Budget 2016

Bacchus

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Nurses work a basic 40hr (or less) per week, they cannot exceed working time directive hours.

I said above that the NCHD's could do with more help, they are the whipping boys of the system.

But overall, its not that bad.... as this 'nurses per capita' indicates

Well, I do agree anyway that the NCHD's bear the brunt of the system.

keane2097

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Paid?
Absolutely (with the possible exception of the NCHDs)

Staffing levels are pretty good.
Ireland rates quite highly for staff numbers per capita.

I wonder, just out of interest, where you think the whole thing is falling down currently?

I would have been one of those still thinking we were spending untold fortunes on double-jobbing admins etc., so good to hear that seems not to be the case.

TheDoc

ezra_pound wrote: »

It's not being cut by 2%. It's being reduced by two percentage points from 7% to 5%. In other words it's being reduced by about 30%. It will make you a lot more than 3.50eur better off a month.

Geuze wrote: »

Note that it's a possible cut in the rate by 2%, not a 2% cut in the amount that you pay.

Can you explain this a bit more? Appears I might have mis-read/mis-understood what this means?

I've probably totally done incorrect maths here. But from the article I read and even some tax guy was speaking on newstalk this morning, both sources indicated that the USC cut would probably result in around €350 a year for someone earning circa €40,000. Which equates to roughly €35 a month.

Obviously rough figures, but I'm not seeing nor hearing anything that makes that USC change sound anything more then something I wont even notice on a monthly basis.

JustTheOne

TheDoc wrote: »

Can you explain this a bit more? Appears I might have mis-read/mis-understood what this means?

I've probably totally done incorrect maths here. But from the article I read and even some tax guy was speaking on newstalk this morning, both sources indicated that the USC cut would probably result in around €350 a year for someone earning circa €40,000. Which equates to roughly €3.50 a month.

Obviously rough figures, but I'm not seeing nor hearing anything that makes that USC change sound anything more then something I wont even notice on a monthly basis.

350 a year= 3.50 a month?

joeguevara

TheDoc wrote: »

Can you explain this a bit more? Appears I might have mis-read/mis-understood what this means?

I've probably totally done incorrect maths here. But from the article I read and even some tax guy was speaking on newstalk this morning, both sources indicated that the USC cut would probably result in around €350 a year for someone earning circa €40,000. Which equates to roughly €3.50 a month.

Obviously rough figures, but I'm not seeing nor hearing anything that makes that USC change sound anything more then something I wont even notice on a monthly basis.

€3.50 x 12 does not equal €350

TheDoc

Sorry sorry meant to be typing €35. On the mobile at the mo

JustTheOne

TheDoc wrote: »

Sorry sorry meant to be typing €35. On the mobile at the mo

Pretty noticeable Imo.

TheDoc

JustTheOne wrote: »

Pretty noticeable Imo.

Didn't look back on what I was posting until you two quoted it.

Eric Cartman

ezra_pound wrote: »

OK just to take first point- halving social welfare.

How on earth do you deal with the riots as 800k oaps take to the streets in wed. morning saying no way are we voting for you and probably justifiably petrified of how they're going to make ends meet.

Why does it have to come from old age pensions ?

Limit child benefit to 2 children, take child benefit from households earning over 50k combined , cut the non stamp jobseekers in half , remove RA from people under 25, tighten up on fraud from disability, no christmas bonus , put non stamped/ non pension welfare on a payment card that cant be used to pay for alcohol, cogarettes, pay tv services, holidays or take out cash. Put child benefit on the same, remove welfare from anyone not in an employment or training program - job done

JustTheOne

TheDoc wrote: »

Didn't look back on what I was posting until you two quoted it.

Ah I mean just with regards noticing it each month.

I always get fat fingers too!

BoJack Horseman

keane2097 wrote: »

I wonder, just out of interest, where you think the whole thing is falling down currently?

(In my opinion)...

The public health system here is pretty good.
They sometimes face calamities...(for example: last winter's bed crisis was worsened by the unforseen problem of the winter flu jab proving inadequate to combat the most common flu strain around then).

but overall, if I can pin down one problem... its simply capacity.

Capacity is insufficient at every level of the system.
- Bed numbers overall are lower than they were in the 80's when the population was younger & 1/4 lower.
- insufficient step-down beds & social care capacity (not entirely the HSE's fault)
- Insufficient private hospital beds in order to accommodate their clients, thus unnecessarily stretching public capacity further.

Invest in greater capacity & a lot of the problems go away.

This would be capital expenditure & tax breaks so wouldn't affect the HSE's budget.

stefanovich

ezra_pound wrote: »

And what on earth would the Leitrim equivalent of the dart be - a taxi driven by a unionised driver?

A rickshaw?

Reduce social welfare in half, take rickshaw in Leitrim, take two panadol and dissolve in Irish water.

A ride on the wheel arch of a toyota hiace

TheDoc

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

(In my opinion)...

The public health system here is pretty good.
They sometimes face calamities...(for example: last winter's bed crisis was worsened by the unforseen problem of the winter flu jab proving inadequate to combat the most common flu strain around then).

but overall, if I can pin down one problem... its simply capacity.

Capacity is insufficient at every level of the system.
- Bed numbers overall are lower than they were in the 80's when the population was younger & 1/4 lower.
- insufficient step-down beds & social care capacity (not entirely the HSE's fault)
- Insufficient private hospital beds in order to accommodate their clients, thus unnecessarily stretching public capacity further.

Invest in greater capacity & a lot of the problems go away.

This would be capital expenditure & tax breaks so wouldn't affect the HSE's budget.

But it never is just one thing unfortunately. There is a number of issues that are all linked, and trying to tackle one is pointless without actioning the others.

There is outdated process' in the health service and too stringent process' that do not allow for proper initiative taking on behalf of front line staff. Not to mention their general bloated management structure that adds further timesinks and red tape.

Everyone knows the stories, everyone has heard of them. Everyone knows someone who had an A&E nightmare or general hospital problem. So while increased investment will provide some quick wins, it doesn't tackle some of the root problems in regards outdated procedures, piss poor communication across departments, and providing more initiative to frontline staff. And lets not forget a massively overbloated management structure, on contracts from the previous organisation that makes them nearly untouchable.

Villa05

Eric Cartman wrote:

Why does it have to come from old age pensions ?

Check the social welfare budget spend, from memory, I think only 25% is spent on unemployment payments.

quadrifoglio verde

TheDoc wrote: »

But it never is just one thing unfortunately. There is a number of issues that are all linked, and trying to tackle one is pointless without actioning the others.

There is outdated process' in the health service and too stringent process' that do not allow for proper initiative taking on behalf of front line staff. Not to mention their general bloated management structure that adds further timesinks and red tape.

Everyone knows the stories, everyone has heard of them. Everyone knows someone who had an A&E nightmare or general hospital problem. So while increased investment will provide some quick wins, it doesn't tackle some of the root problems in regards outdated procedures, piss poor communication across departments, and providing more initiative to frontline staff. And lets not forget a massively overbloated management structure, on contracts from the previous organisation that makes them nearly untouchable.

I'm training to be a pharmacist at the moment and work in a busy pharmacy in west dublin but we are a good bit away from any of the hospitals
Do you know how many scripts a week I get in from a&e with either solpadeine, ibuprofen, laxose and paracetamol on them?

At least 5 a day, maybe 10. Now it doesn't sound like much but remember, on any routes that they could take from the hospital to our pharmacy, they pass at least 5 if not 10. 99% of these scripts will be medical card patients. In fact I can't remember the last time I had a private patient come in with a hospital script for ****ing paracetamol.
They're not going to go to A&e for paractemaol as they have to pay 125 Euro for the privellage.
A small fee of even 10 Euro a visit for medical card patients would help clamp down massively on a&e overcrowding. That way, just like the private patient you're not going to go unless you need to.
And if you need to go to a&e, you should be coming out with a script for something that isn't readily available over the counter or in your local Tesco

TheDoc

quadrifoglio verde wrote: »

I'm training to be a pharmacist at the moment and work in a busy pharmacy in west dublin but we are a good bit away from any of the hospitals
Do you know how many scripts a week I get in from a&e with either solpadeine, ibuprofen, laxose and paracetamol on them?

At least 5 a day, maybe 10. Now it doesn't sound like much but remember, on any routes that they could take from the hospital to our pharmacy, they pass at least 5 if not 10. 99% of these scripts will be medical card patients. In fact I can't remember the last time I had a private patient come in with a hospital script for ****ing paracetamol.
They're not going to go to A&e for paractemaol as they have to pay 125 Euro for the privellage.
A small fee of even 10 Euro a visit for medical card patients would help clamp down massively on a&e overcrowding. That way, just like the private patient you're not going to go unless you need to.
And if you need to go to a&e, you should be coming out with a script for something that isn't readily available over the counter or in your local Tesco

I don't understand what you mean. Are you saying there is a large portion of A&E crowding, by people looking to secure prescriptions?

naughto

No she is saying that people on medical cards go to the doc to get nurofen \brofen as it will only cos them 2.50 for 100 tabs

BoJack Horseman

RTE budget liveblog is here

http://www.rte.ie/news/budget/2015/1013/734420-budget-2016-blog/

Baggy Trousers

I reckon people see right through this budget and what the government are trying to do. It's downright patronising.

Baggy Trousers

Baggy Trousers wrote: »

I reckon people see right through this budget and what the government are trying to do. It's downright patronising.

And embarrassingly will work.

The electorate will take the pat on the head and the accompanying 50p piece, grinning from ear to ear, and will go get some sweets and forget all about the cut on their knee.

BoJack Horseman

Well.... at least real terms deficit will continue to fall (to 1.2% of GDP by y/e 2016)

Skylinehead

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

The perception of bloat is probably unfounded at this point.

2.7% of HSE staffing numbers are for Management & Administration
7.4% of HSE expenditure is on same.

Which I think would rate quite well in a large private company.

I wonder if people were polled on the above where would they assume the numbers would be?

Is that 7.4% of staffing expenditure, or overall? Because I don't think it's great if the latter.

BoJack Horseman

Skylinehead wrote: »

Is that 7.4% of staffing expenditure, or overall? Because I don't think it's great if the latter.

Overall... but I think It also included the running of facilities & whatnot.

seamus

Smokes up by 50c from midnight tonight.
€10.50, a million publicans just howled in frustration

BoJack Horseman

The only tax rise will be on Tobacco.... excise up 50c on 20cigs

€750m in tax reductions

seamus

Entry threshold for USC to €13,000

Est. > 700,000 people will not be liable for USC from next year

USC rates down to 1%, 3% and 5.5%

Means that earners under €70,044 will pay 49.5% tax.

efb

Can't wait for calculators

BoJack Horseman

seamus wrote: »

Entry threshold for USC to €13,000

Est. > 700,000 people will not be liable for USC from next year

Didn't he say that the rise in the USC entry point will exempt 42,000 workers?

There is nowhere near 700k people earning below the now €13k threshold

Baggy Trousers

Deleted User wrote: »

And embarrassingly will work.

The electorate will take the pat on the head and the accompanying 50p piece, grinning from ear to ear, and will go get some sweets and forget all about the cut on their knee.

Yep it's why we have a pathetically inept political system.

seamus

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Didn't he say that the rise in the USC entry point will exempt 42,000 workers?

There is nowhere near 700k people earning below the now €13k threshold

Yeah, not sure. I might have been speed misreading.

Baggy Trousers

Baggy Trousers wrote: »

Yep it's why we have a pathetically inept political system.

Because we elect them. We (the electorate) prefer parties to tickle us than to do the right thing.

Parties learn this and buy into it.

The cycle continues ad infinitum.

Only we can stop it, but we never will, because we love a good chin tickle.

Dickerty

seamus wrote: »

Means that earners under €70,044 will pay 49.5% tax.

Work hard for 20+ years, achieve a modicum of success, continue to get pinged for half my taxable salary - while paying for GPs, Water, bins, child-care, Property Tax....

BoJack Horseman

Noonan is such a poor orator.

Bob24

Dickerty wrote: »

continue to get pinged for half my taxable salary -

Nope.

50% is only on the higher brackets of your salary. If you're on less than 70k (amount mentioned earlier) your overall income tax + USC is below 35% of your salary.

BoJack Horseman

9% VAT rate on the hospitality sector remains for a further year.

zl1whqvjs75cdy

Are we all rich yet?

seamus

Parents to children CAT threshold is now €280k

Proposing to freeze current LPT valuations to 2019. I.e. your LPT will stay the same.

BoJack Horseman

donkeyoaty0099 wrote: »

Are we all rich yet?

Noonan specifically mentioned that you won't be.

The rest of us are golden though.

zl1whqvjs75cdy

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Noonan specifically mentioned that you won't be.

The rest of us are golden though.

****e.

efb

@JohnLyonsTD: Recast €5 duty on ATM cards - no charges for debit card use #budget16

efb

Contactless limit raised from €15 to €30

efb

@FineGael: ICYMI: €550 Earned Income Tax Credit for those with earned income who do not have access to the PAYE credit #Budget16 http://t.co/oMLeDRioz4

efb

Equality

Thargor

Anyone seen one of those calculators that usually pops up around now to tell you if you're better or worse off yet?

Bob24

Thargor wrote: »

Anyone seen one of those calculators that usually pops up around now to tell you if you're better or worse off yet?

Not updated yet, but they probably pop-up here or there at some point today.

Dickerty

Bob24 wrote: »

Nope.

50% is only on the higher brackets of your salary. If you're on less than 70k (amount mentioned earlier) your overall income tax + USC is below 35% of your salary.

Hence my use of the word 'taxable'...

Thargor

Thargor wrote: »

Anyone seen one of those calculators that usually pops up around now to tell you if you're better or worse off yet?

http://taxcalc.ie/budget-2015/

Bob24

Dickerty wrote: »

Hence my use of the word 'taxable'...

You might want to double check what taxable income means. I doubt you are paying anywhere close to 50% tax on your whole taxable income.

Dickerty

Anyone have clarity on the childcare changes? We are currently paying for a second year of pre-school for our 4 year old, last year was free so we are paying for this one - should we now get this year for free??

efb

Dickerty wrote: »

Anyone have clarity on the childcare changes? We are currently paying for a second year of pre-school for our 4 year old, last year was free so we are paying for this one - should we now get this year for free??

No, takes effect from Sept 16