Renua

micosoft

Flat tax and simplification of the Tax code! So far so Tea Party.

As someone who would personally benefit hugely from this change I have to say I'm not all that exercised about it. I doubt Renua will get a lot of voters from it given I'm used to living in a High Tax Low Services country. That said it might be beside the point as their explanation of how it would work in reality is as vague as Sinn Feins economic policy.

The party has said this new system would still account for 80 per cent of current tax and has asserted that higher compliance, less use of tax reduction measures and other multiplier effects would make good on the deficit.
Similar flat tax regimes are already in place in Jersey, Guernsey, Hungary, Romania, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia.

When this is what passes for innovative policy I'd have to say I'll pass on it. If they were at least honest and explained the huge cuts in social welfare and other areas to fit the very real tax cuts I'd appreciate it. Or perhaps they will do a FF and borrow it all....

blackwhite

I must say I love their reasoning for avoiding having it costed by the Dept of Finance.

http://www.thejournal.ie/renua-flat-tax-2368262-Oct2015/ wrote:

The party said that the proposal had not been costed by Department of Finance with Creighton describing many of their analyses as “inaccurate”.

Nothing at all to do with the strong possibility that the Dept of Finance might highlight the gaping holes in their reasoning, or lack of concrete figures that lead them to the 75-80% of current tax take

Manach

Given that any form of savings that would come from a simplification both of the byzantine tax & state bureaucracy would impact the civil service,then perhaps asking stakeholders that make up the Dept. of finance, which has an inbuilt inimical world view to such, to calculate the plan's effectiveness might be a tad ... fraught.

Gringo180

So basically somebody that earns around 200k a year would pay the same rate of tax as somebody on minimum wage? What planet is Creighton living on?

n97 mini

blackwhite wrote: »

I must say I love their reasoning for avoiding having it costed by the Dept of Finance.



Nothing at all to do with the strong possibility that the Dept of Finance might highlight the gaping holes in their reasoning, or lack of concrete figures that lead them to the 75-80% of current tax take

Despite having all the data, the DoF never gets a tax take forecast right, so I wouldn't necessarily believe any "holes" they might find in Renua's figures.

Manach wrote: »

Given that any form of savings that would come from a simplification both of the byzantine tax & state bureaucracy would impact the civil service,then perhaps asking stakeholders that make up the Dept. of finance, which has an inbuilt inimical world view to such, to calculate the plan's effectiveness might be a tad ... fraught.

Very well said.

aaakev

Gringo180 wrote: »

So basically somebody that earns around 200k a year would pay the same rate of tax as somebody on minimum wage? What planet is Creighton living on?

I like the idea, if i earn 10 times more than the next man i pay 10 times more tax than him. Explain how thats not a good system in theory?

Gringo180

aaakev wrote: »

I like the idea, if i earn 10 times more than the next man i pay 10 times more tax than him. Explain how thats not a good system in theory?

Because the person on minimum wage kind of needs every cent to just survive. How is it fair that somebody gets taxed 65 euro out of a measly 328 euro a week on minimum wage when somebody on 1k a week gets taxed 200?

It only benefits the rich in society.

BoJack Horseman

aaakev wrote: »

Explain?

The progressive nature of increasing rates with increasing income has worked well so far.

Lucinda explained it all on Radio 1.

- Eliminate USC
- 42% reduction in PAYE on earnings above €34k.
........ Very very costly.

But this will be compensated by self employed splurging their savings.... apparently.

Yes, this massive margin of tax take difference will be compensated by the random, unverified, non-causal assumption that small businesses get all spend happy for whatever reason.

Weak sauce...

Lockstep

Creighton is being very frank in how this affects the worst off.

She's admitted that low-wage workers will actually be worse off under her tax plan. Her solution: they should work more hours.

There's certainly a case to be argued for simplifying our tax system but Renua's approach is laughable.

gandalf

As someone who flirted with joining them I find these latest proclamations are very mixed.

The 23% flat tax rate is step too far and it does proportionally take more from the lower earners. A tweaked tiered system like we have now is better with a lower tax free threshold to bring more people into the taxation system (which is needed).

I agree with them totally on the motor tax situation. If you drive more you pay more. If you buy a bigger more fuel hungry car you pay more. It makes total sense to me. But this only works if they can fire the majority of staff that are currently involved in anarchic motor tax collection system in place. If it's going to be the usual fudge where something gets streamline yet the public servants effected are still in jobs then there is no point.

The TV license abolition is also a good idea. I for one resent paying a fee to have crap soap operas made in English and Irish and a smattering of current affairs programmes with overpaid prima donna's.

aaakev

Gringo180 wrote: »

Because the person on minimum wage kind of needs every cent to just survive. How is it fair that somebody gets taxed 65 euro out of a measly 328 euro a week on minimum wage when somebody on 1k a week gets taxed 200?

It only benefits the rich in society.

Anyone i know on minimum wage would love to be able to make more money, a tax system like this will allow it if they work more...

Someone earning 40 or 50k before tax is hardly rich but this will hugely benefit them. Im not rich and it would benefit me

In theory i think its a good idea

micosoft

aaakev wrote: »

I like the idea, if i earn 10 times more than the next man i pay 10 times more tax than him. Explain how thats not a good system in theory?

Marginal Utility.

micosoft

Manach wrote: »

Given that any form of savings that would come from a simplification both of the byzantine tax & state bureaucracy would impact the civil service,then perhaps asking stakeholders that make up the Dept. of finance, which has an inbuilt inimical world view to such, to calculate the plan's effectiveness might be a tad ... fraught.

PAYE system is extremely straight forward. It's not like the states where everyone makes a return. I suspect any cost savings will be minimal and certainly not in the quantum Renua need. They seem to think that it will then be made up from increased growth which is dubious.

Skrynesaver

A couple of points,
The cutoff point for gaining on the flat 23% proposal is around €50K.https://twitter.com/Cormac_Staunton/status/651366131450683392


As a general rule people on minimum wage zero hour contracts don't get to set their hours

There's some merit to the fuel levy over motor tax on a polluter pays principle

RTE's use of the license fee may be questionable where the "stars" are concerned and their pro-government bias is appalling at times, but the need for a public interest broadcaster is a reality, for example Murdoch admitted that the reason Sky is moderately sane in the UK relative to Fox in the Us is the existence of the BBC, without which he'd get away with equally bogus drivel.

Godge

If they had kept the 40% rate for income over say €150k, this could actually have been a runner.

By getting rid of all of the tax reliefs those at the top would pay the same or slightly more but everyone between 40k and 150k would benefit, which are the people most likely to vote.

So long as you also protected the pensioners, it would work as a vote-gatherer.

Gringo180

aaakev wrote: »

Anyone i know on minimum wage would love to be able to make more money, a tax system like this will allow it if they work more...

Someone earning 40 or 50k before tax is hardly rich but this will hugely benefit them. Im not rich and it would benefit me

In theory i think its a good idea

Some companies wont give overtime to there staff. Maybe raise the minimum wage, especially in Dublin, so people can earn more money instead off working more hours.

jjmcclure

I have seen the flat tax system at work in another country, Estonia. everyone I have spoken to there is delighted with it.

I have gone from having no interest in Renua to having some interest now.

I'm tired of people at the upper end, in this country let’s call that 100k (according to SF etc that's "rich") being expected to pay for everyone else.

In Ireland 2015 those who have educated themselves, worked hard, been successful and earn a good salary are treated like criminals. I for one would support any party that proposes a flat rate of tax. Those who earn more pay more, those who earn less pay less.

We are expected to pay for a bloated and ineffective public service that is overstaffed, overpaid and over protected. (frontline services excluded).

STOP blaming the successful in society for your own situation. If you want to earn more, learn more and get a better job!!!
A flat rate tax is a fair tax!

End of rant!

Gringo180

jjmcclure wrote: »

I have seen the flat tax system at work in another country, Estonia. everyone I have spoken to there is delighted with it.

I have gone from having no interest in Renua to having some interest now.

I'm tired of people at the upper end, in this country let’s call that 100k (according to SF etc that's "rich") being expected to pay for everyone else.

In Ireland 2015 those who have educated themselves, worked hard, been successful and earn a good salary are treated like criminals. I for one would support any party that proposes a flat rate of tax. Those who earn more pay more, those who earn less pay less.

We are expected to pay for a bloated and ineffective public service that is overstaffed, overpaid and over protected. (frontline services excluded).

STOP blaming the successful in society for your own situation. If you want to earn more, learn more and get a better job!!!
A flat rate tax is a fair tax!

End of rant!

I wouldn't like to live in a society that has this attitude of just looking out for themselves.

genericguy

Gringo180 wrote: »

I wouldn't like to live in a society that has this attitude of just looking out for themselves.

It's soviet Russia you're looking for buddy, it's about 50 years East of here. Your comment reads as: I need others to be prepared to pay my way.

It's not so much that people are "out for themselves" as we are sick of giving away half our pay checks for people who don't bother - when is a political party going to canvass on behalf of the squeezed middle earners, rather than those on the dole. Income tax as it stands is literally discrimination against the hard-working.

Gringo180

genericguy wrote: »

It's soviet Russia you're looking for buddy, it's about 50 years East of here. Your comment reads as: I need others to be prepared to pay my way.

It's not so much that people are "out for themselves" as we are sick of giving away half our pay checks for people who don't bother - when is a political party going to canvass on behalf of the squeezed middle earners, rather than those on the dole. Income tax as it stands is literally discrimination against the hard-working.

I am happy living in Ireland, I have no issue with the current tax rates so maybe its the likes of yourself that should seek to move elsewhere, like Estonia, Latvia or Lithuania, or other utopian nations where there is a flat tax rate.

jjmcclure

Gringo180 wrote: »

I am happy living in Ireland, I have no issue with the current tax rates so maybe its the likes of yourself that should seek to move elsewhere, like Estonia, Latvia or Lithuania, or other utopian nations where there is a flat tax rate.

Actually Estonia is pretty good. When you see how they run their public service etc.... Ireland could learn a thing or two.

And by the way I more than pay my way in this society.

K-9

Mod:

Err. Could we stop the Soviet Russia and maybe go live in Estonia stuff. Keep it civil, thanks.

Eric Cartman

Gringo180 wrote: »

I wouldn't like to live in a society that has this attitude of just looking out for themselves.

and a lot of us don't like living in a society where we get almost nothing in return for 51% of our money getting taken by the government and 24% of that money taken is given to One of the highest per capita welfare spends in the entire world and what do we have to show for it , genuine families struggling to put food on the table while in or in-between jobs having their money stolen from them by false disability claims, career single mothers treating kids like ATM's , drug addicts, alcoholics and pretend 'minority' groups using a quasi ethnicity to shield them from prosecution for their lives of chosen criminality.

At what point can anyone honestly look at a society where somebody who makes 100k a year doesn't even get to keep 60k of it in his pocket , yet somebody can get a free house and spend 200 quid a week drinking and smoking themselves to death and all of it is legal, and call that fair. This is not a fair society.

daveytheravey

Personally I like her and I like her proposals!

Imo she has a bit of balls and this is what a lot of people are lacking in the country. We need to stop punishing the worker who puts in long hours, or the entrepreneur who risks it all to be successful?

We need to encourage those trying to create jobs. Also its harsh but real, if you work harder the earlier years in your life school/college you will lead a better life in the future.

We should be congratulating those who earn high wages and not crucifying them by taxing over 40%? What kind of thank you is that? Work harder, play harder.

It is more worthwhile for some people to sit at home twiddling their thumbs getting the weekly dole than going out working hard long hours? What kind of system. Start rewarding those who work hard and aim to achieve more in their life. Start cutting the generous social welfare and lets see how people react. We are amongst the most generous social welfare givers in the European Union. This needs to stop. We are being taken advantage of left right and centre.

Gringo180

Eric Cartman wrote: »

and a lot of us don't like living in a society where we get almost nothing in return for 51% of our money getting taken by the government and 24% of that money taken is given to One of the highest per capita welfare spends in the entire world and what do we have to show for it , genuine families struggling to put food on the table while in or in-between jobs having their money stolen from them by false disability claims, career single mothers treating kids like ATM's , drug addicts, alcoholics and pretend 'minority' groups using a quasi ethnicity to shield them from prosecution for their lives of chosen criminality.

At what point can anyone honestly look at a society where somebody who makes 100k a year doesn't even get to keep 60k of it in his pocket , yet somebody can get a free house and spend 200 quid a week drinking and smoking themselves to death and all of it is legal, and call that fair. This is not a fair society.

Nothing in return? Anybody earning anywhere near 100k a year has got more than enough in return. They have a great job that pays well and have been educated to get themselves there by the same infastructure that they now pay tax into. This tax system will only impoverish people on low incomes and create unemployment.

You are away with the fairies if you think the majority of welfare recipients spend 200 quid a week drinking and smoking there lives away. Quiet a generalisation if I say so myself.

Skylinehead

I like their motor tax ideas, pay at the pump. Other than that, go away.

Eric Cartman

Gringo180 wrote: »

Nothing in return? Anybody earning anywhere near 100k a year has got more than enough in return. They have a great job that pays well and have been educated to get themselves there by the same infastructure that they now pay tax into. This tax system will only impoverish people on low incomes and create unemployment.

You are away with the fairies if you think the majority of welfare recipients spend 200 quid a week drinking and smoking there lives away. Quiet a generalisation if I say so myself.

* almost nothing (you missed that part)
* I gave an example of what is legal to do, I also clearly stated that genuine families in need (which definitely exist) are also being hurt by these people) it is not the majority, but they're certainly the most visible and expensive sector and I wouldn't call them a minority group either, they make up a sizeable chunk of recipients.

"they have a great job that pays well" - because the government just went and handed them that and its completely luck of the draw :roll eyes: They earned that job, they earned that money , who are you to say they shouldn't be allowed to keep it.

"and have been educated to get themselves there by the same infastructure that they now pay tax into" everybody in Ireland has the same educational opportunities these days, some would even say a welfare recipient has more of an opportunity due to grants, back to education programs and other employment support centres.

Gringo180

daveytheravey wrote: »

Personally I like her and I like her proposals!

Imo she has a bit of balls and this is what a lot of people are lacking in the country. We need to stop punishing the worker who puts in long hours,

This system is punishing the worker. The minimum wage worker is taxed €447 per annum. If they paid a 20% tax rate they would be taxed €3,600 per annum a loss of over 3k. How is that fair?

jjmcclure

Gringo180 wrote: »

This system is punishing the worker. The minimum wage worker is taxed €447 per annum. If they paid a 20% tax rate they would be taxed €3,600 per annum a loss of over 3k. How is that fair?

Everyone should contribute. Is €447 a fair contribution. What if that worker has 4 kids and a partner on the dole. Is €447 a fair contribution when you consider child benefit, schools, the dole, medical card etc.

But I forgot, I should pay for all those things for the minimum wage worker. I shouldn't be aloud to keep my hard earned money to provide a solid start for my own kids, or to invest I'm my family's future or in the economy to create more jobs. I should pay because I have been successful and therefore should be punished.

Eric Cartman

jjmcclure wrote: »

Everyone should contribute. Is €447 a fair contribution. What if that worker has 4 kids and a partner on the dole. Is €447 a fair contribution when you consider child benefit, schools, the dole, medical card etc.

But I forgot, I should pay for all those things for the minimum wage worker. I shouldn't be aloud to keep my hard earned money to provide a solid start for my own kids, or to invest I'm my family's future or in the economy to create more jobs. I should pay because I have been successful and therefore should be punished.

this is basically how Ireland works.

Gringo180

So basically yous expect people worse off with no exposable income to pay the same rate of tax as somebody who would be on a 100k + salary a year, or even 200k+ salary a year?

Instead of looking at it from your point of view why dont you put yourselves in the minimum wage workers shoes and see how he is suppose to live off 265 euro a week after a 40 hour work week if this rate did come in. What money is left over after rent, esb, gas, waste, food, commuting to work etc.??

I personally just find that morally wrong and quite repulsive in fact.

jjmcclure

Gringo180 wrote: »

So basically yous expect people worse off with no exposable income to pay the same rate of tax as somebody who would be on a 100k + salary a year, or even 200k+ salary a year?

Instead of looking at it from your point of view why dont you put yourselves in the minimum wage workers shoes and see how he is suppose to live off 265 euro a week after a 40 hour work week if this rate did come in. What money is left over after rent, esb, gas, waste, food, commuting to work etc.??

I personally just find that morally wrong and quite repulsive in fact.

It could be argued that the minimum wage worker receives significant benefits from todays system. I receive almost none of these benefits and ask little from the state.

Therefore yes. They shoul contribute a fair amount.

Chris_Heilong

At the moment Ireland is taxing 52% including social charges of peoples earnings if they are earning over 42000 euro a year, this is the highest tax bracket here, in the UK you would have to be making over 100k a year to be on the highest tax bracket, the Irish government is raking in the tax.

HivemindXX

Why stop at a flat tax? How is it fair that someone on 100k would pay 20k (for which they get almost nothing right Cartman?) when some slacker who only earns 20k (because they are too lazy to earn more, amiright?) only has to pay 4k?

A flat tax should mean a flat tax. My calculations indicate that everyone should just pay 10k no matter how much they earn. Any shortfall would be made up by eliminating waste and by how much our economy would improve as a result of this.

S.O

I waited to see what kinda policies Renua would develop before casting judgement, after this flat rate tax suggestion I won,t be giving them any vote nor preference whenever the election gets called, someone on €100.000 per year gets to pay the same rate of income tax as the minimum wage worker in the local supermarket, I wouldn,t and don,t support a party with a policy like that, and Lucinda saying on radio you can work more hours to be more productive just how many more hours beyond a 40 hour week would she like people to work ?

Rifter

Further from their economic policies being the foremost reason I won't be voting for any Renua candidate, the fact that Ms Creighton is centre right and Conservative, you can forget about issues like Gay Marriage and repeal of the 8th Amendment, I simply wont be voting for a Renua candidate!!

I would agree that our tax and social welfare system needs a massive overhaul off the top of my head,

*Changes in the tax brackets (properly costed, not a fook the poor and uneducated sweeping axe cut)
I don't agree that there should be a flat rate as it doesn't take into account the realities of the world we live in! If everyone had a Degree/Masters/PhD exactly how would the country run!
*Reform of Social Welfare payments, for instance child benefit
There should be a cut off to the amount of children it's paid out for AND an upper income threshold!
*I do like the motor tax/full tax proposal
*Reduction in vat on certain goods and services(Milk, eggs, bread etc etc)
*Increase in vat on certain goods and services (High end goods e.g. designer products/items)

jjmcclure

HivemindXX wrote: »

Why stop at a flat tax? How is it fair that someone on 100k would pay 20k (for which they get almost nothing right Cartman?) when some slacker who only earns 20k (because they are too lazy to earn more, amiright?) only has to pay 4k?

A flat tax should mean a flat tax. My calculations indicate that everyone should just pay 10k no matter how much they earn. Any shortfall would be made up by eliminating waste and by how much our economy would improve as a result of this.

If we look at a very simple example and for illustration use a 10% flat tax (overly simplistic I know)

Worker one earns €10k per year and pays €1k in tax
Worker two earns €100k per year and pays €10k in tax

So worker two pays TEN TIMES what worker one does. At what point do those moaning about people on over €100k feel that a system is fair? x20 times x 40 times?

jjmcclure

S.O wrote: »

I waited to see what kinda policies Renua would develop before casting judgement, after this flat rate tax suggestion I won,t be giving them any vote nor preference whenever the election gets called, someone on €100.000 per year gets to pay the same rate of income tax as the minimum wage worker in the local supermarket, I wouldn,t and don,t support a party with a policy like that, and Lucinda saying on radio you can work more hours to be more productive just how many more hours beyond a 40 hour week would she like people to work ?

Well try working the hours those of us who work in multinational companies work. Many of us are working 50 to 60 hours per week. In addition we are always expected to be available via phone and email. That's what is expected and in fact needed if you want to get ahead. OR try working the hours a small business owner works! 40 hours a week, get a grip mate its not 1950!!!

Gringo180

jjmcclure wrote: »

Well try working the hours those of us who work in multinational companies work. Many of us are working 50 to 60 hours per week. In addition we are always expected to be available via phone and email. That's what is expected and in fact needed if you want to get ahead. OR try working the hours a small business owner works! 40 hours a week, get a grip mate its not 1950!!!

Thats your choice to work those hours. Some people want to have a life outside of work and spend it with family and friends. Id rather work a 40 hour week and live a decent life than stress my body out doing ridiculous hours and taking most of my earnings to the grave. Working anything over 45 hours a week isnt healthy.

Besides some minimum wage jobs are more demanding on the body than somebody sitting in an office on there computer all day earning 100k+ a year.

gandalf

Gringo180 wrote: »

Thats your choice to work those hours. Some people want to have a life outside of work and spend it with family and friends. Id rather work a 40 hour week and live a decent life than stress my body out doing ridiculous hours and taking most of my earnings to the grave. Working anything over 45 hours a week isnt healthy.

It isn't healthy or productive either. People putting in long hours at the office are actually cheating their employers of productive work.

I absolutely agree with you on this. I tend to work around 5 extra hours per week in work because I come into the office early. It suits me I tend to get a lot more work done then. I absolutely try and get out of the office on time because I want to spend some quality time with my wife and young son.

I know what Lucinda is getting at but I think she has expressed it in a very clumsy fashion and is giving off a very arrogant off hand attitude that will lose Renua a number of their targeted voters.

I am still undecided whether I will give them a preference in the GE. Some of what they say is manna to my ears, other policies do not add up and in the background is the fear they will be dominated by a Conservative Catholic ethos that doesn't align with my liberal values. The other item is that I believe Lucinda could jump back into bed with FG when Enda finally gets ousted especially if her mate Leo becomes leader.

aaakev

gandalf wrote: »

in the background is the fear they will be dominated by a Conservative Catholic ethos that doesn't align with my liberal values.

For this reason alone they would not get my vote. Id be happy to vote for a party that has the same liberal values as myself and keep the current tax regime over conservatives offering low tax.

Idbatterim

Gringo180 wrote: »

So basically somebody that earns around 200k a year would pay the same rate of tax as somebody on minimum wage? What planet is Creighton living on?

No they would be paying in a massive multiple of what someone on 20k was on...

K-9

Idbatterim wrote: »

No they would be paying in a massive multiple of what someone on 20k was on...

He said same rate, not same amount.

Idbatterim

K-9 wrote: »

He said same rate, not same amount.

Yes absolutely they would pay the same rate. But if one person earns 10 times more, they will be paying in 10 times more, more than bloody "fair" to me. If people on this forum , dont see the damage a moronic rate like 51% does, then I won't bother trying to convince them. But just think forces second, it doesn't just effect those earners, it effects low or no income earners too. If the job creators or talent isn't here in Ireland, that is good for any of us how? Way too many contributing nothing indirect taxes , one of the results of the moronic marginal rate...

Quin_Dub

Conceptually the idea for a flat tax rate has merits..

But Ireland is too small I think to make it work.

We definitely need to address the tax rates and simplify the whole thing..

Perhaps something like 3 rates - 10%,20% and 30% with everyone from zero to €25k paying a flat 10% , €25k to €50k paying 20% and all income above that paying 30%.

That makes sure that all are contributing - The number of people "outside the tax net" is almost as big an issue as the 51% rate and its stupidly low entry point.

However it also means that those on lower incomes aren't getting hit unduly hard..

BoJack Horseman

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Perhaps something like 3 rates - 10%,20% and 30% with everyone from zero to €25k paying a flat 10% , €25k to €50k paying 20% and all income above that paying 30%.

It would probably mean a reduction in overall tax take.... but could be ameliorated by eliminating PAYE credits.

would also enhance the 'simplification' angle

BoJack would also like to see radical reform of social insurance taxation..... cos that's more of a mess than income tax.

jjmcclure

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Conceptually the idea for a flat tax rate has merits..

But Ireland is too small I think to make it work.

We definitely need to address the tax rates and simplify the whole thing..

Perhaps something like 3 rates - 10%,20% and 30% with everyone from zero to €25k paying a flat 10% , €25k to €50k paying 20% and all income above that paying 30%.

That makes sure that all are contributing - The number of people "outside the tax net" is almost as big an issue as the 51% rate and its stupidly low entry point.

However it also means that those on lower incomes aren't getting hit unduly hard..

Estonia's population is under 1.4 million and it works there.

jjmcclure

Gringo180 wrote: »

Thats your choice to work those hours. Some people want to have a life outside of work and spend it with family and friends. Id rather work a 40 hour week and live a decent life than stress my body out doing ridiculous hours and taking most of my earnings to the grave. Working anything over 45 hours a week isnt healthy.

Besides some minimum wage jobs are more demanding on the body than somebody sitting in an office on there computer all day earning 100k+ a year.

Correct! This is my choice. The difference is I don't expect you to pay for MY lifestyle choice like you expect me to pay for yours.

Gringo180

jjmcclure wrote: »

Estonia's population is under 1.4 million and it works there.

Estonia's average monthly wage is 600 euro compared to Irelands 1700 euro. The gap between high earners and low earners in Estonia is much smaller than it is in Ireland.

Zillah

Eric Cartman wrote: »

and a lot of us don't like living in a society where we get almost nothing in return for 51% of our money getting taken by the government and 24% of that money taken is given to One of the highest per capita welfare spends in the entire world and what do we have to show for it , genuine families struggling to put food on the table while in or in-between jobs having their money stolen from them by false disability claims, career single mothers treating kids like ATM's , drug addicts, alcoholics and pretend 'minority' groups using a quasi ethnicity to shield them from prosecution for their lives of chosen criminality.

At what point can anyone honestly look at a society where somebody who makes 100k a year doesn't even get to keep 60k of it in his pocket , yet somebody can get a free house and spend 200 quid a week drinking and smoking themselves to death and all of it is legal, and call that fair. This is not a fair society.

You sound like someone locked you in a cabin and screamed right wing cliches at you for a week.

Oh boo hoo, the poor people earning six figures are upset they pay more tax than the people who make their coffee and empty their bins :(:( How ever will this injustice be righted? I hear some people on the dole have televisions and refrigerators.

It is fair for people on high salaries to pay disproportionately larger income taxes because the minimum cost of living is fixed, so you get take home pay disproportionately higher than people on lower salaries compared to how much you need to spend to have a good quality of life. A tax hike for a poor person means they lose most or all of their disposable income; a tax hike for a rich person means their disposable income takes a small hair cut.

You want more in your pocket, I get it, it's very human; but if you put any effort into looking at the big picture you'll understand why a progressive system is more fair.

And all of that aside, even if we agreed for the sake of argument that people on the dole are all drug-addicted scroungers, and the people on minimum wage are unmotivated losers who should just work harder - what do you think is the pragmatic way to run things? Cut off the dole and leave their children trapped in poverty, to create a bigger cycle of addiction and homelessness? What's your vision of the future - do you really think forcing the unemployed to live from meal to meal is going to make society better? Do you really think working people on the minimum wage to the bone is going to improve life for anyone?

Or is it, that you just don't care? You want more in your pocket and poor people can just be a slave race for all you care? I think that probably is it for a lot of people, in which case you and Renua and go shag the horse you rode in on.

Gringo180

jjmcclure wrote: »

Correct! This is my choice. The difference is I don't expect you to pay for MY lifestyle choice like you expect me to pay for yours.

I earn a decent wage. I dont mind being taxed over 40% because I know I have more disposable income than somebody on minimum wage. People are too greedy these days and want to hoard there money instead of spending it in the economy like the minimum wage worker or the person on social welfare.

If this was to come in nobody will work for the minimum wage it will create huge unemployment.