Fine Gael overall majority: our best hope

invinciblePRSTV

Rebelheart wrote: »

:rolleyes: Mar dhea. More like a rightwing one. But how predictable that all our apologists for rightwing Thatcherite policies are trying to distance themselves from this now.

States all across the western world have been using public funds to subsidise private businesses in capitalist societies for a long time now.

Well said Rebelheart, it's the same type of person who'll moan about people on SW, say they never saw the bust coming, argue for the type of low tax me feiner policies that landed the country in the ****ter in the first place, and then argue with a straight face that we need more of the same as whats gone before.

laughable really.

Fluorescence

Is it even possible for FG to get an overall majority? I didn't think they had the numbers for it

irishh_bob

cleremy jarkson wrote: »

FG majority is definitely the outcome I'd most prefer but at 40/1 on paddypower, it doesn't look like it could ever happen.

http://www.paddypower.com/bet/politics/other-politics/irish-government?ev_oc_grp_ids=46674

it would have happened had thier TD,S and MEP,s had the wit to replace kenny when they had the chance , kenny has extremley limited appeal outside the base and thier was never ever a better time to catch the swing and ( growing by the day ) ex fianna fail vote

Soldie

meglome wrote: »

If these figures are accurate there is a big imbalance in the tax system. We can't afford to lower the tax on the high earners nor would it be sensible to tax them too much more. So that average low taxed worker is going to have to be taxed more.

It's likely that we'll see a widening of the tax base in the forthcoming budget, but I don't see much sense in raising the tax rates themselves -- especially when the rates are relatively high already. For what it's worth, I didn't just mean income tax; VAT is the biggest earner for the government, and earlier this year there was a surge in retail tourism to Northern Ireland when we temporarily increased our rate by half a percentage point to 21.5% (I'm aware that the exchange rate was also favourable at the time, but the VAT rate certainly had an impact, too).

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

Yes this is the mantra beloved of parties of the right - inc. a certain well known and not fondly forgotten Irish party - for the past few decades, but it ignores that Ireland is a low tax economy, there is scope there for tax increases.

Are we really a low tax economy, though? Ronan Lyons covered this recently: our VAT rate is high by EU standards; our all-in marginal income tax rates are amongst the highest in Europe (second only to Hungary); our excises are relatively high; the sacred cow of corporate tax is netting us with twice the revenue that the Germans are getting from their rate, relative to the size of the economy.

lmtduffy wrote: »

Neo-liberalism opens every oppurtunity for maximising profit and minimising losess, so cutting taxes for businesess and high earners adn then bailing them out if they mess up is a classic neo-liberal policy.

I see, so the "neo-liberalism" label becomes a convenient catch-all for any policy that you happen to disagree with. We can no longer smoke in pubs or restaurants, and I'm blaming neo-liberalism!

plonk

We managed to achieve 50% energy from renewables in April of this year, and we have the potential to export 10 times our own power usage into the European grid from renewables.

Fine Gaels "new era" plan which aims to do this together with their "Reinventing Government" plan leaves them as the only obvious party to vote for at this present time.

I know Kenny isn't the most desirable leader but he has a team of knowledgeable people behind him.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

btard

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Here in a nutshell is one reason we are in such a mess. It's ok to raise taxes on lower paid workers and even workers not even earning enough to be in the tax net. It's ok to take money off pensioners, the disabled and the unemployed. It's ok to to slander and pour vitriol on the hard working people who provide your public services and their representatives. It's ok to blame and make everybody else share the pain except for..wait for it..yes that's right... ME ME ME ME.

Well I have news for you. You are going to get screwed along with the rest of us. Thowing crumbs to some tradesmen isn't going to save you. I don't blame you if you leave. I'm leaving myself soon. However, I do blame you coming on here and saying FG is our only hope and spouting propaganda about their soon to be coalition partners. When what you really mean is it's MY only hope to continue living of the fat of the land while the rest of you plebs pay the piper.

So you can take your ME ME ME and get the next plane to Florida if you wish. And you can take your crumbs with you.

oscarBravo

btard wrote: »

You are going to get screwed along with the rest of us. ... I don't blame you if you leave. I'm leaving myself soon.

How are you and he going to get screwed if you both leave?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

fatalll

God help us if they are,
Enda, Leo(look at me im on TV again)Varadkar et all.....
To be honest the independents might be the best option...

invinciblePRSTV

Soldie wrote: »

Are we really a low tax economy, though? Ronan Lyons covered this recently: our VAT rate is high by EU standards; our all-in marginal income tax rates are amongst the highest in Europe (second only to Hungary); our excises are relatively high; the sacred cow of corporate tax is netting us with twice the revenue that the Germans are getting from their rate, relative to the size of the economy.

When the Rainbow coalition was in power and Ireland was experiencing economic growth of the non bubble variety, the standard rate of tax was @ 27%, and the higher rate was @ 48%, as opposed to 20% & 41% today. So yes we are a low tax economy in comparison to what we used to be.

invinciblePRSTV

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Seeing as Labour in government in Ireland pre-dated Tony Blairs accession to the leadership of the UKLP by 2 years and were out of government by the time Blair made it into government, this point doesn't stand up to scrutiny.

However i would agree there is a conservative element in the LP of the social variety.

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Public sector reform & a renewal of the 2nd chamber have been in LP manifestos for at least the past 2 general elections, i suggest you consider this before representing FG - party of the Irish Middle Class, with a high level of public servants, businessmen & other wealthy elements of civilised Irish society (in the AB bracket) amongst its membership (Marsh 2002)- as a reform party.

Pete_Cavan

btard wrote: »

Here in a nutshell is one reason we are in such a mess. It's ok to raise taxes on lower paid workers and even workers not even earning enough to be in the tax net. It's ok to take money off pensioners, the disabled and the unemployed. It's ok to to slander and pour vitriol on the hard working people who provide your public services and their representatives. It's ok to blame and make everybody else share the pain except for..wait for it..yes that's right... ME ME ME ME.

Well I have news for you. You are going to get screwed along with the rest of us. Thowing crumbs to some tradesmen isn't going to save you. I don't blame you if you leave. I'm leaving myself soon. However, I do blame you coming on here and saying FG is our only hope and spouting propaganda about their soon to be coalition partners. When what you really mean is it's MY only hope to continue living of the fat of the land while the rest of you plebs pay the piper.

So you can take your ME ME ME and get the next plane to Florida if you wish. And you can take your crumbs with you.

That is the worst post ever. Its just a series of platitudes, offers no opinions on the issues at hand and no rebuttal to the points raised in the post which he quoted and instead is more interested in personal attacks. Sounds like the kind of person who was convinced to vote Labour by the nonsensical rants of Pat Rabbite the other night. The kind of person that is all too common amoung the Irish electorate but the kind of person we could do with less of.

RedDawn

"Labour is a deeply conservative party in its entrenched support for unions and organized labour."

Which is a complete irrelevence where the election and even the recession is concerned, the IMF will be running things in terms of the big decisions.

Fine Gael are not the returning Christs, they can't even keep house in their own party and they're ideologically bound to support devastating cuts while our taxation system continues to go unlooked at for any serious political action.

Furthermore, Fine Gael agree fundamentally with Fianna Fáil on everything but a stimulus package, their representatives are (begrudgingly) willing to say that to you, and I've seen them do so on RTÉ quite often. The difference between Fianna Fail and Fine Gael on economics is nearly nothing.

Einhard

Laois_Man wrote: »

Someone on TV came up with this brillian nugget the other night too! He claimed we play less tax than the likes of the Germans! I nearly spat up my digestive buiscuit!

GERMANY!!!! Where the average income in my own profession is similar to what it is here - but, where Tax Free Income for single person is €8,004 and the next €13,500 is taxed linerally at between 14% and 24% and then increases linearly from 24% to 42% for the remainde up to €53,000 and 45% for the rest.

Compare that to here where we have a flat 1% income levy on EVERYTHING under €100,000 2% on EVERYTHING above that, plus 20% on the first €36,400 after credits which for a single person, the basic credit is pittence compared to Germany - and then the 41% on the rest! No "Linear" increases at all.

Plus, Germany did not have a property bubble and do not have thousands of famalies living in properties with extortionate mortgages on very modest 3-bed semi-detached homes!

I've been doing a little research on this since you challenged the assertion, and it seems that, actually, the tax burden in Ireland and Germany is quite similar. Indeed, the disparity between the two nations actually increases in favour of the German taxpayer as income grows. Rather then just compare the various rates and exemptions, i used tax calculators for the two jurisdictions.

The Irish one (http://www.hookhead.com/Tools/tax2010.jsp) calculates that a single person earning €40k pa would pay €8,831.84 in total income tax (incl. PRSI & levies). On €60k pa, the burden would rise to €19,031.84

In Germany, the rates are €9,502.38 and €17,964.54. (http://www.parmentier.de/steuer/incometax.htm)

Now, assuming these figures are correct, and there's no reason to think them otherwise, it would seem that a middle income earner in Ireland (40k) has scope for increased taxes before the burden reaches that of his German counterpart. It's a good thing therefore that you didn't actually spit out your digestive!

Note however, that the Irish calculator includes the health levies, PRSI etc. The German one exlcudes them. Digging around a little, I found that the German obligatory health insurance rate is 15.5% with 8.2% paid by the employee. Obviously, including this in the German figures would further increase the tax burden imposed from berlin, and further educe your claims that German is a low tax nation compared to Ireland.

Having found a German tax calculator that includes these further variables therefore (http://www.parmentier.de/steuer/steuer.htm?wagetax.htm), the total burden for someone on €60k increases to over €25k, with someone on €40k liable to over €15k in the same period.

This then would suggest that the tax burden for the average German is significantly higher than that for his Irish counterpart, and supports my contention that there is much scope for increases across the board in the forthcoming budget and its successors.

Einhard

Denerick wrote: »

Well said. FG and FF have always been two cheeks of the same arse. I always get amused when certain posters here castigate FF in such strong terms - in complete denial, of course, that FG would have done pretty much the same thing. They suffer from the same clientalism, the parish pump shíte. And I'm sick to the bloody gut of how so many otherwise intelligent people in this country insist on deluding themselves. Moronic just doesn't quite convey the point.

I have to respectfully disagree with the above, and expecially the highlighted text. Is it not absurd, and deeply unfair, to castiagte a party for what you believe they would have done were they in the position to do so? The fact is that there is no way of knowing whether they would have done anything similar or not. Indeed, given the performance of the Rainbow coalition up to 1997, there is evidence to suggest that FG in government operate far more prudently that FF. Throw in Dukes' Tallaght strategy, and FG's opposition to benchmarking and one gets, I believe, a party which, while by no means infallible, is willing to put the good of the nation and good governance over self-interest and political gain.

DB10 wrote: »

SF are the only party IMO, that can see us out of this trouble. No Labour candidate ever stands in my constituency so that leaves FG-FF.

How? They offer nothing but platitudes. As in: We can get out of this without negatively affecting the lower or middle classes in ANY meaningful way. This is a nonsense of a policy, and one designed not to get Ireland back on the right track, but as a cynical vote garnering ploy, in which regard Sinn Fein are the new Fianna Fail

Rebelheart wrote: »

:rolleyes: Mar dhea. More like a rightwing one. But how predictable that all our apologists for rightwing Thatcherite policies are trying to distance themselves from this now.

States all across the western world have been using public funds to subsidise private businesses in capitalist societies for a long time now.

Practically every society in the world is a capitalist society at this stage. In every single one though, as far as I can tell, there exists a fusion between right and left wing policies, both social and economic. Capitalist societies have long embraced socialist programmes like universal healthcare and pensions. You wouldn't argue from that however that they are capitalist innovations would you? You may wish to re-write the history of the two ideologies in your head, but right wing economics have never been about state intervention in the private sector. It's absurd to come along now and try to blame disastarous government interference on an ideology which has always sought to limit government invoilvement in society. How convenient that "right wing economics" is blamed both on laissez faire financial regulation, and the heavy handed interventions which stemmed from it! Such a scitzophrenic bunch these right wing economists are!

PS: I can't distance myself from "right wing Thatherite policies" because I've yet to defend them here. You really love to put people in pre-arranged little boxes don't you?

btard wrote: »

Here in a nutshell is one reason we are in such a mess. It's ok to raise taxes on lower paid workers and even workers not even earning enough to be in the tax net. It's ok to take money off pensioners, the disabled and the unemployed. It's ok to to slander and pour vitriol on the hard working people who provide your public services and their representatives. It's ok to blame and make everybody else share the pain except for..wait for it..yes that's right... ME ME ME ME.


So you can take your ME ME ME and get the next plane to Florida if you wish. And you can take your crumbs with you.

Why is it ok for those on lower and middle incomes to scream ME ME ME ME, but not for those on higher incomes? What is so wrong with expecting the burden to be shared across society? You scorn the idea that someone might look after their own financial interests, yet pour derision on the idea of sharing the burden? Seems a tad hypocritical to me...

Liam Byrne

Einhard wrote: »

Why is it ok for those on lower and middle incomes to scream ME ME ME ME, but not for those on higher incomes? What is so wrong with expecting the burden to be shared across society? You scorn the idea that someone might look after their own financial interests, yet pour derision on the idea of sharing the burden? Seems a tad hypocritical to me...

If there's a certain amount of money required to survive then no-one should be penalised for working and only achieving that amount.

Until such time as someone works out the minimum amount of disposable (or rather, as the ESRI choose to phrase it, "discretionary") income required and protects that amount, the above will be an issue.

There is no point in someone working for €1,500 a month, paying their mortgage and food and bills from that, and trying to tax them on money that they don't have.

Someone on €100,000 a year has €60,000 that they don't need; I don't begrudge them that if they're worth it (although personally I don't believe anyone is "worth" that much) but they can obviously afford to pay more taxes, while those scraping by can't.

Note, however, that I said those working for that amount; while recognising those who are currently unemployed through no fault of their own due to the economic mismanagement are a different case, those on long-term social welfare and those getting paid childrens' allowance (possibly beyond the first 2 kids) and getting free houses and other welfare are a whole other story.

ShooterSF

I really am torn on this one. On the one hand I prefer FGs attitude towards cutting the public sector down and would be more in favour of privatising where possible as opposed to Labours pro Union policies. On the other hand I really can't stand the idea of our social policies being set by religious conservatives. I can forget the repealed blasphemy law, relaxation of licensing laws, abortion referendums, euthanasia...(not saying Labour would but I'd fancy higher chances)

So to vote for more free market privatised economy or more liberal social policies...

Buford T Justice

ciarriaithuaidh wrote: »

I cannot stomach having that wooden buffoon Kenny as Taoiseach. He would be worse, yes, worse than Cowen for our international reputation..he has the charisma of a wet teabag and doesnt inspire confidence or sound like he is an authority on ANY subject.

Now come on, are you seriously suggesting that we should judge Enda Kenny's ability to potentially lead this country and get us out of the mess we're in on the basis of his personality and ability to charm or not charm people? I think that is the most ludicrous idea I have ever heard.

Brian Cowen is currently an international laughing stock, for so many many reasons which are all but clear to everyone. Can you please explain to me how Enda Kenny would be more of an embarrassment than this?

That being the case, should we just ask Bertie to come back? We all know what he stood over and what he caused, but hey, wasn't he a nice fella though. Yeah, lets get him b-b-b-b-back.

meglome

RedDawn wrote: »

Which is a complete irrelevence where the election and even the recession is concerned, the IMF will be running things in terms of the big decisions.

But it's not irrelevant though is it. Labour won't even entertain the notion of some of the reforms, that any right thinking person, believes are needed. Now they are either deluded or lying. We've had well enough of both. As it stands I couldn't be forced to vote for them.

RedDawn wrote: »

Fine Gael are not the returning Christs, they can't even keep house in their own party and they're ideologically bound to support devastating cuts while our taxation system continues to go unlooked at for any serious political action.

No they are not and no one is suggesting otherwise. Voting on a new leader has no relevance to their policy's. And they seem to be the only party with decent forward thinking policy's to try to get us out of this mess.

RedDawn wrote: »

Furthermore, Fine Gael agree fundamentally with Fianna Fáil on everything but a stimulus package, their representatives are (begrudgingly) willing to say that to you, and I've seen them do so on RTÉ quite often. The difference between Fianna Fail and Fine Gael on economics is nearly nothing.

Are you a Labour supporter? I have given some sort or preference to almost all party's over the last 20 years depending on the election. I'll always try to do what is best at the time and FG are offering what is best right now. I have no interest as such in political party's. FF and FG are not the same no matter how much you believe it.

Einhard

Liam Byrne wrote: »

If there's a certain amount of money required to survive then no-one should be penalised for working and only achieving that amount.

Until such time as someone works out the minimum amount of disposable (or rather, as the ESRI choose to phrase it, "discretionary") income required and protects that amount, the above will be an issue.

There is no point in someone working for €1,500 a month, paying their mortgage and food and bills from that, and trying to tax them on money that they don't have.

I agree to an extent, but I believe that everyone should pay something. I mean, you have people in this country who were up in arms when medical card holders were charged 50c per prescription, or wealthy OAPs had their automatic right to a medical card removed. Everyone of us living in this state is a consumer of the state, and I don't think it's inequitable that we all contirbute something towards that. I do think it unfair to say to someone earning €70 that their tax burden will increase by, say, €3k, but that someone earning €20k will incur no increase at all. Not only is it unfair, but it's not sustainable.

Someone on €100,000 a year has €60,000 that they don't need; I don't begrudge them that if they're worth it (although personally I don't believe anyone is "worth" that much) but they can obviously afford to pay more taxes, while those scraping by can't.

Of course those earning more should pay more; but I think everyone should pay something. And when increases are in order, those increases should apply across the board where possible. There's a lot of cant about this issue I think, and many people (not all) who claim inability to pay in that position because of mismanagement or other reasons.

Note, however, that I said those working for that amount; while recognising those who are currently unemployed through no fault of their own due to the economic mismanagement are a different case, those on long-term social welfare and those getting paid childrens' allowance (possibly beyond the first 2 kids) and getting free houses and other welfare are a whole other story.

Agreed.

Liam Byrne

Einhard wrote: »

Of course those earning more should pay more; but I think everyone should pay something. And when increases are in order, those increases should apply across the board where possible. There's a lot of cant about this issue I think, and many people (not all) who claim inability to pay in that position because of mismanagement or other reasons.

How, if paying "something" doesn't give them enough to survive on ?

And you said yourself - "not all" are because of mismanagement or other reasons; how do you expect them to pay more ? And with what ?

oppenheimer1

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

FG will need to put up quality candidates in each constituency, not just parachuted celebrities or councillors that have worked their way to the top of the local greasy pole. My local FG TD is known more locally for attending funerals than doing anything worthwhile. Any funeral either myself or my parents attend he is there one wonders how he has time for anything else.

This needs to stop.

(Does anyone know of a database to see how much a representative has participated in Dáil proceedings, such as submitted questions, motions, speeches etc?)

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

steelcityblues

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Would this declared libertarian care to defend why FG idly stood by to the EU project as Irish sovereignity got a punch in the tooth as a result. Why they let the bankers get a second chance in a blatantly anti-free market endorsment?

As for cronyism being solely in FF, do the names Kenny, Enright, Flanagan, Coveney not come from previous generations of politicians too?

Do you really think they won't hop into bed with their old reliable friend Labour if the numbers needs be?

I think you are setting yourself up for a huge dissapointment!

lmtduffy

Soldie wrote: »

I see, so the "neo-liberalism" label becomes a convenient catch-all for any policy that you happen to disagree with. We can no longer smoke in pubs or restaurants, and I'm blaming neo-liberalism!

No you see wrong, it is a development of classical liberalism, where, generally, not just the market but also the government are exploited for profit.

lmtduffy

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

If you're not concerned about your ignorance, you'd best say nothing on the subject.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

punchdrunk

going from fianna fail to fine gael is like replacing a blowout with a retread

Ireland needs new political blood & ideology

Permabear

This post has been deleted.