I'm sick to death of being taxed to death !

K-9

Mod:

Ok, can we move on from discussing NovemberJersey's farm and get back on topic.

marienbad

NovemberJersey wrote: »

And I think because farmers are the backbone of this country we should only have a flat rate of income tax of 20% as we give so many jobs to other people in one form or another anyway, my local Co Op was founded by my father and his equals and now it's one of the biggest flavourings and ingredients companies in the world

You must think you are still in the age of Rickard Deasy , from one of your own publications http://www.agriland.ie/farming-news/agriculture-plays-a-key-role-to-the-irish-economy/#

Some sense of entitlement you have , you want to run a big business and just because it is in farming you want subsidies , grants , flat tax and on top of all that you want to limit the help to other sectors .

Who is going to pay for all this ?

Professor Moriarty

Ok back to tax. I resent the fact that my taxes are used to subsidise unprofitable businesses such as farms. A more equitable use of my tax would be to treat all businesses equally, i.e. let them stand or fall on their own two feet. For example, an unprofitable farm could be sold to a farmer who was making profit thus obviating the need for subsidies (taxpayers' money) and increasing the yield from farming land. Everybody wins.

NovemberJersey

marienbad wrote: »

You must think you are still in the age of Rickard Deasy , from one of your own publications http://www.agriland.ie/farming-news/agriculture-plays-a-key-role-to-the-irish-economy/#

Some sense of entitlement you have , you want to run a big business and just because it is in farming you want subsidies , grants , flat tax and on top of all that you want to limit the help to other sectors .

Who is going to pay for all this ?

Nobody need pay for it, all we need do is stop wasting so much money on social welfare and healthcare and education… the wealthy people are getting driven out of this country, your better off not working and just having 10 children in this country at this stage, the grants that are there for sending people to college is crazy, if you don't work your children can get upto €8,000 every year for 3rd level grants plus they've no registration fees at all to pay then, for people like myself then we obviously get no 3rd level grants and we've to pay the university registration fee each year which costs thousands

NovemberJersey

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Ok back to tax. I resent the fact that my taxes are used to subsidise unprofitable businesses such as farms. A more equitable use of my tax would be to treat all businesses equally, i.e. let them stand or fall on their own two feet. For example, an unprofitable farm could be sold to a farmer who was making profit thus obviating the need for subsidies (taxpayers' money) and increasing the yield from farming land. Everybody wins.

I've reported you for repeatedly attacking me and trying to insult me. Your after making yourself liable by repeatedly telling me my business isn't profitable, I've answered anything you've asked me and I've been very civil and after the mod told us all to stop talking discussing my business you clearly ignored him on purpose

Professor Moriarty

NovemberJersey wrote: »

Nobody need pay for it, all we need do is stop wasting so much money on social welfare and healthcare and education… the wealthy people are getting driven out of this country, your better off not working and just having 10 children in this country at this stage, the grants that are there for sending people to college is crazy, if you don't work your children can get upto €8,000 every year for 3rd level grants plus they've no registration fees at all to pay then, for people like myself then we obviously get no 3rd level grants and we've to pay the university registration fee each year which costs thousands

Here's a stat: 40% of farmers get third level grants.

Wanderer78

NovemberJersey wrote:

Nobody need pay for it, all we need do is stop wasting so much money on social welfare and healthcare and education… the wealthy people are getting driven out of this country, your better off not working and just having 10 children in this country at this stage, the grants that are there for sending people to college is crazy, if you don't work your children can get upto €8,000 every year for 3rd level grants plus they've no registration fees at all to pay then, for people like myself then we obviously get no 3rd level grants and we've to pay the university registration fee each year which costs thousands

Always find these comments odd, how about we tackle the issues in the parasitic fire (finance, Insurance and real estate) sectors. Might help before we start destroying our welfare systems

Professor Moriarty

NovemberJersey wrote: »

I've reported you for repeatedly attacking me and trying to insult me. Your after making yourself liable by repeatedly telling me my business isn't profitable, I've answered anything you've asked me and I've been very civil and after the mod told us all to stop talking discussing my business you clearly ignored him on purpose

I'm so sorry that your feelings are so hurt. However, may I respectfully suggest that my point was general and didn't mention you or your farm. So why not answer the general point?

realitykeeper

kippy wrote: »

So you didnt put much thought into your initial statement then.

To me the national debt does not include bank debt. That should be defaulted on by the state.

realitykeeper

Wanderer78 wrote: »

You are aware, neoliberalism is a bust?

That was inevitable given that neoliberalism is not capitalism. The only reason neoliberalism was given an airing for a while was because anything is better than socialism.

Wanderer78

realitykeeper wrote: »

To me the national debt does not include bank debt. That should be defaulted on by the state.

if it was as simple as that, it would have been done long go, but i do suspect we re getting to a crunch point with regarding sovereign debt issues. as some say, 'debt that cant be paid, wont be paid', we just have to figure out how that actually happens, and that isnt easy as it generally means somebody's savings needs to be wiped as well.

Wanderer78

realitykeeper wrote: »

That was inevitable given that neoliberalism is not capitalism. The only reason neoliberalism was given an airing for a while was because anything is better than socialism.

id have to agree with somebody like ha-joon chang, that we re following the most dangerous 'form of capitalism' i.e. neoliberalism. id say its probably a good idea if we tried other forms of capitalism before all this goes bang! we need to start creating economic and financial systems that actually try to share wealth more evenly, systems that are more co-operatively based, and systems that wont cause irreversible damage to our socioeconomic, political and environmental systems. if we do continue with our current systems, it ll lead to the dismiss of our planet and our species. we dont need to return to socialism but to other systems that incorporate elements of both socialism and capitalism, and other systems that are beneficial to all, so to make this planet a better place to live for all, at least that should be our goal.

K-9

@Professor Moriarty & NovemberJersey, cut it out. Stop taking digs at each other.

Professor Moriarty

Wanderer78 wrote: »

id have to agree with somebody like ha-joon chang, that we re following the most dangerous 'form of capitalism' i.e. neoliberalism. id say its probably a good idea if we tried other forms of capitalism before all this goes bang! we need to start creating economic and financial systems that actually try to share wealth more evenly, systems that are more co-operatively based, and systems that wont cause irreversible damage to our socioeconomic, political and environmental systems. if we do continue with our current systems, it ll lead to the dismiss of our planet and our species. we dont need to return to socialism but to other systems that incorporate elements of both socialism and capitalism, and other systems that are beneficial to all, so to make this planet a better place to live for all, at least that should be our goal.

Social Democracy?

Wanderer78

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Social Democracy?

theres certainly no harm at looking at these kind of systems but it might be best if we put no barriers on other potential solutions. we re getting to a point where its gonna be all hands on deck, as we are facing serious failure in our environmental, political, economic and financial systems. in the words of yanis varoufakis, we re playing an 'extend and pretend' game with all of this. we re getting close to crunch point. we re in desperate need of the creation of true co-operative systems or we re done as a species. this wont be easy as we cant even agree on some very basic things, in a global sense.

NovemberJersey

K-9 wrote: »

@Professor Moriarty & NovemberJersey, cut it out. Stop taking digs at each other.

I was just trying to explain myself to him and reporteded him rather than stooping to his level and returning insults but I feel it's best I retain my dignity and leave the thread as it's no longer in anyway constructive to be here.

Professor Moriarty

Wanderer78 wrote: »

theres certainly no harm at looking at these kind of systems but it might be best if we put no barriers on other potential solutions. we re getting to a point where its gonna be all hands on deck, as we are facing serious failure in our environmental, political, economic and financial systems. in the words of yanis varoufakis, we re playing an 'extend and pretend' game with all of this. we re getting close to crunch point. we re in desperate need of the creation of true co-operative systems or we re done as a species. this wont be easy as we cant even agree on some very basic things, in a global sense.

Absolutely. Unfortunately, I think we're past tipping point. The environment is already shot and not enough is being done to prevent further climate change. Many scientists already believe that we have about 100 years left on the planet but that resource wars will start long before then.

Similarly, as Trump and Brexit show, many people are becoming more isolationist which precludes the co-operation needed to tackle global problems. The planet and its politics simply cannot sustain the aspirations of six billion+ people. That's just how it is. Instead of working together to make the planet an equitable and safe place, we still cling to the fallacy that if it's not happening in my country then it won't affect me. Those days are long gone.

So we we plough blithely onwards ignoring reality. And we're probably better off at this stage.

marienbad

NovemberJersey wrote: »

Nobody need pay for it, all we need do is stop wasting so much money on social welfare and healthcare and education… the wealthy people are getting driven out of this country, your better off not working and just having 10 children in this country at this stage, the grants that are there for sending people to college is crazy, if you don't work your children can get upto €8,000 every year for 3rd level grants plus they've no registration fees at all to pay then, for people like myself then we obviously get no 3rd level grants and we've to pay the university registration fee each year which costs thousands

correct me if I am wrong but did not farmers children get free access to 3rd level long before anyone else did ?

realitykeeper

Wanderer78 wrote: »

id have to agree with somebody like ha-joon chang, that we re following the most dangerous 'form of capitalism' i.e. neoliberalism. id say its probably a good idea if we tried other forms of capitalism before all this goes bang!

The damage has been done and the bang will happen in 2017 in my opinion. QE is to be tapered in the eurozone from April while the US Fed are running out of excuses for not increasing interest rates.

Wanderer78

realitykeeper wrote: »

The damage has been done and the bang will happen in 2017 in my opinion. QE is to be tapered in the eurozone from April while the US Fed are running out of excuses for not increasing interest rates.

i do suspect you could be right there, even david mcwilliams thinks 2017 is gonna be a bad year for the euro and europe and i fear he could be right as the writing's on the wall but that doesnt mean we bury our heads in the sand and throw our hands in the air, people's lives and livelihoods are at stake here.

realitykeeper

Wanderer78 wrote: »

if it was as simple as that, it would have been done long go, but i do suspect we re getting to a crunch point with regarding sovereign debt issues. as some say, 'debt that cant be paid, wont be paid', we just have to figure out how that actually happens, and that isnt easy as it generally means somebody's savings needs to be wiped as well.

Yes, a lot of it comes down to pain. On paper, Ireland owes the money borrowed to pay bank debt. For now, the repayments are being made. However, Ireland is still borrowing so the true extent of the pain is not apparent yet. But, once the QE tapering takes effect and the next recession comes along it will be a whole new ball game.

My own view is that the next recession will be worse than any in living memory. The sense of injustice at being required to pay for bank debt will be the final straw. Society will destabilize as will the government.

Stheno

Sarn wrote: »

FYI. Dental benefit will be expanded to include an annual free scale and polish and optical benefit will include the option of either free glasses or a contribution of €42 towards the cost of glasses (October 2017).

Not much, but a little better.

Have you a link to that?

Sarn

Stheno wrote: »

Have you a link to that?

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/money_and_tax/budget_2017.html

Stheno

Sarn wrote: »

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/money_and_tax/budget_2017.html

Thanks was a thread on this in dental issues apparently its not yet agreed

kippy

realitykeeper wrote: »

Yes, a lot of it comes down to pain. On paper, Ireland owes the money borrowed to pay bank debt. For now, the repayments are being made. However, Ireland is still borrowing so the true extent of the pain is not apparent yet. But, once the QE tapering takes effect and the next recession comes along it will be a whole new ball game.

My own view is that the next recession will be worse than any in living memory. The sense of injustice at being required to pay for bank debt will be the final straw. Society will destabilize as will the the government.

Where do you think we would be right now if the state hadn't taken over or partially taken over some of the banks or formed NAMA?

Wanderer78

realitykeeper wrote: »

Yes, a lot of it comes down to pain. On paper, Ireland owes the money borrowed to pay bank debt. For now, the repayments are being made. However, Ireland is still borrowing so the true extent of the pain is not apparent yet. But, once the QE tapering takes effect and the next recession comes along it will be a whole new ball game.

My own view is that the next recession will be worse than any in living memory. The sense of injustice at being required to pay for bank debt will be the final straw. Society will destabilize as will the the government.

i fear you could be right here, i do believe the next crashes could very well be catastrophic for us all.

kippy wrote: »

Where do you think we would be right now if the state hadn't taken over or partially taken over some of the banks or formed NAMA?

i think yanis varoufakis's term for this is, 'extend and pretend'. we ve only kicked cans down the road, they will eventually erupt. i do think we ll see more things such as 'bail-ins' etc when we eventually hit the wall. keep a close eye on the italian banking crisis, it ll reveal more of the fundamental problems within the eurozone.

realitykeeper

kippy wrote: »

Where do you think we would be right now if the state hadn't taken over or partially taken over some of the banks or formed NAMA?

Iceland is an (imperfect) example of what might have happened.

kippy

realitykeeper wrote: »

Iceland is an (imperfect) example of what might have happened.

Really?
How do you figure that out?

Sand

realitykeeper wrote: »

Yes, a lot of it comes down to pain. On paper, Ireland owes the money borrowed to pay bank debt. For now, the repayments are being made. However, Ireland is still borrowing so the true extent of the pain is not apparent yet. But, once the QE tapering takes effect and the next recession comes along it will be a whole new ball game.

My own view is that the next recession will be worse than any in living memory. The sense of injustice at being required to pay for bank debt will be the final straw. Society will destabilize as will the government.

The 'tapering' is going to be pretty brutal. The one thing that has dramatically changed since now and 2012 is that Draghi was appointed the head the ECB and he recognised the ECB would not survive the Euro crisis that Trichet was determined to engineer. So he turned on the money pumps, breaking the ruleset about what could not be done. A Vanity Fair article on the Celtic Tiger summarised the 2001-2008 period as being a time when every country in the world was left alone with a huge bag of money to do whatever they wished with it. Ireland took the opportunity to build, buy and sell each other houses.

Ireland is a nation uniquely dependent on globalisation and brass plate operations, as highlighted by our recent 26% GDP growth, and we are going to enter a Brexit/Trump era with the ECB at the absolute limits of what it can purchase and planning to slash its support of Irish bonds by 60%. And the public sector unions are demanding pay rises. Budgets are still made up on the hoof. Policies are just whims, with long term institutions like property taxes and water charges here today, gone tomorrow. Meetings are not minuted, all the better to support corruption. The construction industry is busy trying to weaken half hearted regulations, and the government is desperately trying to inflate another credit fuelled property bubble.

Similar to 2001-2008, Ireland has been swimming along in an era of incredibly easy credit since mid 2012, at times borrowing money at better rates than the US - which ought to be a red flag in itself. The ECB is signalling that the tide is about to go out so we'll see just how well dressed we are.

newacc2015

realitykeeper wrote: »

My own view is that the next recession will be worse than any in living memory. The sense of injustice at being required to pay for bank debt will be the final straw. Society will destabilize as will the government.

Why will it be worse? It is a very bold statement with zero reasoning

realitykeeper

kippy wrote: »

Really?
How do you figure that out?

Isn`t it obvious? They let their banks fail. Why the silly question?

Idbatterim

Any Iceland comparisons are ridiculous. They aren't in the euro zone. They didn't require a bailout... They weren't a potential failing domino. They are too small to matter probably even if they were in euro ...

realitykeeper

newacc2015 wrote: »

Why will it be worse? It is a very bold statement with zero reasoning

It will be worse for several reasons. For one thing, the ECB will not be able to respond to another recession with a fresh round of QE without seriously jeopardizing the value of the Euro. Lowering interest rates is not an option either because they have been kept at record lows for a long time now and going negative carries its own risks.

Furthermore, true or natural interest rates (which are not observable) were probably much higher than the low interest rates in the EU throughout the past decade. According to the Bank of International Settlements, this could result in a major "snapback" to real interest rates if confidence is lost in the Euro.

So without the means to offset a recession with more accomodative monetary policy, pain must be borne.

Finally, Ireland has a lot more debt now than in 2008. If there is even a rumour that Ireland cannot keep up its repayments, the cost of financing new Irish Bonds will become prohibitive.

FreudianSlippers

realitykeeper wrote: »

Iceland is an (imperfect) example of what might have happened.

I feel like this has been debunked in various posts to you over a number of years now...

Chips Lovell

The Icelandic situation is often misrepresented. Iceland did let its banks go bust, but then created new banks that were all capitalised by the state. The cost of doing that to the Icelandic exchequer wasn't too far off what Ireland spent bailing out its banks.

senordingdong

If only there was a political party that promised a flat tax rate.

BoatMad

realitykeeper wrote: »

Yes, a lot of it comes down to pain. On paper, Ireland owes the money borrowed to pay bank debt. For now, the repayments are being made. However, Ireland is still borrowing so the true extent of the pain is not apparent yet. But, once the QE tapering takes effect and the next recession comes along it will be a whole new ball game.

My own view is that the next recession will be worse than any in living memory. The sense of injustice at being required to pay for bank debt will be the final straw. Society will destabilize as will the government.

jaypers, doom and gloom,

(a) QE will unlikely to be tapered unless inflation returns , and that is now unlikely in the Eurozone

(b) Irelands long term debt is entirely financeable even if stressed tested . so no issues there

BoatMad

senordingdong wrote: »

If only there was a political party that promised a flat tax rate.

Ireland has almost that already , since only one group really pay a lot of tax proportionally , thats the middle classes on less then 100K and more then the average industrial

BoatMad

realitykeeper wrote: »

To me the national debt does not include bank debt. That should be defaulted on by the state.

what bank debt , none remains to default on ?

if you are suggesting the promissory note, that free money anyway

BoatMad

And I think because farmers are the backbone of this country

nope, pharma and tech are , farmers are not net contributors to the tax take overall

senordingdong

BoatMad wrote: »

Ireland has almost that already , since only one group really pay a lot of tax proportionally , thats the middle classes on less then 100K and more then the average industrial

I disagree.

kippy

realitykeeper wrote: »

Isn`t it obvious? They let their banks fail. Why the silly question?

But that not what actually happened and their situation was much different to our own.

Sand

Jep Gambardella wrote: »

The Icelandic situation is often misrepresented. Iceland did let its banks go bust, but then created new banks that were all capitalised by the state. The cost of doing that to the Icelandic exchequer wasn't too far off what Ireland spent bailing out its banks.

On the upside, they allowed their failed banks and their failed management culture to die. In Ireland we paid the same money and much more to keep the same failed banks and the same failed management culture intact for the next crisis they will inflict on the Irish people.

Maintaining and capitalising a banking system was always going to happen. A bank and a banking system are not the same thing.

realitykeeper

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

I feel like this has been debunked in various posts to you over a number of years now...

... and as I have pointed out over the years, the next recession will show that Iceland were correct in letting its banks fail. Ireland made a big mistake in bailing out the banks.

realitykeeper

Jep Gambardella wrote: »

The Icelandic situation is often misrepresented. Iceland did let its banks go bust, but then created new banks that were all capitalised by the state.

That is what Ireland should have done. Iceland has the option to privatize those state owned banks in time and get its money back. I do not see that happening in Ireland despite every effort to re-blow the house price bubble, they will not be able to sell the banks because of the stagflation in the economy. Stagflation can only end if the economy is allowed to crash properly like it was supposed to in 2008.

realitykeeper

BoatMad wrote: »

(a) QE will unlikely to be tapered unless inflation returns , and that is now unlikely in the Eurozone

(b) Irelands long term debt is entirely financeable even if stressed tested . so no issues there

Mario Draghi says he will start the taper in April, 2017. In any case, all this QE must either end or it will finish the QE currencies.

Regarding the manageability of Ireland`s long term debt, I have my qualms.

BoatMad

realitykeeper wrote: »

That is what Ireland should have done. Iceland has the option to privatize those state owned banks in time and get its money back. I do not see that happening in Ireland despite every effort to re-blow the house price bubble, they will not be able to sell the banks because of the stagflation in the economy. Stagflation can only end if the economy is allowed to crash properly like it was supposed to in 2008.

Iceland is no poster boy for fixing its banks, its HAD to leave its banks fail , because unlike Iceland it had no access to any other currency other then its own.

its outcomes were and still are incredibly difficult for the country , whereas in Ireland outside of the construction industry , people largely escaped the worst deprivations

"We used to have multinational companies - many of them have left. If you were to found a company in Iceland now which was focused on international markets, you would soon take it out of the country, because you would not want to be locked in our capital controls.
"The new jobs are not very high-paying because tourism is a service sector, not heavily dependent on educated people. We are actually importing labour - mostly from Eastern Europe - to work in the tourist sector. Many of the young Icelandic people are leaving.
"We just had to accept the losses, accept a world with much lower real wages, much lower living standards."
Asgeir Jonsson is the former chief economist at Kaupthing Bank.


in addition Ireland was not free to act, because we were in the Eurozone, hence the reason why Anglo in particular was not allowed to fail ( and in particular I believe that it should have been )

The other issue that people keep forgetting is that unlike Iceland, Irelands tax base was in a mess prior to the recession and the collapse of construction exposed the state inability to service its national debt. This is the real story behind the austerity, the banks were a side show

realitykeeper

BoatMad wrote: »

Iceland is no poster boy for fixing its banks, its HAD to leave its banks fail , because unlike Iceland it had no access to any other currency other then its own.

So Ireland had a soft option and it took it. The problem with soft options is they don`t work.

BoatMad wrote: »

... "We just had to accept the losses, accept a world with much lower real wages, much lower living standards."
Asgeir Jonsson is the former chief economist at Kaupthing Bank.

So they had to deal with reality. Pity it didn`t happen here, at least then it would have been in our recent past instead of our near future.

BoatMad wrote: »

in addition Ireland was not free to act, because we were in the Eurozone, hence the reason why Anglo in particular was not allowed to fail ( and in particular I believe that it should have been )

Ireland was not forced to bail out Anglo. It had a choice and it choose to do it. The EU had no law to force a country to bail out a bank. In fact it had laws prohibiting it but all that went out the window. To get easy money, Ireland choose to bail out Anglo.

BoatMad wrote: »

The other issue that people keep forgetting is that unlike Iceland, Irelands tax base was in a mess prior to the recession and the collapse of construction exposed the state inability to service its national debt. This is the real story behind the austerity, the banks were a side show

The solution to that was to take the full consequences of Bertie Ahern`s bad governance. Only by taking the consequences can the economy crash to its base level and that is necessary for real organic growth in the economy.

FreudianSlippers

BoatMad wrote: »

Iceland is no poster boy for fixing its banks, its HAD to leave its banks fail , because unlike Iceland it had no access to any other currency other then its own.

That's a key point - remember Iceland initially wanted to bail out its main bank; it was when they saw that they would need to bail out all their banks that they realised they didn't have sufficient money to do so.

So they nationalised the main bank, broke all banks down into good/bad portfolios and let the bad portfolio holding banks fail, whilst nationalising the good portfolios.

FreudianSlippers

realitykeeper wrote: »

Iceland is an (imperfect) example of what might have happened.

In other news NAMA expected to give a surplus of €2.3bn to the Irish taxpayer.

Anyone seriously suggesting this doesn't represent the best-case scenario from our bank bailout is in la la land.