were in permanent positions and would have been made permanent in their 4th year.
    diverdriver wrote: »
    Why? That is typical Irish begrudgery. No one has any business telling a private company what they can or cannot pay their staff. All their profits come from earnings not taxation. If I own a company, I can pay my staff anything I want to if I think they are worth it to my company and if I can afford it. In many cases high earners make more money for the company than they cost. Plus if you don't pay the going rate. They will leave and go to your rival.

    A higher rate of tax would do the trick for both sectors then at the higher pay levels.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    NewDubliner
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,615 ✭✭✭NewDubliner


    diverdriver wrote: »
    No full time permanent staff have been laid off, none zero, zilch. People on temporary contracts are just that; temporary.
    Recurring contracts not renewed? Non replacement of permanent staff who leave? The imminent redundancy of hundreds of staff from the state-owned Anglo-Irish bank? Up to 1,000 more permanent due to leave and not be replaced? It might be a lot less than the loss of unnecessary private sector workers, but it's not zilch.
    diverdriver wrote: »
    Why? That is typical Irish begrudgery. No one has any business telling a private company what they can or cannot pay their staff.
    Where do these earnings come from? The public? Unless you're exporting 100%, we pay your wages.
    diverdriver wrote: »
    Restricting salaries in private companies not in receipt of public is basically Communism. We really don't want that.:eek:
    So is state ownership/control of the banks and property market.


  • Options
    #98
    wicklowmale
    Closed Accounts Posts: 45 ✭wicklowmale


    It looks like the government don't have the balls after all.

    The indo had an article saying the government were looking at reform, if the unions can come up with proposals. How much bull**** do we have to take?

    They also stated taxes may be increased for some ppl.

    Here we are again, the government are afraid to stand up to the unions. The private sector continue to suffer and the PS get away with it again.

    Do you not think it time for the common people to stand up, united and protest about the PS?

    Alas i know this will not happy as the irish ppl will take it as always, i have a friend who is a friend with a well known wicklow politician said 'the irish ppl will complain for a while but eventually they will accept it'.

    How much more are we going to take?


  • Options
    #99
    SkepticOne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,718 ✭✭✭SkepticOne


    NewDubliner wrote: »
    The imminent redundancy of hundreds of staff from the state-owned Anglo-Irish bank?
    I'm not sure I would count this since Anglo has only recently been taken over by the state. It is really a private sector failure.
    Up to 1,000 more permanent due to leave and not be replaced?
    Not really comparable to forced redundancies as have been happening in the private sector.


  • Options
    #100
    NewDubliner
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,615 ✭✭✭NewDubliner


    SkepticOne wrote: »
    I'm not sure I would count this since Anglo has only recently been taken over by the state. It is really a private sector failure.
    It's part of the public sector numbers.
    SkepticOne wrote: »
    Not really comparable to forced redundancies as have been happening in the private sector.
    So, coercive lay-offs are better for the economy than voluntary ones? BTW part of the T&Cs of the PS voluntary layoffs are that the workers cannot be re-employed in any part of the PS, thus removing them from any competition with other unemployed people.


  • Options
    #101
    imme
    Registered Users Posts: 3,200 ✭✭✭imme


    ei.sdraob wrote: »
    one thing that the public sector people here need to be pointed out


    your salaries are paid by taxation on the private sector and the productivity of this sector


    yes yee pay taxes but it all goes back into paying yee in the end

    keep that in mind when yee speak of "entitlement"'s
    people in the PS also pay tax, prsi, dirt tax, vat etc etc etc


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    stereo_steve
    Registered Users Posts: 1,226 ✭✭✭stereo_steve


    Its not really tax that you have contributed to the system. I, as a private sector worker pay tax, which pays PS wages. Which then is used to again by you to pay tax.

    Can you not see that you are a net loss to the system? You earn 30k (lets say) and pay 5k in tax. In reality you earn 25k.

    Its not a PS attack, just the way it is.


  • Options
    #103
    irish_bob
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,271 ✭✭✭irish_bob


    wicklowmale wrote: »
    It looks like the government don't have the balls after all.

    The indo had an article saying the government were looking at reform, if the unions can come up with proposals. How much bull**** do we have to take?

    They also stated taxes may be increased for some ppl.

    Here we are again, the government are afraid to stand up to the unions. The private sector continue to suffer and the PS get away with it again.

    Do you not think it time for the common people to stand up, united and protest about the PS?

    Alas i know this will not happy as the irish ppl will take it as always, i have a friend who is a friend with a well known wicklow politician said 'the irish ppl will complain for a while but eventually they will accept it'.

    How much more are we going to take?


    only one thing needs to happen ,a political party called fine gael need to wake the **** up and realise that they will reap a harvest of private sector voters and unemployed voters if they go all out and pitch to theese demographics , they need to declare all out war on the unions so as to show theese groups who have no voice that they mean business but 1st they must ditch enda kenny as leader


  • Options
    #104
    P. Breathnach
    Registered Users Posts: 12,089 ✭✭✭✭P. Breathnach


    kaymin wrote: »
    All tax revenue is ultimately derived from the private sector since the public sector doesn't produce anything...

    If we introduced fees for all education, for all medical services, for water and for sewage disposal, for admission to libraries and museums, and many other things, then we could then have a situation where the public service was deemed to be productive. Because so much of what is provided by the public service is free at the point of consumption, some people regard it as non-productive.


  • Options
    #105
    imme
    Registered Users Posts: 3,200 ✭✭✭imme


    stereo_steve wrote: »
    Its not really tax that you have contributed to the system. I, as a private sector worker pay tax, which pays PS wages. Which then is used to again by you to pay tax.

    Can you not see that you are a net loss to the system? You earn 30k (lets say) and pay 5k in tax. In reality you earn 25k.

    Its not a PS attack, just the way it is.
    true enough. as well PS workers spend in the Irish economy thereby supporting the service sector etc


  • Options
    #106
    dresden8
    Registered Users Posts: 3,290 ✭✭✭dresden8


    P. Breathnach wrote: »
    If we introduced fees for all education, for all medical services, for water and for sewage disposal, for admission to libraries and museums, and many other things, then we could then have a situation where the public service was deemed to be productive. Because so much of what is provided by the public service is free at the point of consumption, some people regard it as non-productive.

    It's all coming, then we'll be the most productive sector. Oh, the joy.


  • Options
    #107
    SkepticOne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,718 ✭✭✭SkepticOne


    P. Breathnach wrote: »
    If we introduced fees for all education, for all medical services, for water and for sewage disposal, for admission to libraries and museums, and many other things, then we could then have a situation where the public service was deemed to be productive. Because so much of what is provided by the public service is free at the point of consumption, some people regard it as non-productive.
    Merely substituting fees for taxes does not make an organisation more productive. It is what is produced or output for those fees or taxes that make it productive, hence the term productivity.


  • Options
    #108
    NewDubliner
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,615 ✭✭✭NewDubliner


    stereo_steve wrote: »
    Can you not see that you are a net loss to the system?
    Only if the person does not contribute something to the wellbeing of others.


  • Options
    #109
    SkepticOne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,718 ✭✭✭SkepticOne


    NewDubliner wrote: »
    It's part of the public sector numbers.
    Anglo had failed as a business prior to nationalisation. Anyone due to be laid off would have been anyway had the bank not been nationalised.
    So, coercive lay-offs are better for the economy than voluntary ones? BTW part of the T&Cs of the PS voluntary layoffs are that the workers cannot be re-employed in any part of the PS, thus removing them from any competition with other unemployed people.
    Still not comparable to the hardship of compulsory redundancy that many are facing in the private sector yet relatively few in the public sector.


  • Options
    #110
    P. Breathnach
    Registered Users Posts: 12,089 ✭✭✭✭P. Breathnach


    SkepticOne wrote: »
    Merely substituting fees for taxes does not make an organisation more productive. It is what is produced or output for those fees or taxes that make it productive, hence the term productivity.

    And giving a service for free (because it is public policy to give it) does not mean that the organisation providing that service is unproductive.


  • Options
    #111
    ei.sdraob
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭ei.sdraob


    imme wrote: »
    people in the PS also pay tax, prsi, dirt tax, vat etc etc etc

    ffs :rolleyes:

    and where do them taxes end up again ?

    you are paying taxes on money that was raised by taxation in first place

    are the PS really so blind?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #112
    Omar comin
    Registered Users Posts: 18 ✭Omar comin


    "Why did you not try and get a job in the Irish Public Sector during the boom and when they were recruiting quite a lot?"

    I should have. I hadnt realized what a gravy train it was.


  • Options
    #113
    SkepticOne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,718 ✭✭✭SkepticOne


    P. Breathnach wrote: »
    And giving a service for free (because it is public policy to give it) does not mean that the organisation providing that service is unproductive.
    By free I presume you mean paid for through taxation, i.e. not free. The answer I would give is no it doesn't make a difference how the service is paid for.


  • Options
    #114
    imme
    Registered Users Posts: 3,200 ✭✭✭imme


    ei.sdraob wrote: »
    ffs :rolleyes:

    and where do them taxes end up again ?

    you are paying taxes on money that was raised by taxation in first place

    are the PS really so blind?
    yeah I guess all PS staff need glasses.
    I was making the point that PS workers pay taxes the same as private sector workers. The tax paid by both public and private sector has the same value.

    Look, cut to the chase here, PS workers know that their pay will be cut, but aren't happy about it. That's pretty much what's going on here.


  • Options
    #115
    gerry28
    Closed Accounts Posts: 438 ✭✭gerry28


    ei.sdraob wrote: »
    ffs :rolleyes:

    and where do them taxes end up again ?

    you are paying taxes on money that was raised by taxation in first place

    are the PS really so blind?


    Yeah PS workers understand we are paid from the state but how else would you propose taxing public sector workers. We have to go through the same systems as everyone else.

    People with different circumstances pay different rates of PRSI, Tax, credits etc.

    Take two guards for example - a single male guard and a female guard married to a small business owner - you couldn't say we will pay you both €40,000 and take no account for their different circumstances.

    Private sector tax payers are not more valuable irish citizens because they generate the wealth to pay for public services.


  • Options
    #116
    P. Breathnach
    Registered Users Posts: 12,089 ✭✭✭✭P. Breathnach


    SkepticOne wrote: »
    By free I presume you mean paid for through taxation, i.e. not free. The answer I would give is no it doesn't make a difference how the service is paid for.

    I think that you do not understand what I have been saying.


  • Options
    #117
    SkepticOne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,718 ✭✭✭SkepticOne


    P. Breathnach wrote: »
    I think that you do not understand what I have been saying.
    You are right, I picked you up incorrectly. By productive you meant productive of taxes as opposed to general productivity.

    What I would say there is that if you move things away from being funded by general taxation towards a fee based model and open it up to competition, then you may get improvements in efficiency which would improve Ireland's competitive situation. It depends on the particular service in question whether competition is feasible.


  • Options
    #118
    Boskowski
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,361 ✭✭✭Boskowski


    kaymin wrote: »
    All tax revenue is ultimately derived from the private sector since the public sector doesn't produce anything.

    That's true but you can hardly hold that against them.

    I mean ultimately that's what we pay taxes for, right? So that people can be employed who will carry out tasks we all benefit from. Like fixing roads, policing, putting fires out. That's the nature of it.

    Our administrating & governing bodies job is to keep these things in balance. Like figure what services we need to function as a society/country, how much that costs and how much taxes we need to raise to pay for it. Their job also is to keep the service bodies in control because its in their nature to expand and create overheads and become less productive etc. Hardly secrets all this.

    It's not the public services fault what happened. The same way it's not the dogs fault when he empties your dustbin and spreads the rubbish all over your backgarden. He can't help it, it's in his nature.


  • Options
    #119
    imme
    Registered Users Posts: 3,200 ✭✭✭imme


    realcam wrote: »
    It's not the public services fault what happened. The same way it's not the dogs fault when he empties your dustbin and spreads the rubbish all over your backgarden. He can't help it, it's in his nature.
    are you saying the current economic situation generally is the fault of the PS?


  • Options
    #120
    Boskowski
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,361 ✭✭✭Boskowski


    imme wrote: »
    are you saying the current economic situation generally is the fault of the PS?

    Hardly. What I'm saying is that if you create a public body to provide a service by its very nature such a public body will attempt to expand and grow and become less productive and create overheads. It's in the nature of such an institution. She's like your fat, cake-eating auntie. She'd eat cake all day long if you don't watch her.

    Our governments job is to control and steer and streamline these bodies. But instead they meddle with them for various other reasons or are simply incompetent and fvck it all up even more.

    What I'm saying is - the public service is not at fault. The government is.
    Which is not the same as saying the public service doesn't need a bit of a trim.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #121
    imme
    Registered Users Posts: 3,200 ✭✭✭imme


    realcam wrote: »
    Hardly. What I'm saying is that if you create a public body to provide a service by its very nature such a public body will attempt to expand and grow and become less productive and create overheads. It's in the nature of such an institution. She's like your fat, cake-eating auntie. She'd eat cake all day long if you don't watch her.

    Our governments job is to control and steer and streamline these bodies. But instead they meddle with them for various other reasons or are simply incompetent and fvck it all up even more.

    What I'm saying is - the public service is not at fault. The government is.
    Which is not the same as saying the public service doesn't need a bit of a trim.
    you sound like you're watching too many re-runs of Yes Minister. no branch of the PS sets out to less productive, why would they?


Advertisement