Lenihan: Budget cuts will impact on living standards

senordingdong

newmug wrote: »

What exactly do you expect people to spend? Do YOU have an extra 20grand to throw away on a new car or extension? Do you think guards and teachers, who are paid with borrowed money, should then go and spend that money willy nilly?

NO YOU CAN NOT! That is what got us into this mess in the first place! We're going back to a level of spending / standard of living we should have been at all along, only we're doing it all at once instead of over 20 years. The whole 90's and 2000's were a white elephant, everyone had the emperors new clothes syndrome:mad:

So, we owe 15bn. We are being forced to "repay" it through taxes and cuts. But you think that by LOWERING the repayments, that people will volunteer to make up the shortfall by buying even more crap than we did in the crazy tiger years? Did you finish school, serious question?

Alright genius, you produce a better solution.

mickydoomsux

thebigbiffo wrote: »

they've already set up NAMA to manage loans that cant be serviced by individual developers thereby freeing them up to go about their business (sort of...)

where's my NAMA so somebody can take my negative equity and bad loans and so i can get back to the business of being a citizen and spending my income in the economy.

to be fair: it's not that outlandish. i read yesterday there's a 'NAMA like scheme' in place for local authorities as well - example being they paid 5 mill for a site for social housing they can no longer afford, give it to scheme which manages said loan until it's viable to pay it back.

why not free me of my underperforming loans (ie. the mortgage as one example) until the debt can be paid back when the economy recovers. anyone give me a good explaination why there's no NAMA for joe soaps when we're (the taxpayer) effectively the ones who pay for for all these other schemes AND pay into the exchequer aswell?

Because your inability to pay back your loans won't permanently cripple the economy.

Also, NAMA stands for National Assets Management Agency. What assets do you have? The mortgaged house that the bank basically owns until you make your last payment?

gurramok

thebigbiffo wrote: »

they've already set up NAMA to manage loans that cant be serviced by individual developers thereby freeing them up to go about their business (sort of...)

where's my NAMA so somebody can take my negative equity and bad loans and so i can get back to the business of being a citizen and spending my income in the economy.

to be fair: it's not that outlandish. i read yesterday there's a 'NAMA like scheme' in place for local authorities as well - example being they paid 5 mill for a site for social housing they can no longer afford, give it to scheme which manages said loan until it's viable to pay it back.

why not free me of my underperforming loans (ie. the mortgage as one example) until the debt can be paid back when the economy recovers. anyone give me a good explaination why there's no NAMA for joe soaps when we're (the taxpayer) effectively the ones who pay for for all these other schemes AND pay into the exchequer aswell?

Without stating my fierce objection to such a proposal on moral grounds..

-Everyone will be defaulting to jump on the bandwagon
-We'd have to capitalise the banks AGAIN as they will lose more money
-We'd lose international credibility, who da feck will loan to us when the debt won't be paid back!

gurramok

PeterIanStaker wrote: »

I guarantee you these gombeen traitors are delighted that thousands will emigrate.

Correct. Emigration helps lower unemployment figures and justifies 'the economy has turned the corner' jibes. We've got past form on that, the 80's.

Rabidlamb

It may seem a bit obvious to me but why isn't there a huge clamor to cut PS pay as part of these impending cuts.

Croke Park 'will be revisited, but public pay won't be cut'
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/budget/news/croke-park-will-be-revisited-but-public-pay-wont-be-cut-2395927.html

It was revealed last week that of the total Health Service budget 70% was soaked up in pay.
Why isn't someone stating the obvious here or are we not allowed talk about it ?.
Did I miss the memo ?.
Is it OK to mention the war ?.

Prices are not going to fall if 300,000 salaries remain untouched.
Whinge all you want about your pension levy, I've been paying 5% of my salary into a private pension for the past 10 years.
My salary has been cut 25% in the past 2 years, how much has yours.
Tesco, Dunnes etc. set their prices based on the buying power of their customers.
If a large portion of bread earners still have spending money then prices wont come down anytime soon.

iMax

What they should have done with the bank bailout/nama money was to knock a percentage off everyone's mortgage (a deferment).

So if you had (for example) a €1300 a month mortgage payment, this would have brought it down to €1040 a month. This could then have been raised back to the original level over say ten years with the intermediate shortfall tacked onto the end of the mortgage.

Immediately you've got €260 a month extra money in your pocket, so you might book a holiday, buy a new TV/car, eat out more often, spend a little extra in general.

The banks still would have got their money (and more over a longer term), there would be money going back into the economy (not everyone would, but the majority would spend more) & in general, it would have been a fairer deal all round.

Hyperbullet

newmug wrote: »

So, we owe 15bn. We are being forced to "repay" it through taxes and cuts. But you think that by LOWERING the repayments, that people will volunteer to make up the shortfall by buying even more crap than we did in the crazy tiger years? Did you finish school, serious question?

You made some valid points but in all fairness what was the point of that statement?

thebigbiffo

mickydoomsux wrote: »

Because your inability to pay back your loans won't permanently cripple the economy.

Also, NAMA stands for National Assets Management Agency. What assets do you have? The mortgaged house that the bank basically owns until you make your last payment?

its still an asset, it has value, but it's 'underperforming' (not increasing but decreasing in value) as is the case with 'real' NAMA loans. i'll also point out that the banks own all the loans that NAMA currently has.

i'm not going to argue my original point - one NAMA is seriously bad enough - but your argument is invalid!

Sea Sharp

If in 2014 they've made 20bn budget cuts and the number of people working in the Public Sector is the same then we will have been better off with the IMF.

There's billions to be made by sacking unnecessary and overpaid admin.

thebigbiffo

gurramok wrote: »

Without stating my fierce objection to such a proposal on moral grounds..

-Everyone will be defaulting to jump on the bandwagon
-We'd have to capitalise the banks AGAIN as they will lose more money
-We'd lose international credibility, who da feck will loan to us when the debt won't be paid back!

ahh sure i'll keep going

firstly, the moral grounds thing is as relevant to a 'NAMA for the people' as it is to the real NAMA...

second - i'm not talking about defaulters, i'm talking about a sweeping reduction in repayments for people in negative equity (and possibly for people not in negative equity but who have lost a large portion of their income)..

yes, it would involve some re-capitalisation. but we're already up to our tits in it so whats another few bill;)

you're running actually less of a risk that the debt wont be paid back as it gives individuals room to become more financially stable - everybody would be just as liable for the loans, not even over a longer period, it's just that their loans would be sat on not by the traditional banks but by a bad bank who'll operate in a different way.

i'm only fleshing this out!:D it's been called for by people who know more than me, but it just makes a little sense...even a little ?

Amhran Nua

iMax wrote: »

Immediately you've got €260 a month extra money in your pocket, so you might book a holiday, buy a new TV/car, eat out more often, spend a little extra in general.

No, you won't, you'll stick it in the bank and save up because we're in a recession.

The whole idea of trying to use the domestic economy to shore up the sagging tax revenues is mad anyway, we're much too small a country to do that, and even continent sized countries like the US can't pull it off for long.

You can't stop people from saving, or force them to spend. Even if they did, how much of that money would just be siphoned out of the country by foreign owned chains?

If people just want to save, and they do, the government should be going hell bent for leather to encourage those savings to get into investment in domestic export based industries, tourism, anything to get money into the country from outside the country, that we don't need to repay with crippling interest. Added bonus, this will also create sustainable employment.

mickydoomsux

iMax wrote: »

Immediately you've got €260 a month extra money in your pocket, so you might book a holiday, buy a new TV/car, eat out more often, spend a little extra in general.

Or you could save it. But i forgot, the new Irish mentality is to spend every single penny you have and then even borrow money to spend every single penny you don't have. Then you turn around and blame the 'gubbermint' and 'developers' for the fact that you can't pay your mortgage on your over-priced ****box house because it's anyones fault but yours that you have zero money management skills.

thebigbiffo

thebigbiffo wrote: »

its still an asset, it has value, but it's 'underperforming' (not increasing but decreasing in value) as is the case with 'real' NAMA loans. i'll also point out that the banks own all the loans that NAMA currently has.

i'm not going to argue my original point - one NAMA is seriously bad enough - but your argument is invalid!

I don't think you understand. Loans in NAMA aren't "under performing" because the assets involved are dropping in value, they are under performing when the guy isn't able to meet the repayments on the loan. Take this with the drop in value of the asset (and I'm using the term asset loosely) and the bank can't sell to recover its losses.


Besides, all this talk of spending to get the economy going. Sure it'd help, but where does the money end up? Very little of what we buy is produced here. We might get a brief windfall in taxes/job creation and then in a few years we're in an even worse position due to the amount of interest we're paying back on our national borrowings.

average_runner

deelite wrote: »

I heard David Williams on radio other morning and he suggested to freeze all mortgages for 2 years to encourage people to start spending, which I personally think is a great idea. He explained that for every one euro that you spend the government gets approximate 20 cent out of each euro.

Yeah this was a great idea from him except he couldnt back it up with when questions asked about it. For example:

Does the interest build up over the next two years?
People on tracker mortages, would they lose them, if so it be a stupid idea.
The banks owe money to other banks for these mortages, will they let the banks off for 2 years?

How will banks make money, lets face it they need to make money to get us out of this mess

gonedrinking

Rabidlamb wrote: »

It may seem a bit obvious to me but why isn't there a huge clamor to cut PS pay as part of these impending cuts.

Croke Park 'will be revisited, but public pay won't be cut'
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/budget/news/croke-park-will-be-revisited-but-public-pay-wont-be-cut-2395927.html

It was revealed last week that of the total Health Service budget 70% was soaked up in pay.
Why isn't someone stating the obvious here or are we not allowed talk about it ?.
Did I miss the memo ?.
Is it OK to mention the war ?.

Because the government can't fight the unions, they're too powerful. If cuts were made to public sector pay the unions would have the lot of them out protesting until the government caved in.

Amhran Nua

average_runner wrote: »

How will banks make money, lets face it they need to make money to get us out of this mess

Its fair to say that we need to start looking at other alternatives to banks to get us out of this mess.

-Trek-

I'm amazed at the amount of people lubing up and willing to take this up the ***, that it has to be done. FFS they were planning on taking €1bn out of the already crippled health service. Unless they plan to make the cuts in sorting the top heavy admin problem people wont be dying on trolleys they will be dying in the car park (that you now have to pay to a park in!).
/rant

average_runner

mickydoomsux wrote: »

Or you could save it. But i forgot, the new Irish mentality is to spend every single penny you have and then even borrow money to spend every single penny you don't have. Then you turn around and blame the 'gubbermint' and 'developers' for the fact that you can't pay your mortgage on your over-priced ****box house because it's anyones fault but yours that you have zero money management skills.

Well said.

ALot of the mess is down to the ordinary people of this country for not having basic common sense for managing their own money or thinking they might have kids down the line!!

Hyperbullet

mickydoomsux wrote: »

Or you could save it. But i forgot, the new Irish mentality is to spend every single penny you have and then even borrow money to spend every single penny you don't have. Then you turn around and blame the 'gubbermint' and 'developers' for the fact that you can't pay your mortgage on your over-priced ****box house because it's anyones fault but yours that you have zero money management skills.

Simple economic theory will tell you that people spending money on goods and services is what keeps and economy moving. Taking money out of the economy and having it sitting in banks etc is not the way out. I do not condone spending beyond your means at all, however everyone suddenly saving every bit of surplus income they have is not going to get us out of this mess.

yoshytoshy

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

Besides, all this talk of spending to get the economy going. Sure it'd help, but where does the money end up? Very little of what we buy is produced here. We might get a brief windfall in taxes/job creation and then in a few years we're in an even worse position due to the amount of interest we're paying back on our national borrowings.

Spot on and thats probably the biggest reason for getting us in the mess we're in now. A lot of our income was based around borrowed money and not on homegrown talent.

Hopefully we can change all of that and move on ,forget about spending the blues away.

Name Changed

I wouldn't mind taking another hit if everyone did. But as usual, I'm guessing that the highest earners will get away with it. How I pay more tax than someone earning over ten times more than me completely baffles me.

Amhran Nua

Hyperbullet wrote: »

however everyone suddenly saving every bit of surplus income they have is not going to get us out of this mess.

Its a bit of a conundrum alright - naturally people want to save for fear of losing their jobs, but the economy needs spending to keep ticking over. The solution to this apparent paradox, as mentioned, is to encourage those savings to get into investments in export business and working to bring money into the country from abroad. After all, the cash must come from somewhere besides foreign bank loans at the end of the day, and FDI isn't close to enough.

average_runner

Hyperbullet wrote: »

Simple economic theory will tell you that people spending money on goods and services is what keeps and economy moving. Taking money out of the economy and having it sitting in banks etc is not the way out. I do not condone spending beyond your means at all, however everyone suddenly saving every bit of surplus income they have is not going to get us out of this mess.

No offence but I think alot of ordinary people have now learnt that most things in our country are over priced, people will rather save now and look for bargain before we spend. So if you want people to spend then get the retailers to drop their prices more instead of increasing them again like they have lately

Perfect example I was willing to buy a brand new car this year but the car dealers are in their own dream world when it comes into offering you trade in deals etc.

Instead will sell my old car and buy a 2010 car (the same one) in 2011 at cheaper price. In the end they lose out.

Hyperbullet

Name Changed wrote: »

I wouldn't mind taking another hit if everyone did. But as usual, I'm guessing that the highest earners will get away with it. How I pay more tax than someone earning over ten times more than me completely baffles me.

That will probably be the sad reality of it.

thebigbiffo

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

I don't think you understand. Loans in NAMA aren't "under performing" because the assets involved are dropping in value, they are under performing when the guy isn't able to meet the repayments on the loan. Take this with the drop in value of the asset (and I'm using the term asset loosely) and the bank can't sell to recover its losses.


Besides, all this talk of spending to get the economy going. Sure it'd help, but where does the money end up? Very little of what we buy is produced here. We might get a brief windfall in taxes/job creation and then in a few years we're in an even worse position due to the amount of interest we're paying back on our national borrowings.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/developers-challenge-to-nama-tests-its-power-2362713.html

just to point out that not all transfers to NAMA were from developers who couldnt pay...

but you're right and i agree with you. i just wanted to throw it out there i've heard so much about the idea but i'm not very sure.

i do think cuts are the only way to go. the croke park agreement should be ripped up for a start (as someone else pointed out, 70% of the HSE's budget goes on wages...and admin in the HSE is nothing short of a joke) but unfortunately new taxes and charges are going to further lower spending which is something that needs addressing...hence the socialist NAMA idea...

mickydoomsux

Hyperbullet wrote: »

Simple economic theory will tell you that people spending money on goods and services is what keeps and economy moving.

Indeed. But this only works if people have actual money to spend, not borrowed money that they have to pay back. They are basically making a double-loss in this situation, they lose the money by spending it and they lose more money paying it back with interest.

SeaFields

Maybe I'm mad and my little contribution will make fcuk all difference in the larger scheme of things but this Christmas (its less than two months away!) I have decided, and indeed started, to buy all my presents off small, independent Irish retailers. None of the big foreigner retailers, no online buying.

It might cost a bit more in the long run but I am spreading out my shopping due to my measly income so have started doing this already.

I suppose if everyone decided to buy even half their gifts off small Irish retailers it would make a big difference.

Mister men

No **** Lenihan. It won't impact your standard of living will it. Myself and the wife have jobs sorted in Canada for the new year so i could'nt give a ****. May return after 2020 with the kids if things improve but i doubt it. The apathy and lack of protest here againest cuts and this government made up my mind for me some time ago.

sollar

Amhran Nua wrote: »

Its fair to say that we need to start looking at other alternatives to banks to get us out of this mess.

True, and if we can create jobs and growth we will be asked to take even more and more pain in the years to come.

twinytwo

lets see them cut their own salaries first.. and cut their expenses down to 5 or 10% of what they currently are. which is what they should have been in the first place... but what cant have that. Country is going down the tube but biffo must still get is €400 bottles of wine:rolleyes: lets no forget the td's racked up millions in expenses while they were on holidays!!.. i dont even know how that works??.... TBf just like everything else the government are talking out of their asses... the budget will come and go we will get raped and 6 months down the line (assuming the country is actually still standing) they will be back with the same old story of they got their sums wrong and tax revenue wasnt what they thought etc etc.

Amhran Nua

Amhran Nua wrote: »

No, you won't, you'll stick it in the bank and save up because we're in a recession.

The whole idea of trying to use the domestic economy to shore up the sagging tax revenues is mad anyway, we're much too small a country to do that, and even continent sized countries like the US can't pull it off for long.

You can't stop people from saving, or force them to spend. Even if they did, how much of that money would just be siphoned out of the country by foreign owned chains?.

I liked the idea that austrian town had - devaluing currency. Seemed to leave them very well off.
But it was very local and all spending stayed local so I don't think it could work here.
Still, there are ways.

mikom

SeaFields wrote: »

Maybe I'm mad and my little contribution will make fcuk all difference in the larger scheme of things but this Christmas (its less than two months away!) I have decided, and indeed started, to buy all my presents off small, independent Irish retailers. None of the big foreigner retailers, no online buying.

It might cost a bit more in the long run but I am spreading out my shopping due to my measly income so have started doing this already.

I suppose if everyone decided to buy even half their gifts off small Irish retailers it would make a big difference.

You Sir, are a patriot.
I salute you.

Mister men

Mister men wrote: »

No **** Lenihan. It won't impact your standard of living will it. Myself and the wife have jobs sorted in Canada for the new year so i could'nt give a ****. May return after 2020 with the kids if things improve but i doubt it. The apathy and lack of protest here againest cuts and this government made up my mind for me some time ago.

So you're against cuts eh? Got 15 billion lying around that you're not telling us about?

Amhran Nua

bluewolf wrote: »

I liked the idea that austrian town had - devaluing currency. Seemed to leave them very well off.
But it was very local and all spending stayed local so I don't think it could work here.
Still, there are ways.

There are! The question is why the government isn't looking at them! We have a civil service pickled in its own unsackability presenting policy options to small-town solicitors, publicans, and teachers, that's why.

jessiejam

It makes me laugh how lenihan states that the budget cuts will impact on living standards, and on the news last night all the ministers were being driven into leinster house in their big fuk off 2010 Audi A6's.

It may be a start if they gave up the 60k cars and drivers for one.
They don't know the meaning of living standards.
To them it will be maybe having to let the housekeeper go.... poor pets...
GGGGGGGGGGGRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR

Saadyst

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

So you're against cuts eh? Got 15 billion lying around that you're not telling us about?

I think a key point to pick up on is in his second sentence.

jimbling

Name Changed wrote: »

I wouldn't mind taking another hit if everyone did. But as usual, I'm guessing that the highest earners will get away with it. How I pay more tax than someone earning over ten times more than me completely baffles me.

Hyperbullet wrote: »

That will probably be the sad reality of it.

That's probably because you are not paying more tax than someone earning ten times more than you.

topper75

SeaFields wrote: »

Maybe I'm mad and my little contribution will make fcuk all difference in the larger scheme of things but this Christmas (its less than two months away!) I have decided, and indeed started, to buy all my presents off small, independent Irish retailers. None of the big foreigner retailers, no online buying.

It might cost a bit more in the long run but I am spreading out my shopping due to my measly income so have started doing this already.

I suppose if everyone decided to buy even half their gifts off small Irish retailers it would make a big difference.

Bloody good post there. If we were all willing to pay small premiums to buy home-produced stuff, whilst sellers were as reasonable as possible with their margins, we could build an economy worth talking about. Are we willing to take the long view though as a nation?

Alternatively we could continue on our merry way to shop in Tesco and Riverisland and wondering why nothing is budging on the job websites.

Amhran Nua

topper75 wrote: »

Bloody good post there. If we were all willing to pay small premiums to buy home-produced stuff, whilst sellers were as reasonable as possible with their margins, we could build an economy worth talking about.

No, we couldn't. If we can convince people in other countries to buy our stuff, then we could. And it shouldn't be that tough to do.

Saadyst

mikom wrote: »

You Sir, are a patriot.
I salute you.

While it's a nice sentiment and perhaps patriotic, it doesn't have to be idiotic; don't "buy Irish" if you're going to get fleeced. Get the best deal for YOUR money, whether it's here, or somewhere else.

There's no point propping up things which just shouldn't work. One way or another, this country will have to become more competitive. No-one goes on holiday to Ireland and then thinks to themselves, "Wow, that place was really cheap, had a dinner for 4 and a few bottles of wine for €100!". You can go to a nice sunny town in Spain and get that - and we do come back and think that to ourselves when we're on holiday.

So don't buy it just because it's Irish - buy it because it's good value for what you are looking for.

mikom

topper75 wrote: »

Bloody good post there. If we were all willing to pay small premiums to buy home-produced stuff, whilst sellers were as reasonable as possible with their margins, we could build an economy worth talking about. Are we willing to take the long view though as a nation?

Alternatively we could continue on our merry way to shop in Tesco and Riverisland and wondering why nothing is budging on the job websites.

You see that Panasonic DVD player in Tesco.
You see that Panasonic DVD player in Paddys corner store.

Paddys DVD player was not put together by elves in the back room of the shop.

mikom

Saadyst wrote: »

While it's a nice sentiment and perhaps patriotic, it doesn't have to be idiotic;

I wasn't being serious.

Tora Bora

Would somebody please explain the term "reduction in standard of living", to me

Apparently the last 2 budgets reduced out standard of living, but to be honest with you I have'nt noticed one way or the other.
Ok, I'm losing a few euros in extra tax and levies, BUT a lot of things have come down in cost.
I sometimes get the feeling that reduced standard of living to the media etc, means can't have 2 holidays a year, cant have week ends away, cant have designer clothes, cant' have gizmos, cant's have all that useless bullsh1t!!!!!!!!!!!
Surely that is not a reduction in standard of living:P

Saadyst

Tora Bora wrote: »

Would somebody please explain the term "reduction in standard of living", to me

Apparently the last 2 budgets reduced out standard of living, but to be honest with you I have'nt noticed one way or the other.
Ok, I'm losing a few euros in extra tax and levies, BUT a lot of things have come down in cost.
I sometimes get the feeling that reduced standard of living to the media etc, means can't have 2 holidays a year, cant have week ends away, cant have designer clothes, cant' have gizmos, cant's have all that useless bullsh1t!!!!!!!!!!!
Surely that is not a reduction in standard of living:P

Yeah but if there are cuts made to the HSE, cuts in third level fees, cuts to benefits, cuts to tax breaks, increased tax on various types of items... overall, that's a reduction in standard in living

OctavarIan

mikom wrote: »

You see that Panasonic DVD player in Tesco.
You see that Panasonic DVD player in Paddys corner store.

Paddys DVD player was not put together by elves in the back room of the shop.

He was probably alluding more to food and textiles, but I'm sure you knew that.

mickydoomsux

Saadyst wrote: »

So don't buy it just because it's Irish - buy it because it's good value for what you are looking for.

Precisely. Why should you prop up an unsustainable business just because it's Irish?

As for the guy that said that River Island and Tesco don't create employment, i hadn't realised they shipped in their own staff from the UK along with the brand name :rolleyes:

newmug

senordingdong wrote: »

Alright genius, you produce a better solution.

Ok.

1)Pay off what we owe.

2)The quicker its done, the less interest we'll have to pay, the quicker we stop our economy hemorrhaging.

3)Do the hardest work first. Say spread it over 4 years. To ensure we dont smother the economy long term, do half in year 1, a bit less in year 2 etc. So 7 bn year 1, 5 bn year 2, 2 bn year 3, 1 bn year 4.



Oh wait, that looks very familiar:rolleyes:

Trekmad wrote: »

I'm amazed at the amount of people lubing up and willing to take this up the ***, that it has to be done. FFS they were planning on taking €1bn out of the already crippled health service. Unless they plan to make the cuts in sorting the top heavy admin problem people wont be dying on trolleys they will be dying in the car park (that you now have to pay to a park in!).
/rant

People are bending over cos they realise we have to do this. I agree cuts should be implemented wisely, but the bottom line is they have to be implemented. It that or we'll just have to get the sisters of charity to run the hospitals again.

Hyperbullet wrote: »

Simple economic theory will tell you that people spending money on goods and services is what keeps and economy moving. Taking money out of the economy and having it sitting in banks etc is not the way out. I do not condone spending beyond your means at all, however everyone suddenly saving every bit of surplus income they have is not going to get us out of this mess.

Well buddy, thats exactly what we're doing, to the tune of 15 BILLION! To get to a point where your "economic theory" works, we have to square things up first, THEN we can spend money in a self-perpetuating way. You are right about people hoarding not being a good thing, thats why we are being forced to cough up, through taxes. If the "lower VAT an encourage people to spend" idea was implemented, people just wouldnt! They'd save their little extra even harder! So no money to pay off our debts, AND no benefit to the economy. Its a lose/lose situation. At least with the current plan, everybody is being forced to help wipe out our debt.


If there's one thing I hate, its me feiners. "Oh dont raise my taxes, raise someone elses. Dont lower my dole, cut public spending. Dont remove my respite care, close a hospital in the West". We're all in this together, we all have to bear some of the pain.

mikom

OctavarIan wrote: »

He was probably alluding more to food and textiles, but I'm sure you knew that.

Well it was a follow on from Seafields post on Christmas gifts http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=68707320#post68707320
So as long as you are happy with a Christmas jumper and a cup cake you should be alright.

mickydoomsux

Tora Bora wrote: »

Would somebody please explain the term "reduction in standard of living", to me

Apparently the last 2 budgets reduced out standard of living, but to be honest with you I have'nt noticed one way or the other.
Ok, I'm losing a few euros in extra tax and levies, BUT a lot of things have come down in cost.
I sometimes get the feeling that reduced standard of living to the media etc, means can't have 2 holidays a year, cant have week ends away, cant have designer clothes, cant' have gizmos, cant's have all that useless bullsh1t!!!!!!!!!!!
Surely that is not a reduction in standard of living:P

Indeed. In fact i've never been as well off. Stuff costs less and i was able to afford to buy a house with a mortgage i could pay of if i ended up on the dole tomorrow morning

SeaFields

mikom wrote: »

Well it was a follow on from Seafields post on Christmas gifts http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=68707320#post68707320
So as long as you are happy with a Christmas jumper and a cup cake you should be alright.

They'll be happy with what they get or they'll get no more!

Maybe as an example so....my 5 year old nephew wants a bike for Christmas. I could go to Halfords/Argos and buy it there or I could buy it off a local bike shop I know that is there, and has been there for years. I'll be going to the latter.

I know, I know, a lot of posters saying its pointless in the wider scheme of things but I'm still going to try it.