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

Dont cut our pay, Tax everyone else instead!!!

Options
1…6781012

Comments

  • Options
    #272
    c montgomery
    Registered Users Posts: 2,122 ✭✭✭c montgomery


    dearg lady wrote: »
    yeah, just ignore everything I've written in my post and make a (not so) smart comment :rolleyes:




    up until the bank bail out the government pension fund was doing pretty well and public sector workers were funding this, the pension levy is an attempt to fill this hole.

    If you haven't bothered to provide for a pension for yourself then I can honestly say I have no sympathy for you.

    I can assure you that im not looking for it.

    The only people using the sympathy card are the public sector workers saying they they have to maintain their mortgages and provide for their families and cant affford a cut in pay. OPEN YOUR EYES, the govennmant cant afford to pay your over inflated wages any more.

    The teachers saying that they will not accept cuts in eductaion as it will negatively impact the kids when really they mean their pockets.

    Public sector unions also love this sympathy card, wheel out the frontline services who do such an important job at unsocial hours so that all the rest of the public service can hide behind them.

    Hope they cut them all to shreds!!


  • Options
    #273
    c montgomery
    Registered Users Posts: 2,122 ✭✭✭c montgomery


    dearg lady wrote: »
    yeah, just ignore everything I've written in my post and make a (not so) smart comment :rolleyes:




    up until the bank bail out the government pension fund was doing pretty well and public sector workers were funding this, the pension levy is an attempt to fill this hole.

    If you haven't bothered to provide for a pension for yourself then I can honestly say I have no sympathy for you.


    I resent both these comments.

    The first due to the fact that you inserted "not so" smart just because i disagree with you. I did not ignore what you wrote, i read it and saw the purpose of your response which was a bit of a contradiction really. First you said it was a generous pension but then you went on to justify why it was provided based on the contribution made by the worker. Why do they have to get generous pensions when the country is broke, why can they not just get modest ones??How much money do you need when your retired??Mortgage paid and kids grown up, 2/3 of your finishing wage seems a little high for an OAP.

    The second comment i disliked as you seem so out of touch with what is happening. I would love a private pension, love one.I simple cannot afford one right now. I dont want sympathy from you, but i would like a bit of empathy. The trouble with the public sector though, as with you by the way is "its all about you".


  • Options
    #274
    dearg lady
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,091 ✭✭✭dearg lady


    MaceFace wrote: »
    It most certainly was not. The pension fund is grossly under resourced and has been losing money hand over fist for the last numbert of years. Ever hear of the pension timebomb?

    The bank bail out has nothing to do with a hole in the pension fund. This is just plain wrong to suggest it has.

    When will people realise that so far there has been NO public money put into the banks. The only money that has gone in is money from Europe which the State has guaranteed. So we are liable for billions, but we have not paid a penny yet.

    And, shame on you for try and tarnish people who can not afford to pay for a private pension as someone who deserves no sympathy.
    Try come down from your lofty tower for a while and witness the real problems many people are facing on a daily basis!

    I have to disagree with what you've said, and my point was that saying you 'cannot afford' your pension is something a public service worker cannot do, tough, the money comes out either way.
    c montgomery wrote: »
    I can assure you that im not looking for it.

    The only people using the sympathy card are the public sector workers saying they they have to maintain their mortgages and provide for their families and cant affford a cut in pay. OPEN YOUR EYES, the govennmant cant afford to pay your over inflated wages any more.

    The teachers saying that they will not accept cuts in eductaion as it will negatively impact the kids when really they mean their pockets.

    Public sector unions also love this sympathy card, wheel out the frontline services who do such an important job at unsocial hours so that all the rest of the public service can hide behind them.

    Hope they cut them all to shreds!!

    If you actually read my posts you would see I am quite clear and definite in thinking that cuts in public sector wages are necessary
    c montgomery wrote: »
    I resent both these comments.

    The first due to the fact that you inserted "not so" smart just because i disagree with you. I did not ignore what you wrote, i read it and saw the purpose of your response which was a bit of a contradiction really. First you said it was a generous pension but then you went on to justify why it was provided based on the contribution made by the worker. Why do they have to get generous pensions when the country is broke, why can they not just get modest ones??How much money do you need when your retired??Mortgage paid and kids grown up, 2/3 of your finishing wage seems a little high for an OAP.

    The second comment i disliked as you seem so out of touch with what is happening. I would love a private pension, love one.I simple cannot afford one right now. I dont want sympathy from you, but i would like a bit of empathy. The trouble with the public sector though, as with you by the way is "its all about you".


    Just to be clear it was NOT an attempt to justify the pension, I was just making clear that public servants do contribute to their pensions, as it seems to be often suggested on here that they do not. I apologise for the lack of sympathy comment, that was out of line, and truthfully, I do have sympathy. I just wanted to make it clear that whether or not a public servant feels they can afford it or not, it is deducted.


  • Options
    #275
    Riskymove
    Registered Users Posts: 10,888 ✭✭✭✭Riskymove


    dearg lady wrote: »
    While I won't disagree that public servants get a very generous pension, let's just be clear, they do, and have always contributed to it. AFAIK it varies within the public service, but I think around 7% of gross salary pre pension levy and around 13-15% post pension levy. And they don't get the option of saying 'I can't afford it', it's deducted automatically.

    correct
    I believe it's been mentioned on here before also that in spite of paying the same PRSI as private workers (post 1995) public servants do not also receive the state pension once they receive a public service pension. Perhaps someone could confirm if this is correct?

    incorrect

    post-95 public servants pay Class A PRSI and therefore will get the state pension

    However, its not in addition to the PS pension, which will be deducted by the amount of the state pension

    for those people then a sizable proportion of their pension will be the state pension which they will have contributed to through PRSI (around 10%) at present

    and the rest contributed to by 13-14% at present


  • Options
    #276
    P. Breathnach
    Registered Users Posts: 12,089 ✭✭✭✭P. Breathnach


    Riskymove wrote: »
    post-95 public servants pay Class A PRSI and therefore will get the state pension

    Yes.
    However, its not in addition to the PS pension, which will be deducted by the amount of the state pension

    Yes.
    for those people then a sizable proportion of their pension will be the state pension which they will have contributed to through PRSI (around 10%) at present

    "Sizable" is an imprecise term. The Contributory Old Age Pension (COAP) for a single person is approximately €10k per annum. If a retiree's total pension entitlement is €20k, you can say that €10k is a sizable proportion; if the pension entitlement is €50k, some might not consider €10 to be a sizable proportion.
    and the rest contributed to by 13-14% at present

    Again, there is some lack of precision. The public servant contributes 6.5% of the excess of pay over twice the current rate of COAP and also pays a levy on all pay (including non-pensionable elements) which averages about 8%.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #277
    irish_bob
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,271 ✭✭✭irish_bob


    Tipp Man wrote: »
    Sorry but this is a crock of #### to be honest. Can you honestly say that in the 80's people looked down on PS jobs?? Let me see people were emigrating by the thousands becasue they couldn't find work and yet a well paid job, with a huge pension and the ultimate in job security was looked down upon?? Get real and stop talking crap

    +1

    recycled union rhetoric which doesnt stand up to an ounce of scrutiny , this isnt RTE ( excluding pat kenny ) so banner headlines and cliched soundbites dont go unchallenged

    not aimed at you tipp man btw


  • Options
    #278
    NewDubliner
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,615 ✭✭✭NewDubliner


    MaceFace wrote: »
    The bank bail out has nothing to do with a hole in the pension fund. This is just plain wrong to suggest it has.

    When will people realise that so far there has been NO public money put into the banks. The only money that has gone in is money from Europe which the State has guaranteed. So we are liable for billions, but we have not paid a penny yet.
    And what's the INVESTMENT OF THE NATIONAL PENSIONS RESERVE FUND AND MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS ACT 2009 about?


  • Options
    #279
    P. Breathnach
    Registered Users Posts: 12,089 ✭✭✭✭P. Breathnach


    NewDubliner wrote: »
    And what's the INVESTMENT OF THE NATIONAL PENSIONS RESERVE FUND AND MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS ACT 2009 about?

    Oh dear. Yet another poster troubling us with facts.


  • Options
    #280
    MaceFace
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,697 ✭✭✭MaceFace


    NewDubliner wrote: »
    And what's the INVESTMENT OF THE NATIONAL PENSIONS RESERVE FUND AND MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS ACT 2009 about?

    I am assuming this is the Act that allows the government to invest the pension fund money in the likes of NAMA etc.

    I state again, the Pension Fund in many Western countries have been in dire straights for many years and the recapitialization or banks or NAMA have not had any affect on how that fund is performing today.

    My response was directed to a statement that stated that somehow the pension fund is being negatively affected by either.

    EDIT: I stand corrected and am happy to admit my error. The recapitalization was financed out of the pension fund. However I still do not see any negative impact this has had so far. Am I wrong?


  • Options
    #281
    P. Breathnach
    Registered Users Posts: 12,089 ✭✭✭✭P. Breathnach


    MaceFace wrote: »
    I am assuming ...

    Why assume anything when you have been given a link that enables you to know something?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #282
    dodgyme
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,581 ✭✭✭dodgyme


    srvhead wrote: »
    Public Vs Private;
    Back in the late 80's early 90's one was ridiculed and looked down on for joining the civil service!!! .
    That is just simply not true. Anyone who had a job was as lucky as a black cat. I know fella's that tried to get into the PS as electricians, P&T workers etc and it was always difficult, and they would head back off to england if they werent able. Also politicians had a huge hand in who got the jobs.

    That statement is BS.
    srvhead wrote: »
    And for a long time before the benchmarking exercise, private sector wages easily outstripped public sector wages. Career choice lies in the beholder, get over it. .

    That is very debatable and hence not very valid either.
    srvhead wrote: »
    Blaming the public sector is a lame cop out! Start with the politicians, bankers, builders, and finally yourselves for paying ever increasing prices for goods and services without thought, fuelling wage increases .

    Here we go again!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The cop out of not facing facts


  • Options
    #283
    97i9y3941
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,616 ✭✭✭97i9y3941


    public sector are mad,why should there be one rule for the public sector and one rule for the private sector,taxing those private sector people again who pay for the public sector wages is just a spit in the face for them...


  • Options
    #284
    MaceFace
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,697 ✭✭✭MaceFace


    P. Breathnach wrote: »
    Why assume anything when you have been given a link that enables you to know something?

    Why read a legal contract when I have access to "experts" on the issue who are only too happy to refrain from points scoring to actually get at the heart of the issues?

    Oh wait, that was somewhere else.......


  • Options
    #285
    NewDubliner
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,615 ✭✭✭NewDubliner


    MaceFace wrote: »
    I stand corrected and am happy to admit my error. The recapitalization was financed out of the pension fund. However I still do not see any negative impact this has had so far. Am I wrong?
    The act was passed because the wise people at the NTMA which manages the NPRF wouldn't touch any Irish banks with a bargepole.


  • Options
    #286
    jetfiremuck
    Registered Users Posts: 3,467 ✭✭✭jetfiremuck


    Lets get the Gov to provide incentive to the private sector to get jobs growing ....whatever it takes in the short term to kickstart the economy. Lenihan and the rest read the same papers listen to the news as we all do. The vat rate could be lowered tomorrow creating a buzz and shutting off the shopper exodus to the north irrespective of the Uk budget. Yes it might result in revenue loss but if the recent cigarette smuggling capture is any thing to go by what about toys, alchocol, electrical goods. It would I think change the mind set with the public that things were happening.


  • Options
    #287
    srvhead
    Registered Users Posts: 171 ✭✭srvhead


    dodgyme wrote: »
    That is just simply not true. Anyone who had a job was as lucky as a black cat. I know fella's that tried to get into the PS as electricians, P&T workers etc and it was always difficult, and they would head back off to england if they werent able. Also politicians had a huge hand in who got the jobs.

    That statement is BS.



    That is very debatable and hence not very valid either.



    Here we go again!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The cop out of not facing facts


    Not BS. I did an exam and 2 interviews to get into the civil service in 1990. No pull in. On my own merit. Those exams were publicly advertised. Any Joe (including me) could have applied for them. Period. My college mates laughed at me for taking a job they were too stuck up thier own asses to take. They were making a lot more than me after, but horses for courses. As I have stated, career choice is personal choice.
    CSO data proves the pre-tiger wage differential throughout the years. Fact and very valid.


  • Options
    #288
    97i9y3941
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,616 ✭✭✭97i9y3941


    it is defo based on who you know,instance it has become public knowledge thanks to shane ross's independent report,that certain repair jobs in cie where rewarded thanks to collusion with the people who award the contracts and who they know...


  • Options
    #289
    irish_bob
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,271 ✭✭✭irish_bob


    srvhead wrote: »
    Not BS. I did an exam and 2 interviews to get into the civil service in 1990. No pull in. On my own merit. Those exams were publicly advertised. Any Joe (including me) could have applied for them. Period. My college mates laughed at me for taking a job they were too stuck up thier own asses to take. They were making a lot more than me after, but horses for courses. As I have stated, career choice is personal choice.
    CSO data proves the pre-tiger wage differential throughout the years. Fact and very valid.

    sorry but i for one do not accept as fact the union claims that ps workers took a pay cut by working for the state during the past decade , its empty rhetoric which doesnt stand up to an ounce of scrutiny

    as ive said before , the unions would have us believe that all 350,000 ps workers could have been the next founder of a GOOGLE and made millions were they to have not instead served mother ireland , its nonesense

    any guard i know had two choices this past ten years , shovell cement or pull motorists for tax , the same goes for women who became nurses or teachers , where exactly were they going to earn more in the private sector


  • Options
    #290
    srvhead
    Registered Users Posts: 171 ✭✭srvhead


    irish_bob wrote: »
    sorry but i for one do not accept as fact the union claims that ps workers took a pay cut by working for the state during the past decade , its empty rhetoric which doesnt stand up to an ounce of scrutiny

    as ive said before , the unions would have us believe that all 350,000 ps workers could have been the next founder of a GOOGLE and made millions were they to have not instead served mother ireland , its nonesense

    any guard i know had two choices this past ten years , shovell cement or pull motorists for tax , the same goes for women who became nurses or teachers , where exactly were they going to earn more in the private sector

    Not accepting fact is basically denial. I never said what unions are claiming. I am just going on CSO data that private sector wages oustripped ps wages prior to benchmarking. That is fact, not fiction.

    Why didn't you become a guard, nurse or whatever?
    I'll tell you why AGAIN. Your own choice.

    A rising tide lifts all boats.
    The tiger years boosted social welfare rates as well.
    If I was offered voluntary redundancy to cut the public pay bill, cleared my mortgage, and went on the scratcher, got medical card, fuel allowance, telephone allowance etc. would you still grumble?
    Ya cant win! Actually, theres a thought:)


  • Options
    #291
    dodgyme
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,581 ✭✭✭dodgyme


    srvhead wrote: »
    Not BS. I did an exam and 2 interviews to get into the civil service in 1990. No pull in. On my own merit. Those exams were publicly advertised. Any Joe (including me) could have applied for them. Period. My college mates laughed at me for taking a job they were too stuck up thier own asses to take. They were making a lot more than me after, but horses for courses. As I have stated, career choice is personal choice.
    CSO data proves the pre-tiger wage differential throughout the years. Fact and very valid.

    You must have some mates or are easy to wind up. I knew guys who left degree courses in uni that were hard to get into at the time to join the gardai, no one laughed at them and many thought maybe I shoud do the same. Well done at getting in without pull. Most people I know who got a job in the civil service around the late 80's early 90's had to have words, often just incase their competitors had words.

    As for pre-tiger wage differential I would say it would mainly prove the lack of a dynamic private sector in the first place.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #292
    P. Breathnach
    Registered Users Posts: 12,089 ✭✭✭✭P. Breathnach


    dodgyme wrote: »
    ... Most people I know who got a job in the civil service around the late 80's early 90's had to have words, often just incase their competitors had words...

    The Civil Service Commission doesn't work like that. It was a clean operation in the 1960s, and still has that reputation.


  • Options
    #293
    Tipp Man
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,025 ✭✭✭Tipp Man


    P. Breathnach wrote: »
    The Civil Service Commission doesn't work like that. It was a clean operation in the 1960s, and still has that reputation.

    Whatever about the civil service i'm certainly not buying it about the public service as a whole.

    A great friend of mine recently applied for a physio job in a hospital, this girl had a degree, an Irish masters, Irish work experience, UK work experience, other smaller qualificiations from time in UK, a masters from an OZ univeristy on a course which is world renowned in this particular area, and she won international student of the year whilst doing it. An A1 candidate if every there was one.

    so you'd imagine she'd be a shoe in for the job, however she lost out to a girl with 1 years post collage experience, who was way under qualified for the position. My friend was rightly stunned until she realised that the successful girl was the daughter of the county hurling manager, and guess what coincidentally on the interview panel there was a prominent County GAA official.

    Nepotisim is rife (not just in PS) in this country


  • Options
    #294
    nesf
    Registered Users Posts: 27,645 ✭✭✭✭nesf


    donegalfella wrote: »
    This post has been deleted.

    The ESRI said nothing of the sort. Go give the paper a close read.


  • Options
    #295
    nesf
    Registered Users Posts: 27,645 ✭✭✭✭nesf


    MrMicra wrote: »
    I favour aggressive reductions in the public sector pay bill (ideally through pay reductions) however the Laffer curve has been discredited.

    It hasn't. The idiotic misuse of the concept to argue that any tax cut will generate revenue has been discredited but no sane economist believed this in the first place.

    There is a point at which increasing tax reduces the total revenue generated. That's fairly uncontroversial among economists, the problem is determining what this point is is very controversial and generally can't be known until you pass it (and with cigarette taxes this might actually be the case).


  • Options
    #296
    Riskymove
    Registered Users Posts: 10,888 ✭✭✭✭Riskymove


    Tipp Man wrote: »
    Nepotisim is rife (not just in PS) in this country

    I am also aware of such things going on in hiring teachers by schools..e.g. a local getting preference over better candidates from outside the area.

    the problem is that the decision is taken locally...in the case of the civil service and other sectors, there is an independent body overseeing recruitment which stops such things happening


  • Options
    #297
    Riskymove
    Registered Users Posts: 10,888 ✭✭✭✭Riskymove


    irish_bob wrote: »
    sorry but i for one do not accept as fact the union claims that ps workers took a pay cut by working for the state during the past decade , its empty rhetoric which doesnt stand up to an ounce of scrutiny

    given your obvious contempt for public servants this view is not surprising; yet some people come out and say they took a pay cut from what they were doing in the private sector to take a public sector job for other reasons

    you can dismiss them as liers all you like if you wish
    any guard i know had two choices this past ten years , shovell cement or pull motorists for tax , the same goes for women who became nurses or teachers , where exactly were they going to earn more in the private sector

    so lets see, guards are all obviously fairly useless people whose only other option was to shovel cement....lovely

    and female teachers and nurses are all simply women who did not have the ability to do anything of note in the private sector.....charming


  • Options
    #298
    jimmmy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,539 ✭✭✭jimmmy


    irish_bob wrote: »
    any guard i know had two choices this past ten years , shovell cement or pull motorists for tax , the same goes for women who became nurses or teachers , where exactly were they going to earn more in the private sector

    True enough. I know of a school reunion and the Guard turned out the richest of the class after 30 years work out of school. This is despite he was far from being the brightest in his old school class, and he was far from the hardest working at school either. He is not a brain surgeon. Now in his early fifties he is retired with a pension pot provided by the govt ( you and me ) worth 1.3 million. He has a holiday home and a buy-to-let apartment. He has always had lots of holidays, never stressed himself, never took risks, and had a nice quiet easy working life. He spent half his working life chatting to friends + neighbours, and a lot of the rest of it looking after / shopping for his apartment he had let out etc. Many of his colleagues also have investment properties / holiday homes / modern motor-homes / yachts + boats etc. When he has another 30 years plus of life left in him, why is he retired on such a big govt puiblic sector pension ? The tax free lump sum he got on retirement from the govt itself is enough to buy another apartment down the country.
    People of his calibre in school and who had such an easy cosseted working life since, with relatively short "working" weeks, nice paid holidays + sickies etc, do not deserve to be living like millionaires - the country cannot afford it.


  • Options
    #299
    irish_bob
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,271 ✭✭✭irish_bob


    Riskymove wrote: »
    given your obvious contempt for public servants this view is not surprising; yet some people come out and say they took a pay cut from what they were doing in the private sector to take a public sector job for other reasons

    you can dismiss them as liers all you like if you wish



    so lets see, guards are all obviously fairly useless people whose only other option was to shovel cement....lovely

    and female teachers and nurses are all simply women who did not have the ability to do anything of note in the private sector.....charming



    nice way to miss the point , im sure both guards and nurse are capable of lots of things , i just dont know where in the private sector people of such abilitys would make more money

    as for those who claimed they took pay cuts by joining the state sector , they never go any further than to say that , they never say what job they left or what job in the ps they took , as i said , i for one will not simply take their word for it as i firmly believe that most in the public sector would not make more in the private sector , either now or in the past number of years


  • Options
    #300
    Riskymove
    Registered Users Posts: 10,888 ✭✭✭✭Riskymove


    irish_bob wrote: »
    i for one will not simply take their word for it as i firmly believe that most in the public sector would not make more in the private sector , either now or in the past number of years

    well I am not surprised you would think PS workers were liars given your posts to date, but I have seen more details, particularly a number who say they moved from private IT to public sector IT

    in any case I think you miss the point that some people can move from a private sector job to a public sector one in a completely unrelated industry (e.g. I know someone who left a job in a telecommunications company to become a guard and he says he lost salary to do this)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #301
    jimmmy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,539 ✭✭✭jimmmy


    Riskymove wrote: »
    I know someone who left a job in a telecommunications company to become a guard and he says he lost salary to do this

    The people I know who became Guards, while being decent enough citizens, were never brightest or anything near it during their school years, and never the hardest working at school or in subsequent life. Why should people like that in their early fifties be retired now with a pension pot provided by the govt ( you and me ) worth 1.3 million ? The tax free lump sum they get on retirement from the govt is often enough to buy another investment apartment for themselves down the country.


Advertisement