Did you know that Income tax is a 'temporary measure?'

Wanderer78

fvp4 wrote: »

Not the economists suggesting major cutbacks in recessions. They don’t.

i think theyre more idiots than economists

Geuze

fvp4 wrote: »

Not the economists suggesting major cutbacks in recessions. They don’t.

Very few people suggest that.

Most people agree with the massive fiscal expansion during 2020 and 2021 as a response to COVID.

Wanderer78

Geuze wrote: »

Very few people suggest that.

Most people agree with the massive fiscal expansion during 2020 and 2021 as a response to COVID.

will we do it though, or will we default, post covid?

Geuze

Wanderer78 wrote: »

will we do it though, or will we default, post covid?

Default on our debt? No.

As the economy recovers during 2021, 2022 the fiscal deficit will fall.


https://www.gov.ie/en/press-release/07c73-minister-donohoe-publishes-stability-programme-update-2021/

The fiscal forecasts are prepared on the basis of existing policies.

After recording a General Government Deficit of 5.0 per cent of GDP last year, a further deficit of 4.7 per cent of GDP is in prospect for this year before falling to 2.8 per cent of GDP next year.

Debt-to-GNI* ratio projected to rise to 112 per cent this year but is set to decline to 107 per cent next year.

Former Former Former

JimmyVik wrote: »

I dont dodge my tax.

Yes. you do. You literally admitted to it in your previous post. It was probably closer to boasting in fact.

JimmyVik wrote: »

I pay about €3k a month in tax, not to mention all the other stealth taxes i pay too. Thats enough for one person dont you think. I think im doing a fair bit of subsidizing myself

If everyone was allowed to decide when they had paid "enough" tax, the country would go bankrupt overnight.

I pay more than 3k per month in tax. Since I'm apparently paying too much, how do I go about getting a refund on the excess?

Tony EH

osarusan wrote: »

The idea that a country like Ireland would rely on voluntary contributions from its residents to fund the state's services and infrastructure is madness. Beyond even libertarian delusion.

Just look at what happened to Irish Water.

just look at the amount of people who don't bother paying their own mortgate.

Just look at the amount of people who won't pay for their own bins.

People who won't even pay for themselves, never mind voluntarily contributing to pay for others.

Irish water was rejected because it was a ticket to privatisation, with handy positions for cronies and upward trajectory of bills. People saw how bin privatisation went and weren't going to be suckered again.

In short, fuck Irish Water and people were ENTIRELY CORRECT to reject it.

Essential social services should never be put into the hands of private, for profit, hands and SHOULD be paid for out of a county's taxes. That is the prime outcome of any taxation.

Tony EH

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

I wouldn't want to live in any of those four countries.

Neither would any of these 20 something, internet right wing libertarians who see a couple of YouTube videos and think, "yeh taxes are bad, I'll join a forum and start a thread about it."

They like living the societies with structures that are largely paid for by people's taxes, they just don't want to pay themselves.

Padre_Pio

I don't have a problem with tax but I would like to see some measurable upwards trajectory for the tens of billions that are collected each year.

We shouldn't have a failing health service, failing infrastructure, and failing housing policy in a country with such a high per capita GDP.

Tony EH wrote: »

Irish water was rejected because it was a ticket to privatisation, with handy positions for cronies and upward trajectory of bills. People saw how bin privatisation went and weren't going to be suckered again.

Exactly this.
Private companies work when there is a risk of failure.
Private companies running public utilities will never be allowed to fail.

They are then essentially public companies with zero public oversight, and ripe for corruption.

Wanderer78

Geuze wrote: »

Default on our debt? No.

As the economy recovers during 2021, 2022 the fiscal deficit will fall.


https://www.gov.ie/en/press-release/07c73-minister-donohoe-publishes-stability-programme-update-2021/

The fiscal forecasts are prepared on the basis of existing policies.

After recording a General Government Deficit of 5.0 per cent of GDP last year, a further deficit of 4.7 per cent of GDP is in prospect for this year before falling to 2.8 per cent of GDP next year.

Debt-to-GNI* ratio projected to rise to 112 per cent this year but is set to decline to 107 per cent next year.

....this default!

we cant default back to this balancing budgets nonsense, this era of economics is over, it has failed

Tony EH

Mimon wrote: »

What do you want to happen, we go back to Dickensian slums with a dog eat dog world with zero services provided by government?

It's funny that the US inspired Neo Lib crowd cannot see that their "ideas" were already tried before the 20th Century and they were an absolute failure for everybody.

The logical endgame of a right wing libertarian society is the worst of Charles Dickens' 19th Century, with kids up chimneys and people literally living in their own piss and shit, spreading disease and trying to eke out a living by turning to crime or begging.

Anyone who wants an insight of just how a society will turn out under the ideas of the Neo-liberals and Libertarians (of the American persuasion) need only to study what life was like in 1800's London, before conditions got so bad that they had no choice but to engage in the large scale social reforms of the 20th Century. In fact, one doesn't even have to go back in time. Just look at Bangalore or any number of Indian locations and see at the desperate conditions that some people live in over there.

To think that there are people out there that want to see a return to that have/have not state is laughable in it's utter ignorance. An ignorance that's fuelled by living in a self indulgent, western society, where they probably have things too good.

RulesOfNature

Tony EH wrote: »

It's funny that the US inspired Neo Lib crowd cannot see that their "ideas" were already tried before the 20th Century and they were an absolute failure for everybody.

The logical endgame of a right wing libertarian society is the worst of Charles Dickens' 19th Century, with kids up chimneys and people literally living in their own piss and shit, spreading disease and trying to eke out a living by turning to crime or begging.

Anyone who wants an insight of just how a society will turn out under the ideas of the Neo-liberals and Libertarians (of the American persuasion) need only to study what life was like in 1800's London, before conditions got so bad that they had no choice but to engage in the large scale social reforms of the 20th Century. In fact, one doesn't even have to go back in time. Just look at Bangalore or any number of Indian locations and look at the desperate conditions that some people live in over there.

To think that there are people out there that want to see a return to that have.have not state is laughable in it's utter ignorance. An ignorance that's fuelled by living in a self indulgent, western society, where they probably have things too good.

Nice rhetoric. Now try to explain why the government needs half your income.

RulesOfNature

Proponents of MTT please explain why today there is rampant wealth inequality, only the poor are taxed, and why there is an economic/market depression every 10 years.

'But children don't have to sweep chimneys anymore!'

That's because most of the developing nations are in hot climates where chimneys aren't needed. And yet they're living in deprived conditions despite the wonders of Fiat and MMT.

Remember: Ireland and the west are the global minority.

Padre_Pio

RulesOfNature wrote: »

Nice rhetoric. Now try to explain why the government needs half your income.

The government doesn't get half of anyones income.

If you earn 50k, the govt gets 13.2k in tax (income + PRSI + USC)
If you're on 100k, the govt gets 39.5k in tax.

That's before pension contributions, benefits, salary sacrifice, or any other income tax avoidance scheme

Wanderer78

RulesOfNature wrote: »

Proponents of MTT please explain why today there is rampant wealth inequality, only the poor are taxed, and why there is an economic/market depression every 10 years.

'But children don't have to sweep chimneys anymore!'

That's because most of the developing nations are in hot climates where chimneys aren't needed. And yet they're living in deprived conditions despite the wonders of Fiat and MMT.

Remember: Ireland and the west are the global minority.

...ive always found it baffling that libertarian's have a serious grip with central banks and fiat, when the majority of the money supply actually comes from the private sector in the form of credit, always baffling!

this in fact is one of the main reasons for our boom bust cycles, i.e. an over reliance on the private sector money supply, credit, leading to a credit boom, then a subsequent bust!

KyussB

Wanderer78 wrote: »

...ive always found it baffling that libertarian's have a serious grip with central banks and fiat, when the majority of the money supply actually comes from the private sector in the form of credit, always baffling!

this in fact is one of the main reasons for our boom bust cycles, i.e. an over reliance on the private sector money supply, credit, leading to a credit boom, then a subsequent bust!

Easier not to respond to him - he quotes or refers to other posts, but isn't actually replying with anything relevant to them - so there is no need for a response.

RulesOfNature

Padre_Pio wrote: »

The government doesn't get half of anyones income.

If you earn 50k, the govt gets 13.2k in tax (income + PRSI + USC)
If you're on 100k, the govt gets 39.5k in tax.

That's before pension contributions, benefits, salary sacrifice, or any other income tax avoidance scheme

I pay 80k a year in income taxes. We can argue all the live long day about this metric or that margin but at the end of the day, the government is taking 80k from my taxes. That's not counting sales tax and the 41% tax the government takes from my ETFs, and 33% from my Capital Gains Tax.

The government gets over 150k in gross taxes from me every year, and with zero risk or investment on their part.

What you're essentially saying is, if someone is a low earner and have no investment vehicles the current system works fine. But for anyone middle class (True middle class) it is simply unfair.

RulesOfNature

Wanderer78 wrote: »

...ive always found it baffling that libertarian's have a serious grip with central banks and fiat, when the majority of the money supply actually comes from the private sector in the form of credit, always baffling!

It comes from the government. Saying that it comes from the private sector is a misinterpretation. The government prints the money then gives it

Wanderer78

RulesOfNature wrote: »

It comes from the government. Saying that it comes from the private sector is a misinterpretation. The government prints the money then gives it

central banks generally create the public entity of the money supply, this is what deficits are, but globally, the majority comes from private sector banks, we call this money credit, oh and this has been well confirmed at this stage, by respected institutions, and can be seen in the data

RulesOfNature

Wanderer78 wrote: »

central banks generally create the public entity of the money supply, this is what deficits are, but globally, the majority comes from private sector banks, we call this money credit, oh and this has been well confirmed at this stage, by respected institutions, and can be seen in the data

That's a misinterpretation again. The government prints and issues this money then gives it to private institutions who request it who then let it flow into the hands of the people. It comes from the governent. Chase bank cannot print money themselves, it has to be requested.

Anyway you're hung up on this weird zinger because you think its a jab at libertarians, when in reality whether or not money comes from the private sector is an irrelevant heuristics because at the end of the day it is still a centralized form of currency.

Wanderer78

Wanderer78 wrote: »

central banks generally create the public entity of the money supply, this is what deficits are, but globally, the majority comes from private sector banks, we call this money credit, oh and this has been well confirmed at this stage, by respected institutions, and can be seen in the data

RulesOfNature wrote: »

That's a misinterpretation again. The government prints and issues this money then gives it to private institutions who request it who then let it flow into the hands of the people. It comes from the governent. Chase bank cannot print money themselves, it has to be requested.

Anyway you're hung up on this weird zinger because you think its a jab at libertarians, when in reality whether or not money comes from the private sector is an irrelevant heuristics because at the end of the day it is still a centralized form of currency.

jesus, what are you on about now!

again, this has been confirmed, if you have a problem with this confirmation, maybe contact these institutions, and explain to them how theyre wrong

RulesOfNature

Wanderer78 wrote: »

jesus, what are you on about now!

again, this has been confirmed, if you have a problem with this confirmation, maybe contact these institutions, and explain to them how theyre wrong

Private institutions request money. The government prints it.

This is how it works.
You are simply misinterpreting that money comes from private institutions because from your perspective they're the ones asking the government for it, and they're the ones that distribute it. But it does not come from them. It comes from the government, who incidentally have centralized control of the currency.

Wanderer78

RulesOfNature wrote: »

Private institutions request money. The government prints it.

This is how it works.
You are simply misinterpreting that money comes from private institutions because from your perspective they're the ones asking the government for it, and they're the ones that distribute it. But it does not come from them. It comes from the government, who incidentally have centralized control of the currency.

do we truly need to go through all this again on boards!

you ve some reading to be doing!

authors contact details maybe on those, so best of luck!

RulesOfNature

Wanderer78 wrote: »

do we truly need to go through all this again on boards!

you ve some reading to be doing!

authors contact details maybe on those, so best of luck!

Yeah yeah I've read all that. Again, this is all just heuristics to describe a centrally controlled system.

Padre_Pio

RulesOfNature wrote: »

I pay 80k a year in income taxes. We can argue all the live long day about this metric or that margin but at the end of the day, the government is taking 80k from my taxes. That's not counting sales tax and the 41% tax the government takes from my ETFs, and 33% from my Capital Gains Tax.

The government gets over 150k in gross taxes from me every year, and with zero risk or investment on their part.

What you're essentially saying is, if someone is a low earner and have no investment vehicles the current system works fine. But for anyone middle class (True middle class) it is simply unfair.

Some people would say that's the progressive tax system in action!
Taxing the wealthy.

Everything in your post is very relative, and I'm not sure how your relative corresponds with the relative of most of the population.

Low earner relative to what?
Middle class relative to what?

What is a "true middle class"?

Wanderer78

RulesOfNature wrote: »

Yeah yeah I've read all that. Again, this is all just heuristics to described a centrally controlled system.

seriously? our political institutions have lost control of our monetary systems, our economies are primarily controlled by the fire sectors(finance, insurance and real estate), by any chance are you associated with any of those?

RulesOfNature

Padre_Pio wrote: »

Some people would say that's the progressive tax system in action!
Taxing the wealthy.

Everything in your post is very relative, and I'm not sure how your relative corresponds with the relative of most of the population.

Low earner relative to what?
Middle class relative to what?

What is a "true middle class"?

The point is, the low earners are fine. The top percentile earners are also fine. The middle class are the ones who are who are unfairly treated. Its not progressive.

Geuze

Geuze wrote: »

Very few people suggest that.

Most people agree with the massive fiscal expansion during 2020 and 2021 as a response to COVID.

That’s not true, although things are changing. By and large the demand during recessions from standard economists has been to impose austerity. Spending beyond our means, public sector cut backs, pension raids etc

Wanderer78

RulesOfNature wrote: »

The point is, the low earners are fine. The top percentile earners are also fine. The middle class are the ones who are who are unfairly treated. Its not progressive.

primarily due to rising debt

RulesOfNature

Wanderer78 wrote: »

seriously? our political institutions have lost control of our monetary systems, our economies are primarily controlled by the fire sectors(finance, insurance and real estate), by any chance are you associated with any of those?

Yes finance, but not at the top level.

The currency we have is definitely centralized. The banking class is just another subset of the oligarchy.

Wanderer78

RulesOfNature wrote: »

Yes finance, but not at the top level.

The currency we have is definitely centralized. The banking class is just another subset of the oligarchy.

not surprised at all, you wouldnt be the first ive come across that hasnt a clue how money is created, via credit creation