The Increasingly Depressing Financial Crisis Thread

amacachi

kev9100 wrote: »

What is so wrong with that idea? The greedy caused this mess and they should bloody pay for it.

As for your second point. PU sector workers have already seen huge cuts and will probably see more too.

That money doesn't exist!

I was hoping not to go down the Public/Private thing but leaving aside overtime cuts most PS workers are getting almost the same pay as the were 2 years ago because their increments continued. It's fairly easy to check if you don't believe me as well. Once lower interest rates and the lower prices in the last few years are taken into consideration I struggle to see how so many public workers are struggling as badly as they claim to be.

challengemaster

almostnever wrote: »

If everyone can live on 50-100 euro a week, what's the issue in cutting grants?

That argument makes little sense, especially in this context.

The issue with cutting the grants is that even with the grant, you live on that much per week. Also the grant system is a complete disaster. It was feb last year before some people got their first installment.

You get 3 installments, even at the highest level its hard to make it last from one installment to the next, as you dont know when the next one is actually going to get in. It could be delayed by weeks, or months. Depends what the CoCo/VEC do and when they decide to do something.

I still haven't received my first installment, and there's a LOT of other students out there in the same boat.

Also, the grant didn't increase nearly 1/4 as much as welfare or pension did during the boom, yet its the first to be cut. And it's being cut more than either of thsoe. That's the problem.

amacachi

sock puppet wrote: »

Our top rate is effectively 47% with the income levy added on. There's the health levy as well but I don't know how much that is.

From taxcalc.eu it seems a private sector worker's effective top rate is about 50.5%

DáireM

kev9100 wrote: »

What is so wrong with that idea? The greedy caused this mess and they should bloody pay for it.

As for your second point. PU sector workers have already seen huge cuts and will probably see more too.

EVERYONE was greedy, should we tax the bollox out of Jimmy the Plumber who bought a second house to rent out when the market was bullish and is now tits up? I'm sure tax rates for high earners will rise but that alone won't solve the problem. You do realise that we're considered more likely to default on the national debt than Pakistan, right?



Public sector workers haven't seen "huge" cuts, they've seen a pay freeze and a modest enough levy. In the private sector if the company can't afford to pay you you get the sack or you take a 20% paycut. The government can't afford to pay civil servants the wage they've come to expect.

kev9100

amacachi wrote: »

Then there's how to define what a high wage earner is, I find it's generally someone who earns 10% more than than the person being asked. :pac:

I would classify a high-earner as anyone who earns more than 200,000.

amacachi wrote: »

What's the Irish rate once PRSI and the income levy etc. have been applied?


The "wealth tax" is my favorite suggestion. :pac:

I heard on the radio recently that some group was saying that the unemployed would be hardest hits by the recession and just though "Eh, I'd ****ing hope so" :pac: The whole country has to take cuts and the unemployed can only take so much so they can still survive, while the middle class can take slightly bigger cuts. Also the fact that we have a pretty big middle class means that most of the money has to come from there.

I could well be wrong, but I think its about 46%.


Why do you "****ing hope so"? I know this is a radical idea, but why don't the ones who caused the recession and who can afford it suffer most?

Fad

kev9100 wrote: »

I would classify a high-earner as anyone who earns more than 200,000.

O_O

I would consider anyone on ≥60,000 to be a high earner.....

Grindylow

Fad wrote: »

O_O

I would consider anyone on <60,000 to be a high earner.....

Agreed. €200,000 a year? I'd be a lot better off than a "high earner" if I was earning that.

Fad

Sorry about the double post....

kev9100 wrote: »

Why do you "****ing hope so"? I know this is a radical idea, but why don't the ones who caused the recession and who can afford it suffer most?

Could you explain who exactly caused the recession, because, as far as I'm concerned, bankers and developers aren't the only ones who caused it....

amacachi

kev9100 wrote: »

I would classify a high-earner as anyone who earns more than 200,000.



I could well be wrong, but I think its about 46%.

It's around 50% on earnings over ~40k, so how high exactly should it be on over 200k? And do you really think it would raise a decent amount?

Why do you "****ing hope so"? I know this is a radical idea, but why don't the ones who caused the recession and who can afford it suffer most?

Why do I hope so? Because people who aren't working should, in my insane opinion, have a far lower standard of living than those who do work.

almostnever

Fad wrote: »

Sorry about the double post....



Could you explain who exactly caused the recession, because, as far as I'm concerned, bankers and developers aren't the only ones who caused it....

I love how you're basically saying what I'm thinking, in a single sentence. It's fairly brilliant.

amacachi

Fad wrote: »

Sorry about the double post....



Could you explain who exactly caused the recession, because, as far as I'm concerned, bankers and developers aren't the only ones who caused it....

Don't bother, we were all innocents!

Pygmalion

Fad wrote: »

O_O

I would consider anyone on <60,000 to be a high earner.....

< means "less than"

Grindylow

amacachi wrote: »

Don't bother, we were all innocents!

We were all innocent?

We were the ones who supplied the demand for the housing market. We were the ones who caused the inflation of the prices. We were the ones who took out 100% loans. It all comes back to the builders and the banks, but they wouldn't have been able to supply the labour/capital if there wasn't a demand.

almostnever

Noel2k9 wrote: »

We were all innocent?

We were the ones who supplied the demand for the housing market. We were the ones who caused the inflation of the prices. We were the ones who took out 100% loans. It all comes back to the builders and the banks, but they wouldn't have been able to supply the labour/capital if there wasn't a demand.

He was being sarcastic Noel

Fad

Pygmalion wrote: »

< means "less than"

That is an excellent point...... (p_q)

I blame three hours sleep + 8 hours in work at 7 this morning.

Grindylow

almostnever wrote: »

He was being sarcastic Noel

Oh.. I feel stupids now!

Also:
I just saw this on my local radios facebook page:

There is growing speculation this evening that third level students are going to be hit hard in the forthcoming Budget.Government sources are suggesting that third level college registration fees will be substantially increased, with a doubling of fees from €1,500 to €3,000 being suggested for next year.

Speaking on tonight's RTE programme, 'The Week in Politics', the Minister for Defence Tony Killeen refused to rule out substantial increases in third level college registration fees.Asked about registration fees the Minister said 'we have a very difficult challenge. No area is exempt from consideration. The challenges are very, very difficult.'Mr Killeen said the objective of the Government was 'to concentrate on preserving the quality of our education system and I think we can do that.'

kev9100

Fad wrote: »

Could you explain who exactly caused the recession, because, as far as I'm concerned, bankers and developers aren't the only ones who caused it....

I would say it was caused by lack of proper banking regulations, a housing bubble and the idea that it was fiscally responsible to ratchet up spending while cutting taxes.

Fad

kev9100 wrote: »

I would say it was caused by lack of proper banking regulations, a housing bubble and the idea that it was fiscally responsible to ratchet up spending while cutting taxes.

I asked who, you cant make (As you have suggested) regulations, the housing bubble or an idea suffer at the moment.

jumpguy

kev9100 wrote: »

What is so wrong with that idea? The greedy caused this mess and they should bloody pay for it.

That's assuming all the rich people atm were greedy...very unlikely. Many of the rich people that were "greedy" and fuelled the stupidity that started this are no longer rich. Unless you happen to have been part of the government at the time.

We need to pull together to get out of this recession, and stop focussing on this petty "well it's them that caused it" crap, or we're never gonna emerge from this. If the government had some balls and drove some reasonable agreement with the unions (if you consider the Croke Park agreement reasonable...it seems to be a win for the unions to me) a long time ago, strikes or no strikes, we'd be in a much better position now.

The more time that's wasted procrastinating and delaying the inevitable (austerity), the larger our national debt grows and the longer we'll be in this recession, and the longer we'll suffer.

EDIT: Just seeing a report on the RTE website that a registration fee hike is expected. Oh Gooood, I feel like sending an email to Brian Lenihan with a link to this thread...

randylonghorn

crayolastereo wrote: »

Useless degrees? Running a whole course for 15 people 'Ancient and medieval history and culture'. Sure its interesting, fine, I'd say it costs a lot to run ...

Actually, it doesn't, comparatively speaking. Degrees in the humanities are by far the least costly to deliver. Engineering / science and degrees with lab components cost about twice as much, and it keeps going up the scale until you get to courses like medicine.

crayolastereo wrote: »

... and I can't imagine there are too many jobs in it. Irish Folklore is another one.

Actually, I disagree. One of the areas which we really need to reinvigorate, and where we have some chance of doing so, is tourism. We were doing well on it for a while, but priced ourselves out of the market during the "boom". Now we have loads of hotels which were built in the hubris of those years, and we need something to draw people in to use them. Our weather ain't going to do it! One thing which does have a lot of potential, and which has always been under-developed, is cultural / heritage tourism ... there is still a lot of potential there to hit the American market in particular, to fill beds in hotels, table in restaurants, and to create jobs ... probably not the most highly paid jobs, but decent enough.

Organised, high quality and reasonably priced tours; residential courses in genealogy, folklore, Irish music and dance; freelance guides linked to hotels; lots of potential to improve our services in these areas.

crayolastereo wrote: »

Wealthy countries can afford these things. I'm happier to sacrifice Irish Folklore and courses like it if it means people doing real degrees that will get you a job like French, Business, Law or Medicine won't have to pay crippling fees I can't afford.

As pointed out, there are more than enough people with business degrees already, and experience to boot, sitting at home unemployed. There are limited jobs in both law and medicine, and neither is scarce on graduates. The reality is that we're reverting to the days where Ireland's biggest export will be its educated sons and daughters. It's sad, but the reality is that it's our best hope for both these young people and for the country ... if we don't educate / equip them to emigrate, their only choice will be to sit at home drawing the dole. Plus to have any hope of encouraging inward investment we need a well-educated young population ... people have pointed out above that there is inflation in the minimum requirement for jobs, and they're right to an extent, but what they're not taking into account is that this is a worldwide (and American-led) phenomenon, and Ireland has little hope of unilaterally baulking the global trend.

challengemaster wrote: »

If I can live on €50-100 a week in college, then surely other people can too.

You do? Really? That includes your accommodation? And your clothes and transport? Or is that just for food and socialising?

Noel2k9 wrote: »

We were all innocent?

We were the ones who supplied the demand for the housing market. We were the ones who caused the inflation of the prices. We were the ones who took out 100% loans. It all comes back to the builders and the banks, but they wouldn't have been able to supply the labour/capital if there wasn't a demand.

You're right to an extent, and I was one of the "nay-sayers" during the end of the bubble in particular who kept saying that people were losing the run of themselves.

But you also have to remember that the people who were supposed to be leading and guiding this country were encouraging people to do just that. The supposedly leading economic minds in the banks. The government, ffs!! Hell, our glorious taoiseach Bertie Ahern in 2007 famously said that people who were "talking down" the economy might as well go and commit suicide!!

I think we should be very slow to forget that.

Especially at the next election.

almostnever

Did anyone see about the registration fee on RTÉ news earlier? The report featured a college lecture. When it cut to a student's view, all you could see on the laptops was facebook or solitaire. Made me lol. :pac:

Grindylow

RANDYLONGHORN FOR TD!

I'd vote for you anyway! :P

randylonghorn

Noel2k9 wrote: »

RANDYLONGHORN FOR TD!

I'd vote for you anyway! :P

Lol!!

What did I do to you to make you hate me that much, Noel?! :pac:

MavisDavis

challengemaster wrote: »

Up the reg fee so people can't pay, people can't go to university in Ireland, people emigrate. Simple enough logic. Hence the slogan, they want to educate people, not force them to emigrate.

And all class reps are told to encourage people to go. I've no idea why you wouldn't agree with something that's going to benefit everyone here. It's not about USI, it's about showing the country that students aren't the pushovers that people think we are, and we won't take this lying down. But as you said, free country and all that.

Actually, the emigration bit is a separate bit of the "protest" about graduate unemployment, which has nothing to do with upping registration fees. They shouldn't have been put together like that in the slogan - that's the point I was trying to make. Also, where exactly do you propose to go to university for less than €3,000?

I don't agree with this protest for a very simple reason: the country is in dire straits and we all have to shoulder the burden of fixing it. If that means that third level education will cost more, then so be it. Obviously this applies in a sense that those who can afford to pay more will do so. Things will have to be adjusted to cater for those who can't afford the increase.

I'm sick and tired of people saying "we need to pay to fix the country - but not me!" This isn't about not being "pushovers", it's about not letting Ireland implode.


Edit:

unknown13 wrote: »

@MavisDavis: If you are paying about 10 thousand before you start next year. I dont think you will be telling the class reps to STFU.

Where on Earth did you pull a number like €10,000 from? This is about doubling the registration fee to €3,000.

Also, with regards to asking class reps to leave me alone, I do not mean that they shouldn't have posters around UCD or send emails to people. I'm referring to particular reps who are harassing me about my decision not to go. That's all.

highlydebased

MavisDavis wrote: »

Actually, the emigration bit is a separate bit of the "protest" about graduate unemployment, which has nothing to do with upping registration fees. They shouldn't have been put together like that in the slogan - that's the point I was trying to make. Also, where exactly do you propose to go to university for less than €3,000?

I do know in Germany they pay 50 euro registration and 600 euro fees per semester.

MavisDavis

Neon-Circles wrote: »

I do know in Germany they pay 50 euro registration and 600 euro fees per semester.

Well then everyone should become fluent in German and go there then.

highlydebased

MavisDavis wrote: »

Well then everyone should become fluent in German and go there then.

Sure why not.

sock puppet

Neon-Circles wrote: »

I do know in Germany they pay 50 euro registration and 600 euro fees per semester.

You could probably count the number of students that would flock to Germany as a result of an increase in the reg fee on one hand. Other English speaking countries are the only real alternatives for Irish students.

highlydebased

sock puppet wrote: »

You could probably count the number of students that would flock to Germany as a result of an increase in the reg fee on one hand. Other English speaking countries are the only real alternatives for Irish students.

Not suggesting they should, just sayin' is all!

almostnever

In the Leaving Cert forum, someone is complaing that it might mean they've to go to the UK and apply to UCAS.

I don't wanna be the one to burst their bubble.