Where is all the money going?

That's why you don't rely on anecdotal evidence but rather some sort of statistic such as household disposable income as I have tried to provide.

That’s why I was confused as to why you would suggest asking random members of the public what they believed about a comparison between Ireland and the UK in terms of which country is better off, and suggested that most people in Ireland would say Ireland, when on paper at least (using average disposable income as a measure), the UK are better off.

The reason the UK appears better off on paper is because they have more people who are super-wealthy than Ireland, who are pushing up the average disposable income considerably. If you ask Leo about it though, he’ll respond by reminding you that they’re only billionaires on paper 😒

The richest 1 per cent Ireland hold 27 per cent of the country’s wealth, the report said.

https://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/taoiseach-says-some-billionaires-are-all-fur-coat-and-no-knickers-1420516.html

Similarly, in the UK -

It also found that the wealthiest 10% of the population are estimated to hold around half of all wealth, primarily in the form of private pensions and property.

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/map-richest-area-uk-how-much-wealth-150957367.html?guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmllLw&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAAvt-Cx9194b5_Ll54gZkrgzkMcjtEH6cecnUQLKTQGXt0xkir36uZw8wnvPXjD-85X6qPsG4rtxKxSdW-Ik5Q1e-HtTFuB1oYUvg5DstVd8-71w2TiqGpWeR74Nb5lmLoganJhm1rl8BdwBT0_BP4ng9NXz1j0XnNqVljFnxtOM

The less people working especially in low wage jobs drives up prices because there is less stuff being produced.

That’s not what drives prices up? More people having less disposable income is what drives prices up and poverty up, as has happened in the UK with their unforgiving welfare system, which if it were implemented here would mean a proportionate increase in the number of families living in poverty, unable to access basic services such housing, healthcare and education. It’s not that it’s more attractive to stay on welfare, it’s that they don’t have the basic skills and knowledge required to be able to support themselves.

It’s really not that complex or difficult to understand at all, it’s simply that most people just don’t care. I’m sure you’re aware of people who don’t even have the OP’s level of literacy to be able to question where all the money is going, but could understand it if it’s explained to them in a way they do understand - the money is going on providing services for people who can’t provide for themselves.

completely disagree there, people are far from stupid…

Could you point out the part in my post that gave you the impression I was suggesting anyone is stupid?

Like the OP I’m not referring to where the money is coming from, I know where it comes from. It’s where it’s going, is the point of the thread.

I would say it does take into account varying family size. If it were per houshold rather than per capita it would be more problematic. You would be averaging very large households with very small ones.

Instead, better to add up all household disposable income and then divide it by the population.

It's basically the amount the idividual on average has to spend after unavoidable expenses like tax and rent etc.

Yes, the average household size might be 10% larger in Ireland than the UK and so, as you say, you might expect 10% more disposable income per household in Ireland other things being equal. However since there's also 10% more people in the Irish household the amount per individual works out the same (again other things being equal), and its the disposable income of the individual we're measuring here.

I suppose it depend on what you want to measure. I think its a reasonable attempt at assessing how well off we are as individuals in Ireland. To a certain extent, it controls for family size.

The factors you point out such as larger household size should work in Ireland's favour, i.e. should put us a little higher on the scale than other countries since a larger household is probably more efficient in terms of rental cost per individual. However even given that, we're quite far down the ladder.

I think on the other point about education, yes if we've very large numbers in full-time education and not earning that will lower disposable income per capita, but I think that's as it should be. If your in full time education you are not going to be earning what a full time worker would and this, quite rightly, should be reflected in the numbers.

Except that measuring the average household income is a rather arbitrary figure highly dependent on the average household size. It is not really meaningful for the purpose of working out how much the average punter has.

In answer to your question, household A is better off in my opinion since although the total income per household is less, the household only has to support two people. The higher household income per capita captures this.

This is why household income on its own is of little value. Household income per capita has some value and, I would argue, disposable household per capita adjusted also for purchasing power is probably the most relevant to this thread.

...sounds like a great plan, shouldnt cause any significant social disruptions at all!

Well seeing as how the amount Irish people have being saving per capita is one of the highest in Europe, maybe that's where it's going?

20% of the disposable income per capita ends up in savings in Ireland. I think it's about 6k per capita the last year.

Maybe per capita basis screws statics. Hense why medium gets used alot.

So we have a lower than average disposable income per capita, yet save more of if per capita and then complain on where the money is going?

Seriously? Our budget surpluses are coming almost entirely from corporation tax on multinationals. The government has been telling us that every chance they get. It can't be relied upon.