Time to tax wealth - Covid cost Solution

LeinsterDub

Jizique wrote: »

None, because one of the big challenges here is the low level of tax paid by low paid workers, unlike their counterparts in other European countries like the “evil” Germans and the saintly Scandis, yet they expect the same standard of public services as in those countries.

Germany provides a functioning welfare system in exchange. I'll trade you the ability to tax the poor more in exchange for health, housing and transportation

Shefwedfan

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

But if they have them anyway, you think the extra children shouldn't get any payments? That's unfair on the kid, it's not their fault they have irresponsible parents.

No I mean going forwardm, if they have fired out 7 you cant cut them now, from now on you have a max of X....anymore and you pay yourself

LeinsterDub

Shefwedfan wrote: »

My post asked to shut down people having over 4 kids unless they can afford it. How is that hittest the weakest? if they are the weakest the last thing they should be doing is having more kids would you not think?

5 kid it was 2 a minute ago! How many people have 5 or more kids now a days? A very small percentage

blackbox

antix80 wrote: »

We have inheritance tax. The rich can avoid it.

I'd be in favour of a small, flat rate inheritance tax. Maybe register a charge against a property sooner than start making exceptions on paying the tax.

This is a UK article but makes a mockery of inheritance tax

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3735458/How-new-Duke-avoid-3billion-tax-bill-Family-trust-save-Westminsters-fortune-death-duties.html

It doesn't have to be like this.

Shefwedfan

LuasSimon wrote: »

Whilst I am in favour of a wealth tax to increase our taxation it is only fair the welfare is looked at too and people like Margaret cash and her cousins getting children allowance for up to 8 children is not right . 4 children who should be the maximum if not three for children’s allowance purposes . A certain cohort of our society are breeding knowing the state( taxpayer ) will pick up the bill .

Also people who never did a days work should not receive the same welfare as someone who worked for twenty years who is now unemployed .

Personally I would stop at 3.....mostly because 4 in a 3 bed semi in Dublin plus 2 adults is too much, its over crowded.....just thinking about logisitics:P

Shefwedfan

LeinsterDub wrote: »

5 kid it was 2 a minute ago! How many people have 5 or more kids now a days? A very small percentage

I said pick a number on original post, as above over 3 and no child maintnenace

Thelonious Monk

Shefwedfan wrote: »

No I mean going forwardm, if they have fired out 7 you cant cut them now, from now on you have a max of X....anymore and you pay yourself

And you think this is fair on the kids? They didn't ask to be born.

markodaly

KyussB wrote: »

End massive inter-generational transfers of wealth, and you help to put a time limit on massive wealth inequality.

Apart from the fact that there is zero evidence that inequality has been accelerated because of inheritance.

I know its a catchy narrative, kinda of like a 'year zero' solution, buts its nonesense.

Shefwedfan

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

And you think this is fair on the kids? They didn't ask to be born.

Do you think it is fair on a child to be born into a house with a mother who has 7-8 kids, no home, no job....is that fair?



People need to start to act with some responsibility. No more excuses. Max 3 kids and then its their problem. If they can't look after the kids take them off them.

KaneToad

markodaly wrote: »

Apart from the fact that there is zero evidence that inequality has been accelerated because of inheritance.

I know its a catchy narrative, kinda of like a 'year zero' solution, buts its nonesense.

Of course inequality is exacerbated by inheritance. The rich stay rich. They access the better schools, the better universities, the better jobs. The cycle continues. The ability to become a successful entrepreneur is greatly assisted by having an interest free wad to get you going.

A quick glance at Ireland's successful business men:

JP McManus - began his career in family construction business.

Denis O'Brien - son of millionaire, personal assistant to Tony Ryan for a while

Michael O'Leary - son of millionaire, invited personally to work with Tony Ryan because he went to (expensive) boarding school with Ryan's kids

John Magnier - son of a millionaire land owner, had to leave education in (expensive) Glenstal abbey at 15 to manage family estate on death of father.

All of the above are very successful business men who undoubtedly work hard and smart. But we can't ignore the advantages that assisted them to get where there are.

One curiosity though, is Sean Quinn. Although recent events suggest that he had other assistance to get him to where he is.

Rodin

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Do get the same sense of shame availing of other state supports? Education, health, roads etc?

Nope.

I have a hefty tax/PRSI/USC deduction these days that takes care of these.

Rodin

Wanderer78 wrote: »

so at 18, you knew you were smarter the staff at the dole office, how so? what would you have done at that time, if the welfare system didnt exist?

what you re trying to get to with the health system, is the complex nature of human behavior, obesity is extremely complex, particularly psychologically. do you think we should just simply ignore those with complex psychologically issues?

Obesity isn't complex.
A simple case of more going in than going out.

There is a major issue in society with lack of personal responsibility. Always someone / something else's fault.

Shefwedfan

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Do get the same sense of shame availing of other state supports? Education, health, roads etc?

Poster said he/she got a job. SO in reality with the tax paid they have probably paid multiple times what the education etc cost.



In my case I know pay tax on my car and tax on the fuel I put into one, so I pay for the roads and I have private health care.....


I pay substantial tax now and I would like that money used to invest in the local area, like the local running club got a new track. Of course when it was annoucned ou had all the scrougers in the place complaining.....along with education etc.....


So not sure what relevance your point has?

LeinsterDub

Shefwedfan wrote: »

I said pick a number on original post, as above over 3 and no child maintnenace

Seems like this policy isn't quite ready for your manifesto so.

LeinsterDub

Shefwedfan wrote: »

Do you think it is fair on a child to be born into a house with a mother who has 7-8 kids, no home, no job....is that fair?



People need to start to act with some responsibility. No more excuses. Max 3 kids and then its their problem. If they can't look after the kids take them off them.

Honestly how many case like this actually exist?

LeinsterDub

Rodin wrote: »

Nope.

I have a hefty tax/PRSI/USC deduction these days that takes care of these.

It also takes care of those 2 weeks you spent on jobs seekers

Jizique

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Germany provides a functioning welfare system in exchange. I'll trade you the ability to tax the poor more in exchange for health, housing and transportation

Classic quote - but please can we have more detail on Hartz 4 since you are such an expert on Germany.
Germany does not provide free housing or anything like it, Germany does not provide disability to benefit widely, and Germany does have a health system which is not unlike the free care which is available to all welfare recipients through their medical card.
Welfare recipients here get HAP, which covers housing, and free travel, which covers travel.
In Germany, you get an apartment in a ****ty area and are not allowed to turn down work.

gormdubhgorm

LuasSimon wrote: »

In this like many other countries there is a huge difference between taxing income and taxing wealth .
Is it fair that someone with 40 Million in wealth only pays tax on their income of 100k pays 30k in tax whilst someone with no assets earning 60k pays 15K tax ?

SF wanted to tax those of 100k and up more?
Oh ah up the Ra, it will be grand will they get in. And all those auld balaclava's should serve as decent masks against the auld Covid19. :rolleyes:

combat14

effectively the government I.e. tax payer are bailing out banks and particularly property land lordships again by borrowing 20-30 billion euro over next period of time.

Without the coivd payments rents and mortgages are not going to be paid ... effectively a bailout for landlords and banks again

Why not just do away with money? Everyone gets allocated a basic resource allowance - food, medical care, housing, childcare - enough to maintain a basic standard of living.

We could choose to work to pass the day and achieve something, and to get extra allocations for our work, and more again for exemplary performance.

Star Trek TNG alluded to the idea that humans had little need for commerce anymore - it would solve a lot of problems, and make us better people. The trillionaires' money would still exist, it just wouldn't have any value.

Fanciful, I know - but we can dream...

Rodin

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Why not just do away with money? Everyone gets allocated a basic resource allowance - food, medical care, housing, childcare - enough to maintain a basic standard of living.

We could choose to work to pass the day and achieve something, and to get extra allocations for our work, and more again for exemplary performance.

Star Trek TNG alluded to the idea that humans had little need for commerce anymore - it would solve a lot of problems, and make us better people. The trillionaires' money would still exist, it just wouldn't have any value.

Fanciful, I know - but we can dream...

Be handy to have a machine to make Earl Grey in 2 seconds too.

raze_them_all_

Wanderer78 wrote: »

How much of their wealth was created by productive means, and not financial wizardry? How many jobs were in fact destroyed by this wizardry?

How many jobs were created by him and jobs are enabled by him. Everyone uses computers but complains about the guy who profits from it

Rodin

LeinsterDub wrote: »

It also takes care of those 2 weeks you spent on jobs seekers

Actually it doesn't.
That was in a different jurisdiction which work there suitably paid for.
No social welfare of any kind has been claimed in this state.

Wanderer78

raze_them_all_ wrote: »

How many jobs were created by him and jobs are enabled by him. Everyone uses computers but complains about the guy who profits from it

...and how many jobs were lost from activities such as monopolization of markets, stock buy backs etc etc etc

declanflynn

KaneToad wrote: »

Of course inequality is exacerbated by inheritance. The rich stay rich. They access the better schools, the better universities, the better jobs. The cycle continues. The ability to become a successful entrepreneur is greatly assisted by having an interest free wad to get you going.

A quick glance at Ireland's successful business men:

JP McManus - began his career in family construction business.

Denis O'Brien - son of millionaire, personal assistant to Tony Ryan for a while

Michael O'Leary - son of millionaire, invited personally to work with Tony Ryan because he went to (expensive) boarding school with Ryan's kids

John Magnier - son of a millionaire land owner, had to leave education in (expensive) Glenstal abbey at 15 to manage family estate on death of father.

All of the above are very successful business men who undoubtedly work hard and smart. But we can't ignore the advantages that assisted them to get where there are.

One curiosity though, is Sean Quinn. Although recent events suggest that he had other assistance to get him to where he is.

All of the above would have become millionaires irrespective of their parents wealth, some people have a drive to get to the top and hats off to them.
If young Sharon with 3 kids from 3 different fathers in a free house with all the perks was gifted €999,999.00 there is way more chance of her becoming insolvent than a millionaire, so she would go back to square one.

Eric Cartman

Deleted User wrote: »

Why not just do away with money? Everyone gets allocated a basic resource allowance - food, medical care, housing, childcare - enough to maintain a basic standard of living.

We could choose to work to pass the day and achieve something, and to get extra allocations for our work, and more again for exemplary performance.

Star Trek TNG alluded to the idea that humans had little need for commerce anymore - it would solve a lot of problems, and make us better people. The trillionaires' money would still exist, it just wouldn't have any value.

Fanciful, I know - but we can dream...

thats garden of eden stuff right there, sitting round smoking joints sipping on fruit juices and it never rains. We would all die, all of us. Nobody would clean the sewers anymore, nobody would run the power plant, we'd all die.

now I'm not calling you a communist but those teens and 20 somethings these days that think communism is a great idea seem to think we can achieve the above, where they could work if they want to but choose to fill their days painting by a nice stream if they didn't , when the reality is they're down a mine and if they try and put in less than 12 hours a day they're shot.

KyussB

Deleted User wrote: »

Why not just do away with money? Everyone gets allocated a basic resource allowance - food, medical care, housing, childcare - enough to maintain a basic standard of living.

We could choose to work to pass the day and achieve something, and to get extra allocations for our work, and more again for exemplary performance.

Star Trek TNG alluded to the idea that humans had little need for commerce anymore - it would solve a lot of problems, and make us better people. The trillionaires' money would still exist, it just wouldn't have any value.

Fanciful, I know - but we can dream...

Money already performs a lot of this basic purpose - just people are easily fooled into thinking that lack of money = lack of resources.

So you have the retarded situation, of there being plenty of labour available, plenty of important work that needs doing, and plenty of the physical resources that are needed to do it all - but we've decided to not make the money available to do it all...

If you imagine your TNG example - the above sounds utterly absurd, doesn't it? Important work to do, the people available to do it, and all the resources needed to do it...they can just get on with it.

The way we run things? Spend a decade throwing a huge number of people into unemployment - and printing money for the wealthy - instead of for giving those people useful work to do, when there's loads we need to do (e.g. work aimed at eliminating climate changing emissions), and loads of the labour/resources needed to do it...

We don't need ST:TNG to fix all of that - we just need people to understand how money works, and what that means for government finances - and to permanently change the narrative on government finances. That is also one of the greatest things we can do to alleviate wealth inequality: Guaranteeing people the opportunity to earn a decent living, by eliminating pointless long-lasting periods of high unemployment.

Shefwedfan

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

But if they have them anyway, you think the extra children shouldn't get any payments? That's unfair on the kid, it's not their fault they have irresponsible parents.

Tough

It’s not any worse than now when the parents are not spending the money on them anyway

Shefwedfan

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Honestly how many case like this actually exist?

If not that many then passing the law will make f**k all difference

Shefwedfan

declanflynn wrote: »

All of the above would have become millionaires irrespective of their parents wealth, some people have a drive to get to the top and hats off to them.
If young Sharon with 3 kids from 3 different fathers in a free house with all the perks was gifted €999,999.00 there is way more chance of her becoming insolvent than a millionaire, so she would go back to square one.

Example around of people winning the lotto, couple of years later broke, of course it was everyone else’s fault