How will the government bridge the gap?

[wysiwyg]

Privatisation could bridge the gap eventually, by drastically cutting the public-sector pay bill. A lot of fat remains to be trimmed in the public-sector, especially in terms of the 850 state-agencies many of which are duplicating each others role, and were set up to provide jobs for the boys.

Unfortunately Sligo Boy, FT does actually have a point here. The public sector i.e. hospitals, councils, schools, etc are full of jobs which were made up in the past simply to provide employment to "good" FF and FG supporters... not things like nurses or teachers, but lower skilled jobs, which are now draining the services of huge amounts of money because they are tied into public sector wage agreements. There is a lot of fat to be trimmed in the public sector.. but privatisation wouldn't be the way I would do it. What the privateers don't ever seem to understand is that private contractors will never seek to rid inefficiencies completely, because that would remove their own justification for existence... they will only create inefficiencies elsewhere

[BodyofEvidence]

Privatisation could bridge the gap eventually, by drastically cutting the public-sector pay bill. A lot of fat remains to be trimmed in the public-sector, especially in terms of the 850 state-agencies many of which are duplicating each others role, and were set up to provide jobs for the boys.

So what would you sell (in this market) and how much would you get. What, for example, is the worth of Conradh?

[hopi watcher]

Privatisation could bridge the gap eventually, by drastically cutting the public-sector pay bill. A lot of fat remains to be trimmed in the public-sector, especially in terms of the 850 state-agencies many of which are duplicating each others role, and were set up to provide jobs for the boys.

Unfortunately Sligo Boy, FT does actually have a point here. The public sector i.e. hospitals, councils, schools, etc are full of jobs which were made up in the past simply to provide employment to "good" FF and FG supporters... not things like nurses or teachers, but lower skilled jobs, which are now draining the services of huge amounts of money because they are tied into public sector wage agreements. There is a lot of fat to be trimmed in the public sector.. but privatisation wouldn't be the way I would do it. What the privateers don't ever seem to understand is that private contractors will never seek to rid inefficiencies completely, because that would remove their own justification for existence... they will only create inefficiencies elsewhere

There is a point here ok but privatisation is most certainly not the way to go. Overmanning is a management problem and government is there to do that, If they can't, then they should go to the country. BTW, the private sector killed the Celtic Tiger by greed. That's what privatisation would bring to vital services.

[Sligoboy]

Privatisation could bridge the gap eventually, by drastically cutting the public-sector pay bill. A lot of fat remains to be trimmed in the public-sector, especially in terms of the 850 state-agencies many of which are duplicating each others role, and were set up to provide jobs for the boys.

Unfortunately Sligo Boy, FT does actually have a point here. The public sector i.e. hospitals, councils, schools, etc are full of jobs which were made up in the past simply to provide employment to "good" FF and FG supporters... not things like nurses or teachers, but lower skilled jobs, which are now draining the services of huge amounts of money because they are tied into public sector wage agreements. There is a lot of fat to be trimmed in the public sector.. but privatisation wouldn't be the way I would do it. What the privateers don't ever seem to understand is that private contractors will never seek to rid inefficiencies completely, because that would remove their own justification for existence... they will only create inefficiencies elsewhere

No, he doesn't have a point at all. Hhis solution is Privatisation full stop. A solution even you have dismissed.

Reform is needed but not by neo-cons like FT whose 'once size fits all' rhetoric is as lazy as it is idiotic.

[adamirer]

Adamirer above calls for a reduction simply to suit his, and a small number of others financial position. That isn't the way to run an economy. Stamp Duty provided huge revenues to Government because a property guzzling herd were given practically free money by lending institutions, which they used to pay way way over the odds for poor property's. But they are built. We don't need lots of more houses. We have literally hundreds of thousands of empty ones as it is. Let the market settle, and adamirers 380,000 average house in Dublin will settle back at around 300,000 and stamp duty won't be a problem anymore.
Leave the dead donkey alone

Eh, well first off glad to see that at least remained an insult free zone. I don't undertsand how otherwise sane people get so worked up and offended on this thing. Secondly, My point wasn't an 'Indo' centric - stamp duty reform will solve the world idea, I merely said that the agrument between wysiwyg and juncketman missed the point, that you don't need a 700k mortgage to be affected by stamp duty and that I personally believe the stamp duty reform in 2007 was a disappointment and didn't go far enough.

The central tenent of the argument I responded to was that yes, any reduction/holiday in it would certainly make it more likely I could buy the house I currently can't afford in a credit crunched environment. Of course you'd need a detailed economic assessment whether the tax raising benefits of having people who would 'like' to buy actually buying would be countered by those who 'have to'.

Despite that, some of your thinking is simply generalisms from your perspective. There's more than a 'small' number of people in my financial situation - there are thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of people in this country who are on the first rung of the property ladder and now, due to the pressures of finding space for their family, need to move to a bigger home. Its a general societal need and not merely a 'property guzzling herd' mentality (which is a bit disingenuous - do you really think thats why people bought homes in the last decade? we're not all property speculators!). By all means try and find a 4 bedroomed house in a half decent part of the Dublin and you certainly won't see change out of 500k.

There might have been a lot of property built but I think we'd nearly all agree, its been mostly of the wrong type and not family friendly. It could take another 12-18 months for the market to settle, and while i personally, have no problem with free market principles and glad to see prices drop, having to pay stamp duty equivalent to a years salary when you already pay tax, is a detriment to people buying a home.