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

Irelands self created problem:

Options
2»

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    dresden8
    Registered Users Posts: 3,290 ✭✭✭dresden8


    murphaph wrote: »
    but no country that I know of has EVER taxed itself out of a recession.

    Have anybody ever taxed themselves out of a budget deficit?


  • Options
    #33
    Dannyboy83
    Registered Users Posts: 4,236 ✭✭✭Dannyboy83


    dresden8 wrote: »
    Have anybody ever taxed themselves out of a budget deficit?

    To the tune of €25 billion per annum, when relatively high tax rates already yield just €32 billion?

    I don't think any country has been stupid enough to try it.
    Maybe Zimbabwe.
    Not exactly a model for stability.


  • Options
    #34
    ashleey
    Registered Users Posts: 2,005 ✭✭✭ashleey


    Guess what they'll do? They'll slash capital spending to protect current. Thus, public infrastructure will fall further behind that of the scandinavian countries that were the original discussion point of this thread. Then after that doesn't work we'll end up with scandinavian tax and mexican facilities. That won't exactly favour future business and thus tax revenue. We've got to stop confusing income with wealth. The germans are wealthy, the icelanders had a high income for a while. Only wealth creates proper income as opposed to borrowed fund flows. A country's wealth is its infrastructure and its people. Currently, people are making plans to leave. Read a proposal about municipal infrastructure bonds in today's sunday business post for how to square this circle.


  • Options
    #35
    murphaph
    Registered Users Posts: 19,025 ✭✭✭✭murphaph


    ashleey wrote: »
    Guess what they'll do? They'll slash capital spending to protect current. Thus, public infrastructure will fall further behind that of the scandinavian countries that were the original discussion point of this thread. Then after that doesn't work we'll end up with scandinavian tax and mexican facilities. That won't exactly favour future business and thus tax revenue. We've got to stop confusing income with wealth. The germans are wealthy, the icelanders had a high income for a while. Only wealth creates proper income as opposed to borrowed fund flows. A country's wealth is its infrastructure and its people. Currently, people are making plans to leave. Read a proposal about municipal infrastructure bonds in today's sunday business post for how to square this circle.
    Top post. The public sector would happily see capital spending cut to zero so long as their pay was maintained. They couldn't give a toss if we fall further behind the rest of Europe, and believe me, Ireland lags waaaaay behind in almost every infrastructural area.


  • Options
    #36
    irish_bob
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,271 ✭✭✭irish_bob


    ashleey wrote: »
    Guess what they'll do? They'll slash capital spending to protect current. Thus, public infrastructure will fall further behind that of the scandinavian countries that were the original discussion point of this thread. Then after that doesn't work we'll end up with scandinavian tax and mexican facilities. That won't exactly favour future business and thus tax revenue. We've got to stop confusing income with wealth. The germans are wealthy, the icelanders had a high income for a while. Only wealth creates proper income as opposed to borrowed fund flows. A country's wealth is its infrastructure and its people. Currently, people are making plans to leave. Read a proposal about municipal infrastructure bonds in today's sunday business post for how to square this circle.

    tom parlon said one correct thing in his life , cutting infrastructural spending is not a good idea during a rescession , 1st off all , we need that infrastructure when the economy recovers and secondly , thier is huge competition for such projects at the moment , think of it as getting a tradesman at a knock down price


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    ashleey
    Registered Users Posts: 2,005 ✭✭✭ashleey


    Thanks for the compliment. Anyway, the post is what's so painful about reading the posts of the 'ff are finally showing some guts and are taking the hard choices' brigade. The hard choices involve saying no to the golden circles, exposing corruption and grabbing what they can from this group. Then make a commitment to education not teacher's salaries and infrastructure not paying off landowners. That same sbp article describes how the luas cost more than a mission to Mars and it has been stated before that Nama requires greater funding than Nasa. Some look to the solar system, we look to boggy fields in Roscommon. No disrespect intended.


  • Options
    #38
    DanSolo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 127 ✭✭DanSolo


    murphaph wrote: »
    Ireland manufactures stuff for (mostly) foreign owned companies. That's what they do in China for peanuts. why should the Irish get so much for it? Hint: companies are pulling out faster than you can say "high cost of doing business" so it's clearly not sustainable.
    But this has been the situation for years. We obviously have something these companies want or they wouldn't be here. As far as I can see the factories closing around Ireland aren't transferring their production, they just don't have a market for their products at all any more.


  • Options
    #39
    Liam Byrne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,163 ✭✭✭✭Liam Byrne


    irish_bob wrote: »
    tom parlon said one correct thing in his life , cutting infrastructural spending is not a good idea during a rescession

    Was that before or after he got his vested interest position related the construction companies that would be involved in said-same infrastructure projects ?

    That's the problem with Ireland....there is no "collective/greater good"......just vested interests and agendas all the way....


  • Options
    #40
    Absurdum
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,445 ✭✭✭Absurdum


    Liam Byrne wrote: »
    That's the problem with Ireland....there is no "collective/greater good"......just vested interests and agendas all the way....


    ...and idiots who keep on electing 'em (Parlon excluded!)


  • Options
    #41
    NewDubliner
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,615 ✭✭✭NewDubliner


    Liam Byrne wrote: »
    Was that before or after he got his vested interest position related the construction companies that would be involved in said-same infrastructure projects ?
    Yep and after he oversaw the squandering of 300m on an unnecessary 'decentralsation' program that's screwed up the public service and will it make very difficult to redeploy staff to meet changing needs.

    His expertese (or close relationship) with the major developers must have helped him get his job at the CIF after the voters dropped him.

    You can't keep a 'good man' down, it seems.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    thebman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,012 ✭✭✭✭thebman


    DanSolo wrote: »
    But this has been the situation for years. We obviously have something these companies want or they wouldn't be here. As far as I can see the factories closing around Ireland aren't transferring their production, they just don't have a market for their products at all any more.

    Dell clearly had another market and just built a facility in Poland where they could pay workers less.

    I imagine the same is true for other businesses that pulled out of the country.

    We have to compete with other countries at least in the EU for wages and infrastructure or we will be seen as a poor place to invest.


  • Options
    #43
    NewDubliner
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,615 ✭✭✭NewDubliner


    Dannyboy83 wrote: »
    To the tune of €25 billion per annum, when relatively high tax rates already yield just €32 billion?
    Relative to what? Iriish effective tax rates are lower than other European countries and just 11% of the population are on the 41% rate and half of all income earners don't pay any income tax at all. Jacking up taxes across the board is not the only option. Broadening the tax base and spreading the contribution more evenly is possible.

    If we're going to tear up employment contracts with agreed rates of pay, then we can be bold enough to renege on tax breaks given during better times.


  • Options
    #44
    irish_bob
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,271 ✭✭✭irish_bob


    Liam Byrne wrote: »
    Was that before or after he got his vested interest position related the construction companies that would be involved in said-same infrastructure projects ?

    That's the problem with Ireland....there is no "collective/greater good"......just vested interests and agendas all the way....

    if you look past the messenger , would you agree with the message ??


  • Options
    #45
    NewDubliner
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,615 ✭✭✭NewDubliner


    irish_bob wrote: »
    if you look past the messenger , would you agree with the message ??
    You mean "lets's build our way out of recession?"

    Why not let the private sector supply the capital to build the roads, buy the land from the state (or rent it), and they can recoup the cost from road users?


  • Options
    #46
    ashleey
    Registered Users Posts: 2,005 ✭✭✭ashleey


    I would rather put my savings into a muni' bond than a bank deposit. That way i get a return, the roads get financed and people get jobs to do it. The only problem is the banks are desperate for deposits and because of nama and recapitalisations the govt. has placed us in the position where we can't afford for them to fail.


  • Options
    #47
    Liam Byrne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,163 ✭✭✭✭Liam Byrne


    irish_bob wrote: »
    if you look past the messenger , would you agree with the message ??

    Partially, but as has been pointed out his record to date is poor, at best.

    Also, lots of the infrastructure has been developed in a way that the country loses (e.g. the M50 buyout and the Limerick bypass being tolled); and while I recognise the costs involved are an issue, the fact that the Jack Lynch Tunnel in Cork is free and doing it's job proves that it CAN be done.

    If FF had let commercial inevitability handle the Anglo Fiasco, and hadn't sold Eircom's "last mile", and hadn't sold the oil so cheaply, but had invested in those for the good of the country..

    Yes, all those would have cost money, but taken in the context of throwing away €54 billion, whereby we'd have been sorted for the future, it would have been the FAR more sensible option.

    But typically, FF were only looking as far as the next election....ZERO interest in the future of the country.


  • Options
    #48
    DanSolo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 127 ✭✭DanSolo


    NewDubliner wrote: »
    If we're going to tear up employment contracts with agreed rates of pay
    Another reason to go with increasing taxes rather than cutting PS pay. No contracts need changing (hence no legal problems)


  • Options
    #49
    Liam Byrne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,163 ✭✭✭✭Liam Byrne


    DanSolo wrote: »
    Another reason to go with increasing taxes rather than cutting PS pay. No contracts need changing (hence no legal problems)

    The whole contracts thing DOES need to be looked at, though; we've had FAS heads and "regulators" who blatantly didn't do their jobs and should have been fired outright (or at least, if they were in a commercial / private sector job, would have been) and still got more money than most people will see in their lifetime.

    This has GOT to change.


  • Options
    #50
    nesf
    Registered Users Posts: 27,645 ✭✭✭✭nesf


    Liam Byrne wrote: »
    Was that before or after he got his vested interest position related the construction companies that would be involved in said-same infrastructure projects ?

    Well, he's right we need to try and maintain some infrastructure spending during a recession. Of course we should also use the recession to aggressively drive down the prices being charged by contractors for doing such work.


  • Options
    #51
    NewDubliner
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,615 ✭✭✭NewDubliner


    nesf wrote: »
    Well, he's right we need to try and maintain some infrastructure spending during a recession. Of course we should also use the recession to aggressively drive down the prices being charged by contractors for doing such work.
    Why should we take the risk at all? We'd have to borrow money, manage the contracts, deal with local interests, try not to get ripped off by cost over-runs. Then, there'd be an outcry if the government tolled it.

    If it's a good business proposition, let the private sector build it.

    The state should get out of the road-building business.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    MaceFace
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,697 ✭✭✭MaceFace


    NewDubliner wrote: »
    Why should we take the risk at all? We'd have to borrow money, manage the contracts, deal with local interests, try not to get ripped off by cost over-runs. Then, there'd be an outcry if the government tolled it.

    If it's a good business proposition, let the private sector build it.

    The state should get out of the road-building business.

    Why would the private sector build a road (unless they own it and toll it accordingly).
    I can just imagine - drive onto road A, stop, pay a toll, take a right, stop pay a toll, stop at some lights, stop pay a toll to continue to the new road.

    Sounds lovely.


  • Options
    #53
    Danno
    Registered Users Posts: 8,913 ✭✭✭Danno


    Who has the money to pay these tolls?


  • Options
    #54
    thebman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,012 ✭✭✭✭thebman


    MaceFace wrote: »
    Why would the private sector build a road (unless they own it and toll it accordingly).
    I can just imagine - drive onto road A, stop, pay a toll, take a right, stop pay a toll, stop at some lights, stop pay a toll to continue to the new road.

    Sounds lovely.

    I agree.

    Private roads just don't work. You can't have competition so its a monopoly. Are we going to regulate it? Its worked out well for us in the past :pac:


  • Options
    #55
    NewDubliner
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,615 ✭✭✭NewDubliner


    Danno wrote: »
    Who has the money to pay these tolls?
    Who has the money to build those roads?


  • Options
    #56
    Diarmuid
    Registered Users Posts: 3,981 ✭✭✭Diarmuid


    thebman wrote: »
    Private roads just don't work.
    You'd better tell the French that it's not working for them.


  • Options
    #57
    thebman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,012 ✭✭✭✭thebman


    Diarmuid wrote: »
    You'd better tell the French that it's not working for them.

    :rolleyes: That isn't all I posted.


Advertisement