Total Irish tax burden almost unchanged in period 1995-2005

[david]

The only differance is that I see employment as a re-distributive tool to alleviate poverty and to my mind is the first step out of poverty.

Shíte wages = alleviating poverty = pd policy

[Sidewinder]

And this , my good Opus, is where we diverge. If I can be allowed to use your words,

The only differance is that I see employment as a re-distributive tool to alleviate poverty and to my mind is the first step out of poverty.

We seek to acheive the same goals, we just use different methods. By slashing the cost of employment thru cuts in PAYE and PRSI, we help people to get work where there might not have been a chance previously.
The profits of companies then goes directly into the pockets of employees rather than into the coffers of the Revenue Commisioners.

But lets just agree to differ and I promise not tp reply to your next post and so leave you with the last word.

But all the evidence of the last 25 years of "trickle down" Reaganomic theory has shown this doesn't actually work in practice. The share of national income going to wages has massively decreased in the US, Ireland, NZ and Britain while all 4 countries have been pursuing these policies, while the slice of the cake going to capital has massively increased. Real wages for workers in the US have been declining for decades, and social mobility there is now much worse than it is in Europe. While real wages in Ireland increased across the board during the 90s, for the last 5 years real wages in the private sector have also been stagnant or declining while capital continues to rake in an ever-increasing slice of the cake. Only in the protected sectors of the Irish economy have real wages been increasing.

Giving someone a job won't get them out of poverty if the wages are poor and declining at the same time as consumer price inflation is running at 4%+ and even higher for the poor (seeing as items like energy, and basic services, are a much larger proportion of their basket of goods purchased, and inflation in those sectors is running at 7-20%). The humungous rise in private consumer debt in Ireland since 2002, even after the effects of the property bubble are removed, clearly shows that ordinary workers in this country are having to borrow to fund their lifestyles - and this is at least partly due to the fact that real wages have not been increasing.

[hiker]

But all the evidence of the last 25 years of "trickle down" Reaganomic theory has shown this doesn't actually work in practice. The share of national income going to wages has massively decreased in the US, Ireland, NZ and Britain while all 4 countries have been pursuing these policies, while the slice of the cake going to capital has massively increased. Real wages for workers in the US have been declining for decades, and social mobility there is now much worse than it is in Europe. While real wages in Ireland increased across the board during the 90s, for the last 5 years real wages in the private sector have also been stagnant or declining while capital continues to rake in an ever-increasing slice of the cake. Only in the protected sectors of the Irish economy have real wages been increasing.

Giving someone a job won't get them out of poverty if the wages are poor and declining at the same time as consumer price inflation is running at 4%+ and even higher for the poor (seeing as items like energy, and basic services, are a much larger proportion of their basket of goods purchased, and inflation in those sectors is running at 7-20%). The humungous rise in private consumer debt in Ireland since 2002, even after the effects of the property bubble are removed, clearly shows that ordinary workers in this country are having to borrow to fund their lifestyles - and this is at least partly due to the fact that real wages have not been increasing.

The Minimum Wage introduced by no less than Mary Harney as Minister for Employment, Trade and Enterprise can overcome the problem of excessivly low wages. Thats why it was introduced. If it needs to be raised from time to time then it will be done.

As for "workers in this country are having to borrow to fund their lifestyles" then this is again the results of greater choice. In the 70's and 80's you could'nt get a shaggin' loan never mind getting too much borrowing.
Now you complain because workers are getting too many loans.
Getting loans is not a sin, you know. Not paying them back, well, we wont go there........

[Pax]

So, in your view, a high progressive tax is unfair, but a high regressive tax is fair?

No high regressive taxes would also be unfair. Ireland's regressive taxes are not extremley high. For example, Austria has a VAT rate of 20% just one point lower than our own. And Sweden, your beloved model, has a standard rate of 25% something you appear to be unaware of off.

Appear is correct, and beloved? I'm really not sure what your point is with the above vat. Denmark and Sweden have a 25% rate but it is swamped by the proportion received in progressive taxation, (this is then mirrored by the lower level of inequality in these nations) whereas the inverse is the case here.

[On the purchase tax side, what should happen (and will have to happen if this species wants to survive) is that, over and above a fixed allocation of any particular item, you should pay a lot more.

That sounds like rationing. Thats a little dramatic, don't you think. If you are talking about petrol, gas, and energy in general you might have point but to apply this across the board will not happen.?

It is rationing and no, it's hardly dramatic. To use your word, it's equitable.

If you apply rationing to energy, then it does apply across the board. That's what's so beautifully simple about it.

I think Pigovian taxes will not be enough, both because they can be passed on to consumers by businesses avoiding the "polluter pays principle" and that when the actual economy is looked at (as in negative externalities included which is the rule rather than the exception) as opposed to the lazy model, then markets often work to make us produce more of what is not socially and environmentally efficient. Plus markets fail every time at generating quantitative estimates of the costs and benefits of pollution.

Having said that within a market economy then I'd support them instead of marketable permits crapology, but they would have to be linked with cuts in regressive taxes and/or replaced by progressive taxes.

But I think that realistically (as in solving the problem) a rationing or say an allocatable carbon consumption rights system will need to be introduced possibly also where victims of pollution have an incontestable right not to be polluted and are represented in some way to uphold this - whether it all will be introduce or not...

(By the way I've yet to read Heat (next on the list) but have read the extracts in the Guardian, seems like there's some well worked out ideas there backed up with research and facts .... )

[Opus]

Hi hiker,

Interestingly, I also look out for other people (simple or otherwise) - we all do it in different ways I guess but I should point out that I fully agree with you in that education is the only long run way out of poverty. The only difference is that I see taxation that can be used as a re-distributive tool to alleviate poverty and that to my mind is the first step out of poverty. While I can understand that we can't have a completely equal distribution of wealth I do not accept that we should not give everyone an equal shot (as far as practicable) at life.

And this , my good Opus, is where we diverge. If I can be allowed to use your words,

The only differance is that I see employment as a re-distributive tool to alleviate poverty and to my mind is the first step out of poverty.

We seek to acheive the same goals, we just use different methods. By slashing the cost of employment thru cuts in PAYE and PRSI, we help people to get work where there might not have been a chance previously.
The profits of companies then goes directly into the pockets of employees rather than into the coffers of the Revenue Commisioners.

But lets just agree to differ and I promise not tp reply to your next post and so leave you with the last word.

Did you REALLY think I'd let you have the last word? HA!

I agree with you that being in employment is also a significant step out of poverty - the only thing I would tag onto that is that it is not the only one e.g. manipulating the tax so that people on lower wages can take home more of their money by having a lower income tax rate AND lower rates of indriect taxes will allow them to raise their standard of living quicker - for instance €20 a week to someone on €15,000 a year is worth a heck of a lot more then €20 a week to someone on €50,000 yes?

How am I paying for this apparent largesse on my part - a slightly higher level of income tax for richer people - but forgive me - this is the original point I came in on! :wink:

Regards,

Opus.

[eurocrat]

Appear is correct, and beloved? I'm really not sure what your point is with the above vat. Denmark and Sweden have a 25% rate but it is swamped by the proportion received in progressive taxation, (this is then mirrored by the lower level of inequality in these nations) whereas the inverse is the case here.

My point is that Sweden also has high regressive taxes. You are attacking Irelands high regressive taxes believing it to be 'unfair' and inconsistant with the the prusuit of greater equality. I have shown that other countries can have high VAT rates and still produce reasonably 'equal' (I have difficualty with that word and its measurement, but thats another thread) societys.

So what ar you proposing? That we increase both VAT and Income Tax in Ireland?

[JCSkinner]

Its just a matter of choice. On PAYE most workers have NO choice. On Indirect Taxes they have.

Im on PAYE and i dont see much choice in paying/not paying non PAYE taxes.

For example:

TV Licence
Wheely Bins
Credit card stamp duty
Alcohol Duty and VAT
VRT
Road tax(OK I chose to drive a 2L car. But even if I drove a 1L its still taxed)
Health Insurance.(I agree with OECD that this is in effect a taxation)
Voluntary School Donations (Primary school) Voluntary my butt.
Air travel taxes
Property Stamp & CGT
Motorway tolls.
Planning and planning objection fees
FOI charges

blah blah

Where's the choice Hiker. I cant see it.

That whole list is a lifestyle choice. If you cannot see that then what can I say.

Okay, let's say I choose not to pay these taxes. I live with no telly, must produce absolutely no waste whatsoever, cannot use the internet for purchasing goods at reasonable prices leaving me at the mercy of rip-off Irish retailers, don't drink, do not run a car, better not get so sick I require hospital, cannot leave the country to travel abroad, cannot improve my house and cannot find out what the venal scum running this country are really up to.
Yup, that sounds like an achievable lifestyle alright.

[Akrasia]

The only differance is that I see employment as a re-distributive tool to alleviate poverty and to my mind is the first step out of poverty.

Except that the majority of people in poverty in this country are not Unemployed, they are the elderly, disabled, carers, and people with special needs.
Mental health problems, especially clinical depression, are a massive contributing factor in the high levels of poverty in Ireland. Mental health services in Ireland are practically non existent (other than prescriptions for SSRI medication)

We seek to acheive the same goals, we just use different methods. By slashing the cost of employment thru cuts in PAYE and PRSI, we help people to get work where there might not have been a chance previously.

A significant number of people are at risk of poverty despite being in full time employment. The quality of jobs is as big a problem as the lack of jobs in many cases. The lack of decent jobs is also a contributing factor to Mental health problems. These problems are all linked together.

The profits of companies then goes directly into the pockets of employees rather than into the coffers of the Revenue Commisioners.

The profits of companies goes directly into the pockets of the owners of the business.