Ireland's inequality and taxes on Vincent Browne

[Kevin Doyle]

No, you missed the point again. It was an attempt to get some facts, rather than making vast generalisations.

Vast generalisations? The Nordic models are operational models delivering real, verifiable and tangible results.

You really dont have a point at all do you, just more of this mickey mouse flippancy.

[Kevin Doyle]

You are on the wrong forum mate if you think it is so unreasonable to ask folks to support their claims with some facts.

Where are yours....mate?

That time of the month Kevin is it?

Thats about your limit alright.

[hopi watcher]

I wasn't making any assertion, merely enquiring as to the supporting facts of another.




No, actually the old pre-emptive strike. I've asked Hopi questions before and the usual answers are -
1. "You are embarassing yourself"
2. "Can't you read"
3. "You are ridiculous"

So basically cutting him off at the pass.

You are on the wrong forum mate if you think it is so unreasonable to ask folks to support their claims with some facts.
That time of the month Kevin is it?

Are you now saying that the following are not facts? Do you wonder why anyone doubts your reading abilities?

"Some Facts:

The Gino coefficient used to measure inequality shows the following (2007)

"Ireland's inequality as measured by this standard was 31. And the significance of that can be understood by reference to the measurements for other developed countries. For Sweden and Slovenia it was 23. Slovak Republic 24. Czech Republic and Denmark 25. France, Hungary, Malta, Austria and Finland 26. Luxembourg 27. Netherlands 28. Germany and Cyprus 30. And then Ireland, along with Spain on 31.Only Italy, Poland, Estonia, the UK, Greece, and three of the Baltic countries, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia, were worse, ie more unequal."

And again courtesy of Vincent Browne;

"The latest data from the Revenue Commissioners confirms the scale of income inequality. It shows that over 6,000 people (a fraction of 1 per cent) get 7 per cent of all income, an average of over €1 million per head. And they pay just over 38 per cent of their income in taxes and 2010 levies".

And more facts;

"Ireland’s overall tax take (including social security contributions), according to Eurostat ( Taxation Trends in the European Union , 2009 edition), for 2007 was 31.2 per cent of GDP. Belgium’s tax take was 44 per cent of GDP, Denmark’s was 49 per cent, Germany’s 40 per cent and Sweden 48. Even the UK was higher than Ireland at 36.3 per cent. There were only four countries in the EU 27 that had a lower tax take than Ireland’s – Latvia, Lithuania, Romania and Slovakia"

[Foghorn]

No you didn't look it up, you are blowing your foghorn again.

Some Facts:

The Gino coefficient used to measure inequality shows the following (2007)

"Ireland's inequality as measured by this standard was 31. And the significance of that can be understood by reference to the measurements for other developed countries. For Sweden and Slovenia it was 23. Slovak Republic 24. Czech Republic and Denmark 25. France, Hungary, Malta, Austria and Finland 26. Luxembourg 27. Netherlands 28. Germany and Cyprus 30. And then Ireland, along with Spain on 31.Only Italy, Poland, Estonia, the UK, Greece, and three of the Baltic countries, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia, were worse, ie more unequal."

Who is Gino? The Gini Coefficient is something else entirely. Gini coefficient - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

The original poster claimed -

An Gilladaker[/B];2277156]
The rich get far more welfare than anyone else its called coprate welfare check it out

to which you said when I asked for some information on this

Go to Revenue and get a few facts.

You are now providing information on something else entirely. I just wanted to know about "coprate welfare".

And again courtesy of Vincent Browne;

"The latest data from the Revenue Commissioners confirms the scale of income inequality. It shows that over 6,000 people (a fraction of 1 per cent) get 7 per cent of all income, an average of over €1 million per head. And they pay just over 38 per cent of their income in taxes and 2010 levies".

That may be the case but it has nothing to do with the claim about "corporate welfare". These figures are about individuals. You might find this link of interest - A little quiz on Ireland’s income tax | Ronan Lyons

"Ireland’s top 0.5% of earners, the 11,714 people who earned more than €275,000 in a year, paid almost 18% of all income tax, over €2bn in total"

And more facts;

"Ireland’s overall tax take (including social security contributions), according to Eurostat ( Taxation Trends in the European Union , 2009 edition), for 2007 was 31.2 per cent of GDP. Belgium’s tax take was 44 per cent of GDP, Denmark’s was 49 per cent, Germany’s 40 per cent and Sweden 48. Even the UK was higher than Ireland at 36.3 per cent. There were only four countries in the EU 27 that had a lower tax take than Ireland’s – Latvia, Lithuania, Romania and Slovakia."

Again that may be the case but it has nothing to do with the claim about "corporate welfare".

[Foghorn]

Where are yours....mate?

I'm not contesting what he said, merely asking about the "corporate welfare" details me makes reference to from the Revenue Commissioners.

Read the earlier posts it is all there.

Thats about your limit alright.

Do you get hot flushes when you see people asking questions?

[Kevin Doyle]

I'm not contesting what he said,

Yes you are.

Do you get hot flushes when you see people asking questions?

meh

[Foghorn]

Vast generalisations? The Nordic models are operational models delivering real, verifiable and tangible results.

You really dont have a point at all do you, just more of this mickey mouse flippancy.

I wasn't making any statement. Why do you have a problem with a "point" I have not made. Why would I need to bring "facts" for a point I have not made? I'm just asking about "corporate welfare" whose details are, allegedly on the Revenue Commissioners website, as purported by Hopi in his earlier post. Anybody reading the posts can see this at all.

When someone asks a question it doesn't mean they are making a point.....just asking a question. I am interested in "corporate welfare" and I might even recommend it to my business friend in Ireland.

I have no problem with the Nordic model.

[Foghorn]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Foghorn
I'm not contesting what he said,

Yes you are.

Specifically where did I say that I disputed it?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Foghorn
Do you get hot flushes when you see people asking questions?

meh

LOL!!!! QED!

[hopi watcher]

Who is Gino? The Gini Coefficient is something else entirely. Gini coefficient - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

The original poster claimed -



to which you said when I asked for some information on this



You are now providing information on something else entirely. I just wanted to know about "coprate welfare".




[/I]

That may be the case but it has nothing to do with the claim about "corporate welfare". These figures are about individuals. You might find this link of interest - A little quiz on Ireland’s income tax | Ronan Lyons

"Ireland’s top 0.5% of earners, the 11,714 people who earned more than €275,000 in a year, paid almost 18% of all income tax, over €2bn in total"



Again that may be the case but it has nothing to do with the claim about "corporate welfare".

Welfare for the wealthy is given in many ways, look at the list of tax 'incentives'. Your problem is that you simply don't understand what is meant by 'corporate welfare' and hence your persistent confused state. The figures clearly show that Ireland taxes wealth very little in comparison and this is achieved by corprotate welfare. In note that the discussion has forced you seek out how comparisons are made. Keep up the good work, you'll reach understanding soon enough.

[Foghorn]

Welfare for the wealthy is given in many ways, look at the list of tax 'incentives'. Your problem is that you simply don't understand what is meant by 'corporate welfare' and hence your persistent confused state. The figures clearly show that Ireland taxes wealth very little in comparison and this is achieved by corprotate welfare. In note that the discussion has forced you seek out how comparisons are made. Keep up the good work, you'll reach understanding soon enough.

No you are wrong. The definition given here is under Corporate welfare - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia is very clear on the matter. It has nothing to do with "Welfare for the wealthy".

Specifically it states

"Corporate welfare is a pejorative term describing a government's bestowal of money grants, tax breaks, or other [COLOR=Red]special favorable treatment [/COLOR]on [COLOR=Red]corporations[/COLOR] or selected corporations."

You are trying to twist the argument to your way. And again you revert to your old combinations of making a statement and then making claims that anyone disagrees is in a "confused state". I predicted this many post okay when I specifically wrote the part of your normal tactic supporting Ridiculous/Embarrassment/Cannot Read strategy.