We live in a redistributive kleptocracy that has institutionalised Robin Hood

[code twinkle]

In Ireland we have a massively redistributive political system that taxes the wealthy and transfer their money to the poor. Services such as education, health, roads etc are provided free of charge- those who don’t work are given free money and housing. The median earner pays a mere 4% tax on earnings.

Also we've seen the lower paid PS workers, a substantial body of voters, have manged to grab themselves an unjustified 22-31% premium over private workers

This is mob rule, with the poor people ganging up on the wealthy and taking their money. Instead we should have participatory democracy with stakeholders voting according to their contribution.

Thus all people should be allowed to elect a legislature that shall deal with fundamental human (and other animal) rights.

Taxpayers- be they natural people or companies- should elect an Executive in charge of spending. Their voting should be according to their participation: i.e. one vote per one Euro of tax paid

For too long the rich have tolerated the tyranny of the proletariat masses – the rich should raise up and overthrow the institutionalised Robin Hood that is the Irish State.

cYp

Troll? Or just ignorant?

Countries with the Biggest Gaps Between Rich and Poor : The Temasek Review

Sure we don't often score well on OECD comparative lists but on this issue Ireland comes in at an admirable number 10

[ibis]

Troll? Or just ignorant?

Countries with the Biggest Gaps Between Rich and Poor : The Temasek Review

Sure we don't often score well on OECD comparative lists but on this issue Ireland comes in at an admirable number 10

That's not actually relevant to the OP, though, since he's talking about the relative taxation - if the top 10% is 10 times wealthier than the bottom 10%, and pays 20 times as much tax, is that fair*?

* as opposed to pleasing.

[eyeswideopen]

That's not actually relevant to the OP, though, since he's talking about the relative taxation - if the top 10% is 10 times wealthier than the bottom 10%, and pays 20 times as much tax, is that fair*?

* as opposed to pleasing.

The OP title refers to redistribution. As I pointed out already, many of the wealthiest in Ireland have paid virtually no tax over the last ten years, due to their use of tax avoidance measures, of which many were available. Any money left at the end of the year after availing of the various tax incentivese and loopholes could be shovelled into tax deductable pension funds. And of course there were amnesties.

Focus on the tax rates is misleading. The OECD figures showing Ireland as one of the most unequal countries are proof that the OP thesis is wrong.

[ibis]

The OP title refers to redistribution. As I pointed out already, many of the wealthiest in Ireland have paid virtually no tax over the last ten years, due to their use of tax avoidance measures, of which many were available. Any money left at the end of the year after availing of the various tax incentivese and loopholes could be shovelled into tax deductable pension funds. And of course there were amnesties.

Focus on the tax rates is misleading. The OECD figures showing Ireland as one of the most unequal countries are proof that the OP thesis is wrong.

I have to say that you're establishing a very strong track record for inaccurate irrelevance startlingly quickly. Feel free to provide proof of your first assertion, and further demonstrate the relevance of your second point to the OP's proposals, because the ratio between income in different quartiles doesn't tell you anything about effective tax rates in those quartiles.

[skev]

I've got another idea. Why dont the 97% of us who are landless workers, insteading of ganging up on the rich and forcing them to pay a little bit of tax, why dont we gang up on them and KILL THE BASTERDS!!

Landless. As am I. But I must admit I'm landless cause I don't work hard enough. Why are you landless? Are you being held back by the rich?

[skev]

It is not a perfect system but it is miles ahead of any other system I have ever seen. And I have lived in 5 different countries over the last 20 years. The 26 cantons have enormous power over the federal government. Power and the responsibility for exercising it devolves down to the lowest tier to those who vote their community politiicans in and they know that those politicians have real power to affect the community. The canton and the federal government cannot interfere in their decisions because legally they have no competency to do so. Similarly, powers allocated to the canton, including crucially the collection of taxes, cannot be interfered with by the federal government because the constitution allocates this power to the canton alone. The canton passes on any taxes due to the federal government due to it in law. If you live in Switzerland, you realise very quickly that the cantons hold the main power here, not the federal government.

That sounds great except for one thing. Are we going to put county councilors in charge? I presume a canton is equivalent to a county here?

[Captain Sensible]

Landless. As am I. But I must admit I'm landless cause I don't work hard enough. Why are you landless? Are you being held back by the rich?

And just how hard should someone work for a piece of gods green earth ? Should they be slaves for 40 years ?

[Pauli]

That sounds great except for one thing. Are we going to put county councilors in charge? I presume a canton is equivalent to a county here?

Yes but under the constitution, the federal government has its powers limited in law. The canton is the tax-collecting entity, the canton will decide how much corporation tax it levies above the 8% allotted to the federal government, Therefore there is inter-cantonal competition in the tax system.

Because the "county councillors" have such power, the people are very careful who they elect. Also every 3 months there are referenda on one issue or another where the people get their say. The function of politicians in this area is to obey the peoples will.

[code twinkle]

That's not actually relevant to the OP, though, since he's talking about the relative taxation - if the top 10% is 10 times wealthier than the bottom 10%, and pays 20 times as much tax, is that fair*?

* as opposed to pleasing.

Well it is partially relevant as the OP throws a number of things into the rhetorical mix.

Several of his points attack pure and simple the notion of redistribution of wealth from rich to poor:

In Ireland we have a massively redistributive political system that taxes the wealthy and transfer their money to the poor.

This is mob rule, with the poor people ganging up on the wealthy and taking their money.

For too long the rich have tolerated the tyranny of the proletariat masses – the rich should raise up and overthrow the institutionalised Robin Hood that is the Irish State.

My data simply corrects the unsubtle claim that in comparative OECD terms, Ireland is anywhere near being a country where wealth is redistributed in significant quantities to those who have least. Thus his overblown assertions about the tyranny of the poor (an oxymoran if ever there was one) and the massively redistributive nature of our system are seen to be what they are, factually incorrect.

He also takes issue with the relatively low taxes paid by median earners and attempts to meld this into the same argument criticisng too much redistribution of wealth in Ireland (eg. "institutionalised Robin Hood"). However, this is an entirely seperate argument. The facts do indeed indicate that relative to other EU countries, the lower and middle earners of Ireland pay less tax than is the norm. This policy has formed part of FF's bizarre neoliberal-esque attempt to make Ireland a "low-tax economy", a policy which is continuing, as Garret Fitz notes, with the Govt's apparently reflexive about-turn on raising some of the revenue required to stabilise this years budget by €4bn through increased taxes.

This however has very little to do with redistribution of wealth because although median earners are paying less income tax than the norm in EU terms, they are simultaneously receiving far less from the state in terms of public services relative to EU norms.

Clearly if a median earner has to pay for one's health care, even if one is paying lower taxes, s/he is still at a net loss in terms of wealth distribution across the economy.

Relative income tax levels in this scenario have nothing to do with the spreading of wealth across the different levels of society.

[skev]

Yes but under the constitution, the federal government has its powers limited in law. The canton is the tax-collecting entity, the canton will decide how much corporation tax it levies above the 8% allotted to the federal government, Therefore there is inter-cantonal competition in the tax system.

Because the "county councillors" have such power, the people are very careful who they elect. Also every 3 months there are referenda on one issue or another where the people get their say. The function of politicians in this area is to obey the peoples will.

Sounds like a great idea. I would imagine that it would be very expensive to run referenda every 3 months but at the same time it would encourage more people to get involved in politics and I suppose there are a lot of volunteers helping to make it work?

It would also imagine that it would weed out a lot of corruption at county level.

I'm going to go have a read about this.