Kenny declares war on welfare culture

fliball123

chopper6 wrote: »

Why does that concern you?





So a 20% cut is in no way meaningful? What about the pension Levy?



I've had MORE pay cuts than you yet i'm not whinging about what you're being paid..Nor am i calling for yout top have your pay cut or tax increased...you're so caught up in your own situation you're lashing out blindly looking for others to blame/cut pay from/sack.







So the 1/3rd that was gambled recklessley on an overheated property bubble doesnt count at all?

What about the banks writing off billions in loans? Who's paying the price ultimately for that?

And as far as your agenda is concerned 68 billion basically doesnt count as it's not relevant to your anti PS bias?

I wish you could listen to yourself..

It concerns me because they are not worth money that I am paying in taxes to cover their job for life and guaranteed pensions and instead of cutting a pay and pensions bill that is too expensive the government are choosing to cut services such as closing A&Es and increasing class sizes..meaning I get a depreciated service year on year since 2008 all the while being hammered for more and more taxes year on year since 2008..That inequality cannot continue.

Once again where is the 20% pay cut in PS Pay ?? and why are the PS defenders not bringing in the 6 rounds of annual increments into the discussion?

Pension levy is not a pay cut but a contribution to a defined benefit one which anyone in the private sector would slit their own wrists to have access to. Instead the government are fleecing private sector pension pots.

What I get paid has feck all to do with you pal..If I get a pay rise your taxes will not have to take a hit to cover the rise..and if I do get a pay rise it means I pay more in taxes..So you should be looking for private sector workers to be on the up as it means less money has to be saved on ps pay and pensions and on welfare. As for lashing out..I am not lashing out but I will have my say if I see something that I deem to be unfair and that is being taken from my pay packet I have the right to argue about it..Sorry if this offends your delicate nature

As for the 1/3 the 68billion..I never said it didnt count..If I did show me where...I was simply pointing this out to a poster that the reckless gambling/borrowing was not the be all and end all of our troubles..I pointed out it was 1/3rd of the problem..and that the other 2/3s were from borrowing to pay bloated pay packets , pensions and social welfare over the last decade.

I agree with you on the banks and on boards I have tried to put up ways of making people accountable for their own actions such as borrowing for a house then trying to hoodwink the tax payer into paying for their house...

The simple truth is there are loony lefties and raving righties all trying to get their clammy hands on the tax payers pockets. The tax payer is suffering badly and their level of service is p1ss poor...

I have not got a anti "ps bias"..I have an anti "taking the piss on the tax payers dime bias" I have been vocal about banks and lads trying to go bankrupt abroad..both individuals and companies..They should not be allowed back in the country IMO or they should have a bankrupt abroad tax placed on them for any future earnings...

fliball123

ardmacha wrote: »

There has been a much higher proportion of 20% cuts in the PS than in the private sector and most of these got no increment whatsoever.




Fine, so. Privatise hospitals, buses, universities and the like and let people pay for them themselves. They'll still have to pay people to run these services.

Once again have you any proof on that? How many public sector workers forced onto the dole? I reckon 1/4 of a million ex-private sector tax payers who went from what they earned to the dole would bring the private sector well up above cuts in the public sector.

As for the harly anyone got increments..It has been costing us on average 1/4 of a billion a year..someone somewhere must be getting them.

They should privatise as much as they can....The tax payer then does not have to pay over the odds for a public sector employee to do something that the private sector will do at a fraction of the cost.

There will be somethings such as gards, bus routes that are not viable and hospitals in the back arse of no where and the likes that will need to be supported by the tax payer, but if you have competition and a private sector alternative it effectively removes the unions power of strikes and that can only be a good thing. We also pay more than enough tax to cover essential services such as these

sarumite

maguic24 wrote: »

No, but it would have to be better than here where you get absolutely nothing for your taxes!!!! They have a really good health system whereas if you go to a public hospital here you are more likely to come out worse then you went in.....

You also don't pay anything near what the Swedes pay in tax. My effective tax rate was twice what it was in Sweden compared to Ireland. The health care system is good (not really good) but there is very long waiting lists. It took me a year for an operation on my shoulder from seeing a doctor to having the op, during which period I was in a fair amount of pain on several occasions. It is also a very impersonal system, you don't have you own local GP instead you have a vårdcentral where you never know which doctor you are going to see. Sweden, like Ireland, has its positives and negatives however as someone who lived there for over 4 years I find the constant eulogizing of the Swedish system frustrating as it is rarely from someone who has lived there and had to pay tax there. Considering the uproar over the LPT in Ireland, I really don't think we are ready for a Swedish style tax regime.

fliball123

sarumite wrote: »

You also don't pay anything near what the Swedes pay in tax. My effective tax rate was twice what it was in Sweden compared to Ireland. The health care system is good (not really good) but there is very long waiting lists. It took me a year for an operation on my shoulder from seeing a doctor to having the op, during which period I was in a fair amount of pain on several occasions. It is also a very impersonal system, you don't have you own local GP instead you have a vårdcentral where you never know which doctor you are going to see. Sweden, like Ireland, has its positives and negatives however as someone who lived there for over 4 years I find the constant eulogizing of the Swedish system frustrating as it is rarely from someone who has lived there and had to pay tax there. Considering the uproar over the LPT in Ireland, I really don't think we are ready for a Swedish style tax regime.

We have a more progressive taxation system here in Ireland than Sweden does..

Latest OCED reports have concluded we are the most progressive in the EU

http://www.publicpolicy.ie/budget-2013-progressivity-of-irish-income-tax-system/

How much more blood do you want from the stone that is that tax payer?

ardmacha

I reckon 1/4 of a million ex-private sector tax payers who went from what they earned to the dole would bring the private sector well up above cuts in the public sector.

Losing your job is not the same as a pay cut. You lose your job when your services are no longer required, this is the exat opposite of the PS where people complain that there is not enough service.

Pension levy is not a pay cut but a contribution

As has been pointed out here numerous times the legislation for the pension levy specifically states that it is not a contribution. But no matter how many times people point out facts posters here keep on posting falsehoods over and over and over again, as if there weren't enough real problems to talk about.

Sweden, like Ireland, has its positives and negatives however as someone who lived there for over 4 years I find the constant eulogizing of the Swedish system frustrating as it is rarely from someone who has lived there and had to pay tax there.

Sweden doesn't always enjoy services vastly better than Ireland, although spending a lot more. Irish policemen have a detection rate exceeding Sweden, health outcomes like infant mortality are not much different and Irish universities rank at least as highly as Swedish ones.

sarumite

fliball123 wrote: »

We have a more progressive taxation system here in Ireland than Sweden does..

Latest OCED reports have concluded we are the most progressive in the EU

http://www.publicpolicy.ie/budget-2013-progressivity-of-irish-income-tax-system/

How much more blood do you want from the stone that is that tax payer?

I am not sure of what you think that means. The relative amount a higher earner pays in tax to that of a low earner in Ireland is larger than other countries. As someone who wasn't on 167% of the average income in Sweden, the progressiveness of the tax system didn't have as major an impact on my overall tax. In fact, the fact that Sweden is far less progressive in their tax probably explains why my tax was far higher there compared to Ireland.

sarumite

fliball123 wrote: »

How much more blood do you want from the stone that is that tax payer?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_revenue_as_percentage_of_GDP

Sweden: 45.8
Ireland: 30.8

fliball123

ardmacha wrote: »

Losing your job is not the same as a pay cut. You lose your job when your services are no longer required, this is the exat opposite of the PS where people complain that there is not enough service.



As has been pointed out here numerous times the legislation for the pension levy specifically states that it is not a contribution. But no matter how many times people point out facts posters here keep on posting falsehoods over and over and over again, as if there weren't enough real problems to talk about.



Sweden doesn't always enjoy services vastly better than Ireland, although spending a lot more. Irish policemen have a detection rate exceeding Sweden, health outcomes like infant mortality are not much different and Irish universities rank at least as highly as Swedish ones.

Really so a 100% pay cut and 100% hours cut is not a pay cut? So with regards to hardship you think that the ps who have had some pay cuts as well as pay rises is harder or should be shown more sympathy than the pay cuts that have happened in the private sector aswell as 1/4 of a million private sector employees losing their jobs? REALLY

I agree with you that you lose your job when your service is no longer required..so hows about what happened to all of the management level employees that are still working within the HSE when all the health boards amalgamated? Job for Life no matter how many people duplicate the same job as you

As for the public complaining..yeah they are they see PS wages remaining high and all services being cut to shred and yet they pay more and more in taxes..

So to put that in context..If you were paying for sky say 80 Euro a year for 100 stations and they upped it by 10 Euro a year for 5 years and took 10 stations away a year whilst giving some of their employees pay rises would you remain with sky? The sooner that privatisation comes in as competition for as many facets of public sector and semi states the better.

Ask yourself one question about the pension levy is it on Gross or Nett pay and you will answer your own question about it..and yet you still see it as a pay cut

Well with the exception of the police in your comment about comparing us to Sweden..any health care I need I have to pay per visit on top of taxes same goes with my college fees I paid out 15/16k to get my honours degree in Trinity College..So is your argument that if you want better services you have to pay on top of a tax policy that is the most progressive in the EU?

maguic24

sarumite wrote: »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_revenue_as_percentage_of_GDP

Sweden: 45.8
Ireland: 30.8

Arguments aside....I don't think Wikipedia is the best source for reliable information. ..

fliball123

maguic24 wrote: »

Arguments aside....I don't think Wikipedia is the best source for reliable information. ..

Agree I put up a link from publicpolicy.ie which shows in detail how ireland are most progressive when it comes to paying tax in the EU ...

fliball123

sarumite wrote: »

I am not sure of what you think that means. The relative amount a higher earner pays in tax to that of a low earner in Ireland is larger than other countries. As someone who wasn't on 167% of the average income in Sweden, the progressiveness of the tax system didn't have as major an impact on my overall tax. In fact, the fact that Sweden is far less progressive in their tax probably explains why my tax was far higher there compared to Ireland.

It means that those who are earning the most pay the most - which is the right way to do it..but those earning the most do not get access to things such as free medical and are paying for some services twice. In the table we are not that far away from Sweden with regards to taxation and if you take in indirect taxes we are even closer..yet Sweden give free medical care to everyone. So to sum up the more you pay in tax in this country the less service you get which is a bit of paradox

Xenji

fliball123 wrote: »

It means that those who are earning the most pay the most - which is the right way to do it..but those earning the most do not get access to things such as free medical and are paying for some services twice. In the table we are not that far away from Sweden with regards to taxation and if you take in indirect taxes we are even closer..yet Sweden give free medical care to everyone. So to sum up the more you pay in tax in this country the less service you get which is a bit of paradox

Why should people who are earning the most get access to free medical cards, they can well afford it, if you can afford something you should not be getting it for free.

fliball123

Xenji wrote: »

Why should people who are earning the most get access to free medical cards, they can well afford it, if you can afford something you should not be getting it for free.

Alternatively why should they pay more and more tax to cover other peoples expenses..These people have mortgage, creche fee and the costs of going to work as well and its not just the rich at a very low level somewhere around the 35k mark in this country we are put on an effective tax rate of 52% so over half of what you earn after this goes to the tax man and yet if they get sick they can be crippled with medical bills...How is that fair....

The tax you pay should cover you for medical care simple as

Xenji

fliball123 wrote: »

Alternatively why should they pay more and more tax to cover other peoples expenses..These people have mortgage, creche fee and the costs of going to work as well and its not just the rich at a very low level somewhere around the 35k mark in this country we are put on an effective tax rate of 52% so over half of what you earn after this goes to the tax man and yet if they get sick they can be crippled with medical bills...How is that fair....

The ta you pay should cover you for medical care simple as

It is the way the world has worked for centuries, it is not gonna change now.

Shakti

Reveling in the poverty and misfortune of others, you should all be ashamed.

fliball123

Xenji wrote: »

It is the way the world has worked for centuries, it is not gonna change now.

Something somewhere has to change unfortunately...We are not communist Russia..As we are overpaying in tax getting feck all services and still borrowing 1 billion a month...That dichotomy cannot continue..and we have already seen change...Social welfare is being tackled in a more meaningful way so it is changing

Xenji

fliball123 wrote: »

Something somewhere has to change unfortunately...We are not communist Russia..As we are overpaying in tax getting feck all services and still borrowing 1 billion a month...That dichotomy cannot continue..and we have already seen change...Social welfare is being tackled in a more meaningful way so it is changing

It will not change the amount you will pay in income tax though.

fliball123

Xenji wrote: »

It will not change the amount you will pay in income tax though.

Really FG are already sending out soundbits about bringing down the levels of income tax in this country...It may be just that a sound bit do..But as a country we are seriously overtaxed when both direct and indirect taxes come into play..

Maybe when we are running a surplus instead of borrowing then income tax cuts can take place

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/howlin-slams-fine-gaels-tax-cuts-demands-29330909.html

sarumite

maguic24 wrote: »

Arguments aside....I don't think Wikipedia is the best source for reliable information. ..

Arguments aside, wikipedia isn't the source, the heritage foundation was the source. This is the reference form wiki http://www.heritage.org/index/ranking

maguic24

sarumite wrote: »

Arguments aside, wikipedia isn't the source, the heritage foundation was the source. This is the reference form wiki http://www.heritage.org/index/ranking

Wikipedia was your source......in the original comment. Sorry just noticed the last bit of your comment. Either way you should reference the ACTUAL source and not wikipedia if you're trying to make an argument.

sarumite

fliball123 wrote: »

It means that those who are earning the most pay the most - which is the right way to do it..but those earning the most do not get access to things such as free medical and are paying for some services twice.

That may be the case, but it is not the point I was making and doesn't detract from the fact that my effective tax rate in Sweden was far higher compared to that in Ireland.

In the table we are not that far away from Sweden with regards to taxation and if you take in indirect taxes we are even closer..yet Sweden give free medical care to everyone. So to sum up the more you pay in tax in this country the less service you get which is a bit of paradox

We were 15% off and one of the lowest tax to GDP for European counties. Its not free healthcare, you have already paid for it through taxes regardless of whether you use it or not.

sarumite

maguic24 wrote: »

Wikipedia was your source......in the original comment.

Wikipedia was my link. Within wikipedia the 'source' of the information was from heritage.

Geuze

fliball123 wrote: »

Really FG are already sending out soundbits about bringing down the levels of income tax in this country...It may be just that a sound bit do..But as a country we are seriously overtaxed when both direct and indirect taxes come into play..

Note that the overall level of tax in Ireland is below the EU average.

http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-SF-12-055/EN/KS-SF-12-055-EN.PDF

(Yes, yes, public services, e.g. childcare, are also less comprehensive)

Good discussion here:

http://taxpolicy.gov.ie/presentations/tax-conference-june-2013/

See Brendan O'Connor's paper.

Sand

chopper6 wrote: »

And here we go........



Without fail....almost every thread on this forum reverts to this.

Well, its a thread about Irish welfare culture - not Ireland's chances under O'Neil and Keane. You might see some comments on the effectiveness of the delivery Irish welfare spending. And they wont be positive in the main given the results.

maguic24

Xenji wrote: »

Why should people who are earning the most get access to free medical cards, they can well afford it, if you can afford something you should not be getting it for free.

If you pay really high taxes you should get something in return. By working and paying taxes you are contributing to the economy, not like people sitting on the scratcher doing nothing!! It's ridiculous to expect people to work hard for a living and get nothing in return. Where is incentive to go to college/work hard for a good job when you end up getting penalised. Doesn't make much sense to me????

sarumite

maguic24 wrote: »

Either way you should reference the ACTUAL source and not wikipedia if you're trying to make an argument.

Why? If the source of the information is referenced, then whats the problem. People reference newspapers articles quoting CSO data all the time on here.

Geuze

fliball123 wrote: »

Really FG are already sending out soundbits about bringing down the levels of income tax in this country...It may be just that a sound bit do..But as a country we are seriously overtaxed when both direct and indirect taxes come into play..

My parents pay 9% tax and USC on 50,000 income - there is an example of way too low direct taxes.

They have 2 med cards and 2 travel passes.

The MTR on 33k is 52% - there is an example of way too high direct taxes on income.

fliball123

sarumite wrote: »

That may be the case, but it is not the point I was making and doesn't detract from the fact that my effective tax rate in Sweden was far higher compared to that in Ireland.



We were 15% off and one of the lowest tax to GDP for European counties. Its not free healthcare, you have already paid for it through taxes regardless of whether you use it or not.

Try that again with the GNP not GDP in Ireland GDP is blown up out of context by the multinationals..Also you do not take indirect taxes into acount.

does your rates in ireland include PRSI/USC/Pension charges?

Geuze

http://lh3.ggpht.com/-vekGsp_4Xyo/UPYCJDn8-WI/AAAAAAAAJOA/hX5pSbrJSAA/s1600/Tax%252520and%252520Social%252520Insurance%2525203%25255B3%25255D.png

fliball123

Geuze wrote: »

Note that the overall level of tax in Ireland is below the EU average.

http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-SF-12-055/EN/KS-SF-12-055-EN.PDF

(Yes, yes, public services, e.g. childcare, are also less comprehensive)

Good discussion here:

http://taxpolicy.gov.ie/presentations/tax-conference-june-2013/

See Brendan O'Connor's paper.

Once again these comparisons need to be on the GNP not GDP in this country

ardmacha

Once again these comparisons need to be on the GNP not GDP in this country

Why don't you produce such comparisions then? You are claiming to be overtaxed. Is this calculation too taxing?

sarumite

fliball123 wrote: »

Try that again with the GNP not GDP in Ireland GDP is blown up out of context by the multinationals..Also you do not take indirect taxes into acount.

does your rates in ireland include PRSI/USC/Pension charges?

GNP is too low, GDP is too high what are we to do....although a common use is GNP +40% difference between GNP and GDP. Even with that you are still not going to close the gap by 15%. I would have to check with regards to PRSI etc, though my Swedish calculation would have included all direct taxes paid but not indirect.

fliball123

ardmacha wrote: »

Why don't you produce such comparisions then? You are claiming to be overtaxed. Is this calculation too taxing?

We are being over taxed...You have not proven that we are not..There are some on herecomparing us with Sweden why not compare with Greece? We pay 52 cent in every euro in tax after 35k ..We also have indirect taxes of VAT, Carbon Tax, DIRT, CGT, Stamp duty, Proerty tax and Water charges...Are you arguing that we are not overtaxed as I think you will find that your in a tiny minority

fliball123

sarumite wrote: »

GNP is too low, GDP is too high what are we to do....although a common use is GNP +40% difference between GNP and GDP. Even with that you are still not going to close the gap by 15%. I would have to check with regards to PRSI etc, though my Swedish calculation would have included all direct taxes paid but not indirect.

YOu will find that USC and PRSI is not accounted for in these comparisons and with GNP (a better economic indicator) we are very close to Sweden and yet Sweden outstrips us with their levels of service and infrastructure. Also are Sweden borrowing a billion a year or 200 bilion in debt?

Geuze

http://taxpolicy.gov.ie/presentations/tax-conference-june-2013/

http://taxpolicy.gov.ie/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/2013-06-17-BOC-Conference-Presentation-Final.pptx

From Brendan O'Connor's paper:

Total taxes to GDP = 29%, very low compared to other EU countries

(Eurostat 2011 data says 30.4% for Ireland vs EU27 average of 40%)

Total taxes to GNP = 36%, closer to EU average

fliball123

Geuze wrote: »

http://taxpolicy.gov.ie/presentations/tax-conference-june-2013/

http://taxpolicy.gov.ie/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/2013-06-17-BOC-Conference-Presentation-Final.pptx

From Brendan O'Connor's paper:

Total taxes to GDP = 29%, very low compared to other EU countries

(Eurostat 2011 data says 30.4% for Ireland vs EU27 average of 40%)

Total taxes to GNP = 36%, closer to EU average

Once again does this take USC and PRSI into account? Also its 2 years out of date..what taxes have come into play since that?

Geuze

fliball123 wrote: »

Once again these comparisons need to be on the GNP not GDP in this country

Included, if you read BO'C paper.

Geuze

fliball123 wrote: »

Once again does this take USC and PRSI into account?

Yes, USC is a tax, inclded in tax revenue.


Well, hold on, sometimes PRSI is excluded, as it is not a tax. Need to be careful.

The Eurostat data is tax + social contributions.

http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-SF-12-055/EN/KS-SF-12-055-EN.PDF

However, note that Eurostat use GDP, which should be adjusted for the Irish situation.

fliball123

Geuze wrote: »

Yes, ALL taxes.

Yet there is still the extra taxes paid since 2011?

Geuze

Note that Govt revenues have not increased much since 2011.

Me and you might be paying more, but due to unemployment etc, overall revenues are fairly steady.

http://www.cso.ie/en/media/csoie/releasespublications/documents/economy/2013/gfsa2013.pdf


2009 = 55,963m
2010 = 55,149m
2011 = 55,331
2012 = 56,524m

Govt revenues are fairly flat.

Pepole think that they are collecting a lot more taxes, but they are not.

fliball123

Geuze wrote: »

Note that Govt revenues have not increased much since 2011.

Me and you might be paying more, but due to unemployment etc, overall revebues are fairly steady.

http://www.cso.ie/en/media/csoie/releasespublications/documents/economy/2013/gfsa2013.pdf


2009 = 55,963m
2010 = 55,149m
2011 = 55,331
2012 = 56,524m

Govt revenues are fairly flat.

Pepole think that they are collecting a lot more taxes, but they are not.

They have remained steady and yet the number of people who have lost their job in that period that used to be working and paying tax is about 1/4 of a million so with 1/4 of a million people less working and joining the dole we are paying the same amount of tax...and you want to dice it up that there nothing to see here?

Geuze

fliball123 wrote: »

They have remained steady and yet the number of people who have lost their job in that period that used to be working and paying tax is about 1/4 of a million so with 1/4 of a million people less working and joining the dole we are paying the same amount of tax...and you want to dice it up that nothing to see here?

I agree with you.

Huge drop in income tax and VAT from workers who have lost jobs.

Remaining workers paying more direct taxes.

Indirect tax rates increased.

Overall tax revenues fairly flat.

sarumite

fliball123 wrote: »

YOu will find that USC and PRSI is not accounted for in these comparisons and with GNP (a better economic indicator) we are very close to Sweden and yet Sweden outstrips us with their levels of service and infrastructure. Also are Sweden borrowing a billion a year or 200 bilion in debt?

Source?

fliball123

sarumite wrote: »

Source?

Work it out yourself take 2013 GNP to tax (both direct and indirect taxes) and compare...Or do you want me to do all the work for you..Maybe I can took you into you bed tonight aswell

fliball123

Geuze wrote: »

I agree with you.

Huge drop in income tax and VAT from workers who have lost jobs.

Remaining workers paying more direct taxes.

Indirect tax rates increased.

Overall tax revenues fairly flat.

I agree now look at the expenditure side of this little equation

fliball123

Geuze wrote: »

My parents pay 9% tax and USC on 50,000 income - there is an example of way too low direct taxes.

They have 2 med cards and 2 travel passes.

The MTR on 33k is 52% - there is an example of way too high direct taxes on income.

how are they getting away with that?

sarumite

fliball123 wrote: »

Or do you want me to do all the work for you

If you are making the claim, then yes I want you back them up with facts.

Geuze

fliball123 wrote: »

We are being over taxed...You have not proven that we are not..There are some on herecomparing us with Sweden why not compare with Greece? We pay 52 cent in every euro in tax after 35k ..We also have indirect taxes of VAT, Carbon Tax, DIRT, CGT, Stamp duty, Proerty tax and Water charges...Are you arguing that we are not overtaxed as I think you will find that your in a tiny minority

Yes, it is very true that the 52% MTR on income above 32,800 is absolutely crazy.

A long list of different (sensible) taxes does not mean that we are "over-taxed".

Now, you could argue that we get bad value for our taxes, and I would agree with you. If that is what you mean by "over-taxed", then I agree.

I don't agree with 600-700m foreign aid.

I don't agree with huge pension tax relief for high earners.

I don't agree with unlimited duration JSA

I don't agree with pensioners on 50k paying 9% tax + USC.

fliball123

Geuze wrote: »

Yes, USC is a tax, inclded in tax revenue.


Well, hold on, sometimes PRSI is excluded, as it is not a tax. Need to be careful.

The Eurostat data is tax + social contributions.

http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-SF-12-055/EN/KS-SF-12-055-EN.PDF

However, note that Eurostat use GDP, which should be adjusted for the Irish situation.

Sorry but PRSI is a tax on income ergo its a income tax

Scofflaw

fliball123, a reminder that this thread is not called "bash the PS" - it's about tackling welfare and 'dependency traps'.

moderately,
Scofflaw