The 350 a week was a catastrophic and costly mistake

cameramonkey

cameramonkey wrote: »

I have a business that employs many people who who are on the payment.
The day the 350 was announced some of the full time staff said that they were worried about covid and didnt want to come to work. They were being paid a lot more then 350 a week but were worried about their health so they were gone. We then closed and it was two week before we could get enough staff to reopen. We lost many part time staff who would only have been working maybe 10 hours a week or less as they are full time student, they are now on 350 and dont want to work as they can study and receive the payment. As I say we are now reopened but running on reduced staff and opening hours with many of the staff at home on the 350.

I think it is fair enough to give people an option if they wanted to isolate and not risk their families and their own health , also if I was a student working part time I would grab the 350 and stay at home studying.

Did you not have to provide a letter stating that they were being laid off over the Covid epidemic?

Wanderer78

Jucifer wrote: »

While I tend to agree with most of what your points, I am less certain on the debt jubilee point. A lot of pension funds of ordinary workers would be heavily weighted towards debt. I would hope emerging/developing government debt would be a relatively small proportion of that but there are implications for ordinary people for any policies and not just the very wealthy.

we re slowly heading into a situation whereby debt jubilees make sense, we cannot carry all this debt and prosper, large amounts of debt prevent this, a large proportion of the activities of our financial sector is now parasitic and predatory, debt is its preferred tool, its no longer serving us, debt forgiveness is historically common when these type of situations occur

facehugger99

Politicians are great for writing cheques with taxpayers money if it will buy them political capital.


The response to Covid-19 has demonstrated that principle on a scale never before seen in this country.

Remember when everyone was worried about a €2bn children's hospital? We're currently flushing 10's of billions down the toilet to cover career bureaucrat's and minster's arses.

is_that_so

facehugger99 wrote: »

Politicians are great for writing cheques with taxpayers money if it will buy them political capital.


The response to Covid-19 has demonstrated that principle on a scale never before seen in this country.

Remember when everyone was worried about a €2bn children's hospital? We're currently flushing 10's of billions down the toilet to cover career bureaucrat's and minster's arses.

I believe it's going to be about €3bn! Measures for the economy may cost a good bit more, mind.

Wanderer78

facehugger99 wrote: »

Politicians are great for writing cheques with taxpayers money if it will buy them political capital.


The response to Covid-19 has demonstrated that principle on a scale never before seen in this country.

Remember when everyone was worried about a €2bn children's hospital? We're currently flushing 10's of billions down the toilet to cover career bureaucrat's and minster's arses.

you re currently not being taxed for these payments, ecb loans are covering them, but of course that could change with future budgets, they d be fcuking stupid to do so, but....

satguy

Deleted User wrote: »

08 is the past. It’s gone. Forget it and move on. This pandemic is the current reality. Emergency measures were needed.
Try walking facing forward. You’ll make your way easier than constantly looking over your shoulder.

What happened, happened..

The bankers are rich now,, the scum that avoided paying taxes are rich now.

You can still see them on RTE,,, telling us how we all need to do our bit...

Sleeper12

Fred Cryton wrote:

I have a Masters in the subject, thanks so much. McWilliams is a charaltan and a spoofer, yeah free money into everyones account. Sure why not make everyone a millionaire so, what could possibly go wrong.

You should ask for a refund for the Mexican online course you did because your figures make zero sense at all. In fact many of the figures seem to be plucked from the sky without links to back them up

Wanderer78

Sleeper12 wrote: »

You should ask for a refund for the Mexican online course you did because your figures make zero sense at all. In fact many of the figures seem to be plucked from the sky without links to back them up

fairly common in the world of neoclassical economics to be honest

cameramonkey

Deleted User wrote: »

Did you not have to provide a letter stating that they were being laid off over the Covid epidemic?

We haven't provided any letters to my knowledge yet but I believe that they will be looking for them. As far as I can see the payments were given to anyone that applied that also included foreign citizens who would not normally have the right to a social welfare payment so I think there is a big reckoning coming down the line. Obliviously tax will be due on the 350 and I would think that if you were only earning say 100 a week part time but are now on 350 then the difference will need to be paid back.

Sleeper12

Wanderer78 wrote:

fairly common in the world of neoclassical economics to be honest

You know when a poster is making things up, when asked to provide links their reply: is lads they are widely available online & Im not doing your work for you.

fryup

out of interest how much are they getting in the UK? is there a special covid payment over there?

Banana Republic 1

Deleted User wrote: »

Did you not have to provide a letter stating that they were being laid off over the Covid epidemic?

You do and those who keep saying otherwise are wrong

salmocab

cameramonkey wrote: »

We haven't provided any letters to my knowledge yet but I believe that they will be looking for them. As far as I can see the payments were given to anyone that applied that also included foreign citizens who would not normally have the right to a social welfare payment so I think there is a big reckoning coming down the line. Obliviously tax will be due on the 350 and I would think that if you were only earning say 100 a week part time but are now on 350 then the difference will need to be paid back.

They won’t look for the difference back, it wasn’t a condition at the start of it so no politician is going to go down that road. That said in reality the amount of part timers getting it is relatively small I’d think and they are unlikely to be putting that money away so most of it will circle back into the economy.

Wanderer78

Sleeper12 wrote: »

You know when a poster is making things up, when asked to provide links their reply: is lads they are widely available online & Im not doing your work for you.

to be fair, the world of economics is murky anyway, nobody really has a fcuking clue whats going on or whats gonna happen, but neoclassicals live on another planet

Sleeper12

fryup wrote:

out of interest how much are they getting in the UK? is there a special covid payment over there?

Wasn't it pointed out in the Dail to SF that we get more in the south special payment compared to Northern Ireland. They opted to give more to businesses than workers in state aid I believe

cameramonkey

salmocab wrote: »

They won’t look for the difference back, it wasn’t a condition at the start of it so no politician is going to go down that road. That said in reality the amount of part timers getting it is relatively small I’d think and they are unlikely to be putting that money away so most of it will circle back into the economy.

I would think that every part timer in the country would be trying to get this payment. It would be much more lucrative than their job in many instances.

boring accountant

Akrasia wrote: »

Do you use your masters in economics to work for loan sharks or vulture funds?

Have you ever heard of Keynes or did you waste your degree only reading nonsense like Hayek and Milton Friedman

The absolutely worst thing we could do now is to restrict the money supply and force people to borrow for day to day expenses. The 2008 crash was a liquidity crisis, we need the ECB and Irish Central Bank to flood the place with money to counteract the deflation we are facing, and I think it’s 1000 times better to bail out the ordinary workers than to do what the Yanks have gone and give trillions to the big corporations so they can buy their own shares back off the billionaires and hedge funds

Giving poor people an extra few hundred euros for a few weeks won’t break the economy. Deflation will.

In the global perspective, we also need to consider the impact this crisis will have on developing countries, they could be absolutely wiped out with debt after this, we need to very seriously look at a debt jubilee in the next few years

Of course you might disagree if you think the purpose of economic activity is to facilitate a tiny percentage of the population getting ludicrously wealthy at the expense of everyone else...

The best thing we could do for developing economies is to fix our own first. The reason they will suffer so much is because they’re heavily dependent on the export of commodities.

Wanderer78

boring accountant wrote: »

The best thing we could do for developing economies is to fix our own first. The reason they will suffer so much is because they’re heavily dependent on the export of commodities.

what do you mean by fix?

Banana Republic 1

cameramonkey wrote: »

We haven't provided any letters to my knowledge yet but I believe that they will be looking for them. As far as I can see the payments were given to anyone that applied that also included foreign citizens who would not normally have the right to a social welfare payment so I think there is a big reckoning coming down the line. Obliviously tax will be due on the 350 and I would think that if you were only earning say 100 a week part time but are now on 350 then the difference will need to be paid back.

No thats not the case dont people listen the media are banging this out for weeks now.

If you're earning a pitons from employment you will pay little or no tax because there are different tax bands. Normally social welfare isn't subject to income tax, paye,usc because your not working. For all those who got the €350 in loo of work being shutdown the Revenue will simply add this to your earnings from employment this year and tax it accordingly. Every paye worker has an allowance of €3500 for the year that they can earn before paying tax after this the bands kick in. So every body who earned more than this since the year began will pay tax, hw much then depends rate band. The students and part time people earning €9.50 ph will pay less, course you have to remember these people also pay vat on the air they breath.

People are confused now because in normal times the poverty trap works the opposite way. We may see the back of covid but the begrudgers thats a different story.

salmocab

cameramonkey wrote: »

I would think that every part timer in the country would be trying to get this payment. It would be much more lucrative than their job in many instances.

Undoubtedly, I don’t think they should have been able to get it but as noted this had to be rushed in, in the grand scheme though so long as it’s closed off in a reasonable manner and time frame it won’t have cost that much with most of it being spent in the country anyway.

US2

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Then that is the choice of the business. Not the employees.
No doubt many businesses are running at a loss at the moment, especially shops having to take on extra staff to ensure social distancing. My local Tesco seems to have doubled its workforce. All tills manned and numerous workers on the floor filling orders for home delivery or click and collect.

Shops are taking in record profits. Everyone consumes more stuck at home

Plumbthedepths

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Only for sheer good luck,could have easily been us in that situation

You forget European reaction to the banking crisis here.
I remember a top level Euro bureaucrat stating a bomb would go off in Dublin not Frankfurt if we refused to pay the bondholders. Ireland got FA solidarity a decade ago.

Plumbthedepths

weldoninhio wrote: »

Does it mean USC?? That’s temporary too isn’t it??

Again as I already stated the USC was to take money off people. It generated 3.5 billion for the state a year. This is a payment to people from the state, I can guarantee you it's temporary.

kippy

boring accountant wrote: »

The best thing we could do for developing economies is to fix our own first. The reason they will suffer so much is because they’re heavily dependent on the export of commodities.

Define fix? provide an example of a 'fixed' economy.....

satguy

kippy wrote: »

Define fix? provide an example of a 'fixed' economy.....

Over 14K posts,,, I really hope they are not all like this one ??

Beechwoodspark

It is indeed a costly mistake.

If this is to continue it should be reduced down to unemployment rate and leave it at that for another month then re assess.

Fred Cryton

Fred Cryton wrote: »

This is number of part time workers in the economy who earned less than 350 a week pre-crisis. Publicly available information, you shouldn't have to ask. You should have looked it up yourself.

They are all now out of work?

LuasSimon

US2 wrote: »

Oh ya. Like USC was a temporary measure. We will have a new "temporary messaure" deducted from our wages when this is all over

USC tax is here to stay and will have to be ramped up as one of the ways of repaying our debts . The top rate of 8 % for any income over 70 K should be increased significantly, anyone earning over 70 k has capacity for further taxation . 8 % to 12% would be my guess of the top USC in the next budget .

Plumbthedepths

LuasSimon wrote: »

USC tax is here to stay and will have to be ramped up as one of the ways of repaying our debts . The top rate of 8 % for any income over 70 K should be increased significantly, anyone earning over 70 k has capacity for further taxation . 8 % to 12% would be my guess of the top USC in the next budget .

Are you earning over 70k a year ?

pm1977x

LuasSimon wrote: »

USC tax is here to stay and will have to be ramped up as one of the ways of repaying our debts . The top rate of 8 % for any income over 70 K should be increased significantly, anyone earning over 70 k has capacity for further taxation . 8 % to 12% would be my guess of the top USC in the next budget .

I'd reduce the handouts to the workshy, permanently unemployed before further taxing the hard working, productive people who contribute to society and the economy.

Danzy

Fred Cryton wrote: »

No other country made people better off on welfare than when they had been working. 500,000 people are now better off taking the 350 and sitting on their backsides than they had been before this crisis when working. It's going to be enormously difficult to get these people back into the workforce now. Any politician trying to reduce the payment to incentivise work will be branded a right wing thatcherite by the usual suspects.



Who's going to go back to a minimum wage job 20 hours a week when they can earn nearly double that from the taxpayer while not having to work? This will starve businesses of much needed workers just when they need to get back going.



The costs to the exchequer are enormous. We could build a new hospital every month with the amount of money this is costing the state. Did anyone think of this? We have Regina Doherty, mother goose of the nation herself, to thank for this mess.


The key question is WHY IS IRELAND DOING THINGS DIFFERENTLY TO OTHER NATIONS?. When you have to ask this question, you know we've c**ked up.

Your complaining that they did something to avoid an economic depression.

Its obvious you have never run a business in your life.

Are you trying to go for 40% unemployment.

You want to repeat all the mistakes which turned a stock market crash in 28 in to a global depression a short few years later.



Nevermind your deep knowledge chasm in regard to economic history and basic economics, you also show you haven't even attempted to look at what other countries are doing in response to this.

You are either a troll or a fo..., forget it.

Wanderer78

pm1977x wrote: »

I'd reduce the handouts to the workshy, permanently unemployed before further taxing the hard working, productive people who contribute to society and the economy.

they d hardly turn to criminality?

Danzy

Augeo wrote: »

They are all now out of work?

Fred, prides himself on not looking at the numbers.

Given the pub is closed, this is his new court.

LuasSimon

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Are you earning over 70k a year ?

I’m earning circa 75 K so yes I’ll be impacted for a small amount .

LuasSimon

pm1977x wrote: »

I'd reduce the handouts to the workshy, permanently unemployed before further taxing the hard working, productive people who contribute to society and the economy.

You are dead right but close on half of those who never worked are travellers and no one is going to ask any traveller to do a days work in case you’d be called racist .

Plumbthedepths

LuasSimon wrote: »

I’m earning circa 75 K so yes I’ll be impacted for a small amount .

Fair play you are in a minority, very few call for extra taxes they themselves would be subject to.

LuasSimon

Wanderer78 wrote: »

they d hardly turn to criminality?

Many of them already do . Many of them are better off than those their robbing ( middle Ireland tax payers )but that’s modern PC Ireland .

dockysher

Unfortunately the 350 was a rushed decision which it had to be and so many taking advantage of it.
I know numerous people who have quit der low paying jobs to go on it, students who only worked few hours a week wile in college now getting 350 all summer.
As well as builders, painters etc, still working away while on da 350.
Was always going happen though when very little control on payment

kippy

satguy wrote: »

Over 14K posts,,, I really hope they are not all like this one ??

They are all similiar. So let's see your fixed economy example?
Where is this utopian society.
It's a **** excuse for not helping the less well off in the world. It's in our interests to lift all boats to the same level.

If you were to apply the logic to the micro level anyone with a mortgage or debt would never give to charity.

Wanderer78

kippy wrote: »

They are all similiar. So let's see your fixed economy example?

It's a **** excuse for not helping the less well off in the world. It's in our interests to lift all boats to the same level.

i cant ever see absolute equality as a possibility, in fact id say it would be dangerous, but it inequality certainly is out of control

kippy

Wanderer78 wrote: »

i cant ever see absolute equality as a possibility, in fact id say it would be dangerous, but it inequality certainly is out of control

So watching people die of hunger is acceptable?

Wanderer78

kippy wrote: »

So watching people die of hunger is acceptable?

of course its not, but unfortunately it has always happened, and it will probably always, but its probably not possible to share wealth equally, but we certainly can reduce the gap, to reduce the risks of poverty

Danzy

The 350 is not without problems, it was rushed and its not super fair for everyone, things oftentimes aren't.

Much of the this thread has people who seem to have no understanding of what is happening in the global economy.

I was talking to a fellow yesterday who thought we'd be over this in 18 mths!! Lol

My business deals closely with businesses in Northern Italy, they were highly successful and well run companies, they are gone now, wiped out. The same is happening here daily.

We hopefully have capped those on assistance at 28% that's through the covid payment, its would be heading towards 40% unemployment this summer without that.

This economic crisis has outpaced the entire great depression over its many years in just 2 months.


Whether some scumbag is on the dole or some student is getting 350 is irrelevant. It's really looking at the smallest thing while your town burns around you.

The stimulus package needed to keep Western Europe from economic catastrophe is going to run in to several trillions.

The Brits are talking about an economic crisis not seen since the 1700s.

350 euro, are ye f78king well lads? Isn't it grand for ye that's all ye have to deal with.

Viscount Aggro

Eur 350 is a huge amount of money per week. I get by on average 60 per week, all in.

Do people not realise its taxable? If they start with an austerity budget, I plan to withdraw my labour and go on the lump. Also, i would be asking Revenue to collect this money back from people.

Wanderer78

Viscount Aggro wrote: »

Eur 350 is a huge amount of money per week. I get by on average 60 per week, all in.

Do people not realise its taxable? If they start with an austerity budget, I plan to withdraw my labour and go on the lump. Also, i would be asking Revenue to collect this money back from people.

they d be pretty damn thick to do austerity again, what a train wreck of an idea

kippy

Wanderer78 wrote: »

of course its not, but unfortunately it has always happened, and it will probably always, but its probably not possible to share wealth equally, but we certainly can reduce the gap, to reduce the risks of poverty

Indeed but that's not a good rationale for maintaining the status quo.

Wanderer78

kippy wrote: »

Indeed but that's not a good rationale for maintaining the status quo.

im not advocating for the status quo, i advocate for radical changes, im just hoping we do it, and hoping this situation is a beginning of that

Danzy

Viscount Aggro wrote: »

Eur 350 is a huge amount of money per week. I get by on average 60 per week, all in.

Do people not realise its taxable? If they start with an austerity budget, I plan to withdraw my labour and go on the lump. Also, i would be asking Revenue to collect this money back from people.

Please don't, that could be the straw that really breaks the back.

Hold off on your harshly worded letter and restriction of labour.

RandomViewer

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

It is indeed a costly mistake.

If this is to continue it should be reduced down to unemployment rate and leave it at that for another month then re assess.

Main reason for the 350 is that property would plummet again as thousands default on mortgages, we are scraping 30% unemployment, paying 350 for 6 months is cheaper than another bank bailout which the EU central bank would never sanction anyway,

Wanderer78

RandomViewer wrote: »

Main reason for the 350 is that property would plummet again as thousands default on mortgages, we are scraping 30% unemployment, paying 350 for 6 months is cheaper than another bank bailout which the EU central bank would never sanction anyway,

im expecting banking sector issues very very soon, one thing they dont like is an increase in defaults and none performing loans!