FG to just do nothing for the next 5 years.

The Bishop Basher

I notice Leo is quick to mention that this government will last 5 years at every opportunity he gets.

It reeks of desperation.

And while I recoil in horror at the idea of another 5 years of dismal failure under a FFG government, it will be worth it just to see them finally rip each other apart.

Short term pain for long term gain.

SF are also guaranteed a spot at the table next time out if this goes ahead.

Never thought I’d be saying this but thanks Leo.

McMurphy

The Bishop Basher wrote: »

I notice Leo is quick to mention that this government will last 5 years at every opportunity he gets.

It reeks of desperation.

And while I recoil in horror at the idea of another 5 years of dismal failure under a FFG government, it will be worth it just to see them finally rip each other apart.

Short term pain for long term gain.

SF are also guaranteed a spot at the table next time out if this goes ahead.

Never thought I’d be saying this but thanks Leo.

I'm half expecting a heave against Michaél Martin at this stage, and another election will be on the card's.

I would like to have been a fly on the wall when Michaél began his pleading with fg to please not be allowed to be the only FF leader not to have become Taoiseach.....please.lads - please.... even if it's just for a month.......

efanton

McMurphy wrote: »

I'm half expecting a heave against Michaél Martin at this stage, and another election will be on the card's.

I would like to have been a fly on the wall when Michaél began his pleading with fg to please not be allowed to be the only FF leader not to have become Taoiseach.....please.lads - please.... even if it's just for a month.......

That's already been clearly signalled. Its still not clear the the FF party will let this unholy coalition go ahead, but if it doesn't then Michaél Martin is history.
FF will have nothing to lose, they will rapidly elect a new leader within a week or so and then head into a new election, full on damage limitation blaming a leader that in the interests of the party and the country they go rid of.

I seriously cant see Labour shifting on their stance, I doubt the SD's will do anything but talk, but it's the Green's that we have to watch.
It seems Eamonn Ryan has his eye on a minister's position, he stupidly suggested potentially being Tánaiste early in the week, but it seems his party is split about the whole idea of this coalition. I think they will talk for a week or so but when they don't get a commitment for spending on Green polices, which would be highly unlikely being that the money simply will not be there, they will drop out.

Then its on to a new election with a new FF leader that will not rule out coalition with SF saying instead they would prefer not to.

In the mean time you can be pretty certain knives are being sharpened and potential leaders are quietly drumming up support in the FF camp so that a quick and easy election for a new leader can take place before they go into election mode again,

The Bishop Basher

Despite signing off on it, there are still rumblings in FG too.

They know deep down that while this agreement might be legal and above aboard, it’s hasn’t been done in the true spirit of democracy.

The exclusion of SF and a large section of the electorate will come back to bite them.

The only way this could salvaged would be for FFG to do a phenomenal job running the country and maybe even deliver on a few election promises but we all know that’s just never going to happen.

christy c

The Bishop Basher wrote: »

The exclusion of SF and a large section of the electorate will come back to bite them.

Maybe you're right but I think it could actually benefit them, right now SF's tax and pension policies look more ridiculous than ever. And given SF's history of nonsensical proposals FF and FG may well be rewarded for this. Difficult to know.

Anyway as others have pointed out, this looks fragile and may not get off the ground.

Fann Linn

A document which just doesn't add up according to their fan boys in the Indo this morning.
In lay mans terms 'magic money tree economics and free gaffs for all'.

pjohnson

Idbatterim wrote: »

Fg get some hail mary set of circumstances and they are going to balls it up to ninety! LOL! for the FG'ers on here, reporting back to HQ, hell Varadkar, if you are reading this, with one of your sock puppet accounts. It wasnt margaret cash and that cohort that you are so concered about, that desereted you in their droves this election, its the ones you have paying for her and her mates, while you impoverish hard working people to pay for your banana republic.

Maybe you could let the middle keep some money, instead of sending it right down the bottom and top :rolleyes:

You supported FG a few weeks ago :pac:

efanton

christy c wrote: »

Maybe you're right but I think it could actually benefit them, right now SF's tax and pension policies look more ridiculous than ever. And given SF's history of nonsensical proposals FF and FG may well be rewarded for this. Difficult to know.

Anyway as others have pointed out, this looks fragile and may not get off the ground.

Would it not be fair to say you would need 'SF's tax and pension policies', and then some, to even come close to paying for what is 'aspired' to in the FF/FG framework document?

I think FF/FG have given up any right to criticise any other party's economic plan at this stage.
Even Labour, you do remember party that would agree to almost anything, says the framework document is an economic joke.

Wanderer78

Fann Linn wrote:

A document which just doesn't add up according to their fan boys in the Indo this morning. In lay mans terms 'magic money tree economics and free gaffs for all'.

Again, the creation of money is a very magical process anyway, I actually think ffg could do very well here, possibly blocking alternatives such as sf from getting into power for a very long time

christy c

efanton wrote: »

Would it not be fair to say you would need 'SF's tax and pension policies', and then some, to even come close to paying for what is 'aspired' to in the FF/FG framework document?

I think FF/FG have given up any right to criticise any other party's economic plan at this stage.
Even Labour, you do remember party that would agree to anything, says the framework document is an economic joke.

SF's tax and pension policies are an economic joke to borrow your phrase, and will end up leaving the state in an even bigger hole IMO, so that wont be paying for anything.

I agree that FF and FG have not set the bar even remotely high, but that doesn't mean there isn't worse out there.

Labour got a rough deal IMO, their ideals would not be mine but they were the only ones to oppose the bank guarantee so they are worth listening to. However they are another party wanting to pour petrol on the pension time bomb, so not infallible either.

Fann Linn

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Again, the creation of money is a very magical process anyway, I actually think ffg could do very well here, possibly blocking alternatives such as sf from getting into power for a very long time

Can MODS please paste the above as a sticky on the usual SF bashing threads so that the usual suspects can be made aware of this FG/FF position.

The Bishop Basher

Wanderer78 wrote: »

I actually think ffg could do very well here, possibly blocking alternatives such as sf from getting into power for a very long time

They would have to deliver real and credible change to make that happen.

And as past performance has demonstrated time and again, they aren’t capable of delivering anything competently.

SF will wipe the floor with them if we’re forced to endure another 5 years of the same.

Which is exactly what we’ll get.

Wanderer78

Fann Linn wrote:

Can MODS please paste the above as a sticky on the usual SF bashing threads so that the usual suspects can be made aware of this FG/FF position.

I'm not sure what you mean, I'm far from a supporter of ffg, as I'm a lefty myself, but I do believe the political left don't have a hope of getting a majority in this country for a very long time, if ever

Idbatterim

christy c wrote: »

SF's tax and pension policies are an economic joke to borrow your phrase, and will end up leaving the state in an even bigger hole IMO, so that wont be paying for anything.

I agree that FF and FG have not set the bar even remotely high, but that doesn't mean there isn't worse out there.

Labour got a rough deal IMO, their ideals would not be mine but they were the only ones to oppose the bank guarantee so they are worth listening to. However they are another party wanting to pour petrol on the pension time bomb, so not infallible either.

No ffg tax policies are a joke, try suggest Ireland's tax set up to any other country , a rip off top vat rate and marginal rate , effectively no property tax , no water charges but that one is one I wouldn't bother with again...

Social housing worth billions " rented" put for virtually nothing. Ffg needn't talk about the economy and prudence, what they have concocted here with endless vote buying is a banana republic taxation system. With the tax liability falling massively on the workers and not the actual wealthy, with all of their land and property, for a start

Wanderer78

The Bishop Basher wrote:

They would have to deliver real and credible change to make that happen.

I'm not sure about that, we all know both parties histories, and large proportions of the electorate keep voting for them

The Bishop Basher wrote:

SF will wipe the floor with them if we’re forced to endure another 5 years of the same.

I'm not convinced of this at all, I suspect sf just had their chance, ffg are smarter than that, they won't allow that to happen again

christy c

Idbatterim wrote: »

No ffg tax policies are a joke, try suggest Ireland's tax set up to any other country , a rip off top vat rate and marginal rate , effectively no property tax , no water charges but that one is one I wouldn't bother with again...

Social housing worth billions " rented" put for virtually nothing. Ffg needn't talk about the economy and prudence, what they have concocted here with endless vote buying is a banana republic taxation system. With the tax liability falling massively on the workers and not the actual wealthy, with all of their land and property, for a start

I addressed some of this with you a few days ago (agree with a lot of it) and I also put some questions to you and I didn't hear from you since.

christy c

Fann Linn wrote: »

In lay mans terms 'magic money tree economics and free gaffs for all'.

Well we did have the SF folk here over the last day or 2 saying they stole their policies

Joking aside, I think we are going way to close to the Bertie era of spending like drunken sailors. If the coalition does go ahead and one of them gets wiped out, it would be nice if a sensible centre right party could emerge from the ashes. Unfortunately we did not get one in the aftermath of the last crash.

Idbatterim

christy c wrote: »

I addressed some of this with you a few days ago (agree with a lot of it) and I also put some questions to you and I didn't hear from you since.

Ok will go back and reply when on desktop. One poster here thinks I am making up the effects of damage an idiotic marginal rate of tax has on the decisions people make regarding it here, I am going to link to a poster in the property forum , saying how he takes extra time off as a benefit rather than lose half the pay. A friend takes shares in company as bonus rather than Taking cash and paying marginal rate. I have workers turn down extra hours at generous rates because they arent going to work for half the normal hourly rate , regardless of what way some here try to justify it. Imagine the damage this does to potential tax returns, it is lure and utter lunacy, its economic self harm , that's what it is!

The Bishop Basher

Wanderer78 wrote: »

I'm not sure about that, we all know both parties histories, and large proportions of the electorate keep voting for them

Well in his own words, Leo and FG lost the election while SF made historic gains so I would argue that large proportions of the electorate won't keep voting for them in the way that they did prior to the GE.

My daughter is 21 and can't see any way she's ever going to be able to afford a house. She and many of her peers lay the blame for that solely on Leo and FG. They are the next generation of voters. They're angry and disillusioned about the scraps they've been left but most importantly they neither remember nor care about the troubles so the constant anti SF rhetoric from FFG just pushes them further in that direction.

The last GE was a watershed and MM and Leo don't seem to have copped it yet.

christy c

Idbatterim wrote: »

Ok will go back and reply when on desktop. One poster here thinks I am making up the effects of damage an idiotic marginal rate of tax has on the decisions people make regarding it here, I am going to link to a poster in the property forum , saying how he takes extra time off as a benefit rather than lose half the pay. A friend takes shares in company as bonus rather than Taking cash and paying marginal rate. I have workers turn down extra hours at generous rates because they arent going to work for half the normal hourly rate , regardless of what way some here try to justify it. Imagine the damage this does to potential tax returns, it is lure and utter lunacy, its economic self harm , that's what it is!

Yes I agree. Problem is we don't have parties proposing anything remotely sensible and affordable at the moment.

By the way that was 3 or 4 days ago (guessing) I asked you those questions. I've no interest keeping a conversation running over that timeframe.

Mortelaro

Idbatterim wrote: »

Ok will go back and reply when on desktop. One poster here thinks I am making up the effects of damage an idiotic marginal rate of tax has on the decisions people make regarding it here, I am going to link to a poster in the property forum , saying how he takes extra time off as a benefit rather than lose half the pay. A friend takes shares in company as bonus rather than Taking cash and paying marginal rate. I have workers turn down extra hours at generous rates because they arent going to work for half the normal hourly rate , regardless of what way some here try to justify it. Imagine the damage this does to potential tax returns, it is lure and utter lunacy, its economic self harm , that's what it is!

That's exaggeration and hyperbole
The effective tax rate for all of a persons income on say 50k a year is about a third
Even on 100k,its only about 40%
Half the normal hourly rate my Ar5e
At no point does it go above 50%
Try the 1980's for that

The Bishop Basher

Mortelaro wrote: »

That's exaggeration and hyperbole
The effective tax rate for all of a persons income on say 50k a year is about a third
Even on 100k,its only about 40%
Half the normal hourly rate my Ar5e
At no point does it go above 50%
Try the 1980's for that

Strange.

I was awarded shares a few months ago and paid 52% tax on them.

Should i request 12% back ?

That aside though, who cares about a marginal tax rate when the government are taking well in excess of 50% back off you in one form or another.

Marginal tax rates are just a red herring in these conversations.

Bass Reeves

Idbatterim wrote: »

Ok will go back and reply when on desktop. One poster here thinks I am making up the effects of damage an idiotic marginal rate of tax has on the decisions people make regarding it here, I am going to link to a poster in the property forum , saying how he takes extra time off as a benefit rather than lose half the pay. A friend takes shares in company as bonus rather than Taking cash and paying marginal rate. I have workers turn down extra hours at generous rates because they arent going to work for half the normal hourly rate , regardless of what way some here try to justify it. Imagine the damage this does to potential tax returns, it is lure and utter lunacy, its economic self harm , that's what it is!

I agree Idbatterim the marginal rate is an issue. Its implementation at around 35% causes huge issues to many workers. That along with college grants starting being means tested at around 50K encourages those on wages around these levels to watch there earnings and causes issues for certain business's

However its dose not effect tax returns as it is unlikely that this is a huge issue across the economy. When you get above these wages rates those in the privates sector start to go ob salaries, or OT rates compensate for it. It is one of the many income traps in the Irish economy.

However many forget that the main issue is the vast amount that pay no tax due to our system that takes low earners out of the tax net. College students(thanks very much) semi retired people working part time, self employed handling cash( taxi drivers etc) older people.

I doubt if SF will change any of that

boring accountant

Mortelaro wrote: »

That's exaggeration and hyperbole
The effective tax rate for all of a persons income on say 50k a year is about a third
Even on 100k,its only about 40%
Half the normal hourly rate my Ar5e
At no point does it go above 50%
Try the 1980's for that

Sorry but your numbers are simply bogus. Failing to include PRSI and USC. Yes, at some point it does go above 50%, it can go as high as 55%.

Mortelaro

boring accountant wrote: »

Sorry but your numbers are simply bogus. Failing to include PRSI and USC. Yes, at some point it does go above 50%, it can go as high as 55%.

I was working off this

Bass Reeves

Mortelaro wrote: »

That's exaggeration and hyperbole
The effective tax rate for all of a persons income on say 50k a year is about a third
Even on 100k,its only about 40%
Half the normal hourly rate my Ar5e
At no point does it go above 50%
Try the 1980's for that

You are incorrect there I think with Tax, PRSI and USC. Tax is 40% PRSI is 4%. USC for most workers is 4.5% and jumps to 8% on earning over 70K.

Effective rates are not really the issue it the marginal rate. Most on a steady income are not aware of tax as those who's income vary due to extra hours or commission. Nothing worse than putting in an 60 hour week and 1-2 weeks later when you are paid for it to see an 2-300 euro gone out of your wages. Other time it is a huge issue is where companies pay a bonus say a worker on 50K gets a 10% bonus he takes 500 as a tax free voucher ( not really worth 500 but better than paying half in tax) and sees the rest shrink down to nearly 2250 euro.

FrancieBrady

So who is biting at this Framework Document?

Has anyone been positive about it?

Mortelaro

Bass Reeves wrote: »

You are incorrect there I think with Tax, PRSI and USC. Tax is 40% PRSI is 4%. USC for most workers is 4.5% and jumps to 8% on earning over 70K.

Effective rates are not really the issue it the marginal rate. Most on a steady income are not aware of tax as those who's income vary due to extra hours or commission. Nothing worse than putting in an 60 hour week and 1-2 weeks later when you are paid for it to see an 2-300 euro gone out of your wages. Other time it is a huge issue is where companies pay a bonus say a worker on 50K gets a 10% bonus he takes 500 as a tax free voucher ( not really worth 500 but better than paying half in tax) and sees the rest shrink down to nearly 2250 euro.

Ah I see,is that the case if the person gets a pay rise to 55k?
According to that Irish times table,their tax is less than 17k on that salary?
They're also suggesting that includes USC and the data is from the Irish tax institute

McMurphy

FrancieBrady wrote: »

So who is biting at this Framework Document?

Has anyone been positive about it?

Not that I've seen, a cursory glance at yesterday's/this morning's news, labour seem to be rejecting it, the social democrats said it was far from radical and very underwhelming.

Not sure about Eamon Ryan and the greens, but they're just back in from the wilderness, surely to Jesus Ryan ain't that stupid to get the party decimated once again by being mudwings?

But forget all the above, the articles I'm reading, it seems many within FFG aren't too happy about it either, right up to ministerial positions.

If what I'm reading about big names possibly being culled (Richard Burton in particular) things could deteriorate fairly quickly.

The Bishop Basher

FG are starting to remind me of that drunk at a party that won't go home.

You ask them to leave cause they're annoying everyone but they think they're the life and soul of the party and everyone wants them around. It's starting to get cringe worthy and embarrassing at this stage.

On the up side it's lose lose for FFG.

If they don't pull it off they will have attempted a cynical power grab on the back of a health crisis for zero gain.

If they do manage to pull it off it will create huge divisions within each party and is likely destroy one or both of them. It will certainly mean the end of term swapping for a decade at least.

I suppose being blinded with a lust for power while already so incompetent was never going to end well for either Leo or MM.