The bulk of that wealth is held is devalued assets which can't be sold and now worthless shares. I agree, have a supertax for the superwealthy... but I think there is going to be disappointment in terms of how much it can actually bring in.

Auditor #9 wrote:

johnfás wrote:

Who is that guy on the right?

Cathal O Loughlin ? ???

What does he do?

johnfás wrote:

The bulk of that wealth is held is devalued assets which can't be sold and now worthless shares. I agree, have a supertax for the superwealthy... but I think there is going to be disappointment in terms of how much it can actually bring in.

That's what I was thinking - do any of them have gold that we could lift or they would be taken to place de la concorde

What do you think about what O'Toole was saying - apply an emergency income for a couple of years, capping what everyone in the public sector earns ?

johnfás wrote:

Auditor #9 wrote:

johnfás wrote:

Who is that guy on the right?

Cathal O Loughlin ? ???

What does he do?

Did they say he used to work in the Dept. of Finance ?

I don't remember what points he was making - that the solution couldn't focus on one section of society only ?

Mary White in the Seanad this evening suggested that a cent on text messages would bring in 1.4billion euro. That can't be right can it?

Plus I've just been told that 20 fags are to cost 11 euro from April, the fellow in my local shop said he'd just been informed from on high...

Accoring to RTE last year 25 million texts are sent in Ireland per day. That is 9,125 million texts by 0.01 is 91250000 euro or 91 million euro. Significant, but not 1.4 billion.

johnfás wrote:

Accoring to RTE last year 25 million texts are sent in Ireland per day. That is 9,125 million texts by 0.01 is 91250000 euro or 91 million euro. Significant, but not 1.4 billion.

George Lee said 100 million last week on Morning Ireland

I thought it couldn't be right, perhaps I misheard her, or perhaps she meant a combination of that and another suggestion she made (which escapes me at the moment)...

It'd be great if it was 1billion. How about a penny for every link on the internet clicked

There must be a lot more things like that that could be applied if you could think about them. That sounds like a handy 100m. It's half a billion by 2014 and it could easily be notched up 0.25c in Oct. without any pain but another 25m coming in.

25m will seem like a shitload of money by October.

Fintan O'Toole said that they were not going to tax wealth, only income, and that there is 50 billion in wealth owned by a relatively small number of people.

They said on Prime time that there weren't enough of the rich to bring in sufficient additional revenue from taxing income but showed figures on how the lower paid were numerous enough to do the trick.

If we borrow an idea from Ryanair, and meter the loo in every home and workplace perhaps that adds up. And might cut down water an energy use too. Though the tendering process for the meters might eat up all the potential profits.... Not to mention storage costs if they don't work. Mmm, back to the drawing board.

candide wrote:

They said on Prime time that there weren't enough of the rich to bring in sufficient additional revenue from taxing income but showed figures on how the lower paid were numerous enough to do the trick.

If we borrow an idea from Ryanair, and meter the loo in every home and workplace perhaps that adds up. And might cut down water an energy use too. Though the tendering process for the meters might eat up all the potential profits.... Not to mention storage costs if they don't work. Mmm, back to the drawing board.

It was a strange programme. It seemed to be set up to try to demonstrate that there was no point in taxing the wealthy, but with O'Toolle to provide "balance". A wealth levy could raise a lot, but would have to be done quickly without warning, before the so and sos hid everything in the Turks and Caicos or box under the bed.

How do you ascertain the value of "wealth"? Aside from cash on deposit giving any asset owned a value right now is a very difficult task... and as I said I really don't think it is going to bring in as much as people hope. Sure you have the Super wealthy, but their assets are already abroad. The vast bulk of the 'wealthy' in that BOI survey you linked to will be professionals who included the assets within their pension and their share portfolio in their 'wealth'. That has basically disappeared now.

I'm not saying don't do a wealth tax, I'm just saying I think you are going to have to do both.

johnfás wrote:

How do you ascertain the value of "wealth"? Aside from cash on deposit giving any asset owned a value right now is a very difficult task... and as I said I really don't think it is going to bring in as much as people hope. Sure you have the Super wealthy, but their assets are already abroad. The vast bulk of the 'wealthy' in that BOI survey you linked to will be professionals who included the assets within their pension and their share portfolio in their 'wealth'. That has basically disappeared now.

I'm not saying don't do a wealth tax, I'm just saying I think you are going to have to do both.

We're not too far apart then. I think that PAYE tax should be on a sliding scale rather than bands. They do it that way in Australia.

Some people can afford to pay plenty more tax, but the problem is that people have entered commitments i.e have debts and many have very little slack in their budgets. It is appalling beyond belief that government built public expenditure up on taxes from a housing boom and have left us with this agonising adjustment to make.

cactus flower wrote:

johnfás wrote:

How do you ascertain the value of "wealth"? Aside from cash on deposit giving any asset owned a value right now is a very difficult task... and as I said I really don't think it is going to bring in as much as people hope. Sure you have the Super wealthy, but their assets are already abroad. The vast bulk of the 'wealthy' in that BOI survey you linked to will be professionals who included the assets within their pension and their share portfolio in their 'wealth'. That has basically disappeared now.

I'm not saying don't do a wealth tax, I'm just saying I think you are going to have to do both.

We're not too far apart then. I think that PAYE tax should be on a sliding scale rather than bands. They do it that way in Australia.

Some people can afford to pay plenty more tax, but the problem is that people have entered commitments i.e have debts and many have very little slack in their budgets. It is appalling beyond belief that government built public expenditure up on taxes from a housing boom and have left us with this agonising adjustment to make.

Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern.Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern.

Don't forget it.

EvotingMachine0197 wrote:

cactus flower wrote:

johnfás wrote:

How do you ascertain the value of "wealth"? Aside from cash on deposit giving any asset owned a value right now is a very difficult task... and as I said I really don't think it is going to bring in as much as people hope. Sure you have the Super wealthy, but their assets are already abroad. The vast bulk of the 'wealthy' in that BOI survey you linked to will be professionals who included the assets within their pension and their share portfolio in their 'wealth'. That has basically disappeared now.

I'm not saying don't do a wealth tax, I'm just saying I think you are going to have to do both.

We're not too far apart then. I think that PAYE tax should be on a sliding scale rather than bands. They do it that way in Australia.

Some people can afford to pay plenty more tax, but the problem is that people have entered commitments i.e have debts and many have very little slack in their budgets. It is appalling beyond belief that government built public expenditure up on taxes from a housing boom and have left us with this agonising adjustment to make.

Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern.Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern.

Don't forget it.

That's very true, he gave us a whole lot of services that no one looked for at all, what was he thinking.

Would you not agree that an over reliance on stamp duty was a very bad mistake by the Government tonys? Or would you say that was not the case?

johnfás wrote:

Would you not agree that an over reliance on stamp duty was a very bad mistake by the Government tonys? Or would you say that was not the case?

I think we all agree that there should have been more measures to dampen down the property boom. In that regard, I don't think people are seriously saying we should have eliminated stamp duty as that would only have thrown fuel on the fire.

So what are you suggesting JF? Should we have kept income taxes higher despite the huge property tax revenues? Or should we not have spent the revenue we took in from property taxes? Should we instead have invested it in shares like the National Pension fund??? Don't forget that FG were suggesting we should cash in the pension fund a number of years ago on the basis that 2007 was a rainy day!!!

I'm not saying anyone had any better ideas but I do think there is going to have to be an admission from Government that they did in fact make policy errors. At the end of the day Fianna Fáil held the purse strings of the State, Fine Gael, Labour and to a large extent the Greens did not.

It would seem to me that we should have continued to run our economy in a sustainable way and that the property taxes should have been considered a bonus which we invested in something akin to a sovereign wealth fund like alot of countries do to great success with their oil revenues. You could have at least spent the money on one off expenses and projects... but you simply cannot commit to an ongoing expense without sustainable ongoing income... it doesn't make sense.

You have got to run your business (or in this case your State) on a sustainable model. On a micro level it is the businesses that built on a sustainable basis which are going to survive this recession; it is those businesses which experienced rapid growth without a sustainable base who are going to suffer most. On a macro level it would seem to me, at any rate, that the same applies to States.

It seems an obvious flaw that we were over dependent on property taxes. However, the question was what should we have done with them. I note the suggestion of one off projects. In fairness, we have been knee deep in one-off projects for the last 10 years.

johnfás wrote:

Would you not agree that an over reliance on stamp duty was a very bad mistake by the Government tonys? Or would you say that was not the case?

The tax base should have been widened as the property taxes dried up as was no doubt was the plan, but they didn't expect the arse to fall out of it to the tune of -70% in one year. That said the drop in stamp duty only accounts for a shortfall of 600 million in a total shortfall of 2 billion, so we'd be in serious shit even without any property crash as are the Germans and everyone else sans property booms/crashes.

Zhou_Enlai wrote:

It seems an obvious flaw that we were over dependent on property taxes. However, the question was what should we have done with them. I note the suggestion of one off projects. In fairness, we have been knee deep in one-off projects for the last 10 years.

The obvious things would have been broadband, a new national grid able to take wind energy, wind farms, schools and houses. If government had not stopped building houses then house prices would not have gone up so much.

Property taxes also contributed substantially to the increase in house prices and thus to the extent of debt that people are now in. Property taxes at time of purchase should have been kept lower. We should have had a local rate instead across all property to pay for local services and infrastructure.

These aren't new suggestions, plenty of people, myself included, have been saying them over the last 7 or 8 years.

Zhou_Enlai wrote:

It seems an obvious flaw that we were over dependent on property taxes. However, the question was what should we have done with them. I note the suggestion of one off projects. In fairness, we have been knee deep in one-off projects for the last 10 years.

Infrastructure is the real wealth of the nation and it includes a lot more than roads

forestry is at 9%-10% we could have been boosting this up towards the European avg. of ~30%
the grid as cactus said - anyone any idea why the 25 massive turbines on the Kish bank were scaled back to just 2? That's a lot of home produced energy gone a begging.
broadband
water rates should have been introduced on a sliding scale - the more you use the more you pay and make it revenue neutral, using the money to block up the 60% leakages in places like Kilkenny (this might have also dampened the fires of the Celtic Tiger)
public transport in Dublin - even to whack a load more bus lanes up might have helped or forced car-sharing (cheap but effective solutions)
legislative upgrades that might be necesary could have been done
education of the less well off and illiterate - 24% were illiterate according to a 1996 OECD report (indo article)
income tax should have been introduced on a sliding scale


The horse is gone though but always worth thinking about what we can do because it's never too late. It's not the end of our country or anything is it ?

Brian Lenihan, on RTE's News at 1 with Seán O'Rourke, again refused to admit that the Government had made any mistakes in relation to the economy.

He was happy to admit that the banks had made some mistake, that owing to our membership of the euro mistakes had been made in the advancement of too much credit... but again, no blame on the Government.

The question arose in relation to a comment made by Alistair Darling yesterday that his Government had made mistakes and that without such an admission they could have no credibility in solving their problems.

Clearly our Minister for Finance does not share that position. Perhaps he will change his mind once he has been called into PJ Mara's office for a spanking.

Stamp duty was the means of damaging the second-hand house market. First time buyer's grants were a subvention to builders and drove up the prices of new houses.

The ultimate value of a home is measured in how many years in the nursing home it will pay for, and at €60,000 a year currently, that's not many. Perhaps house price estimates now should be in NHYs, like say 5 or 6. That might focus the mind a little. And for the little old ladies whose savings from the sale of their home are now dwindling at the rate of €60,000 a year, and who probably don't even realise that fewer than two NHY equivalents are now guaranteed by the state indemnification of the banks, I would not like to see DIRT increased for them.