cactus flower wrote:

)

I agreed with a lot of what Tom O'Connor had to say this morning on Morning Ireland. http://www.rte.ie/news/morningireland/index.html

[Specific article
http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0305/morningireland_av.html?2501707,null,209 ] (Audi)

Amongst other things, he said is was madness to be considering spending 13 billion on the Luas and Metro North. Imo, one billion on new buses and bus infrastructure would be more cost effective by far.

He pointed out that as against that, and vast motorway spending, only 276 million was earmarked in the NDP for renewable energy.

He was the first person I have heard who was thinking strategically rather than just hacking about the place randomly.

The problem with buses, and I say this as a regular user of Dublin Bus, not as a random outsider, is that there are various bottle necks around the city owing to narrow roads through some of the suburbs nearer the city. It is all well and good to say invest in bus infrastructure if you think that all bus routes are like the 46A - whizzing down a dedicated lane of a 3 lane carraigeway the whole way into the city. If you want to put a proper buslane system in where I live it would require the demolition of whole streets of homes.

johnfás wrote:

imokyrok wrote:

johnfás wrote:

I've always wondered the fascination of new builds. Give me an 1880s redbrick with character any day.

Yeah they're great - except for the rising damp, dry rot, mould, leaking roof, crumbling walls, draughty windows and floors, warped doors, faulty wiring, backed up plumbing, no central heating and insulation. But apart from those things you can't beat an old house.

As opposed to poorly built new builds with as many internal problems owing to the fact that they weren't built with any attention to quality, on half finished estates where you pay a couple of grand a year on a management charge... not my cup of tea.

My my, you must live in a shoddy end of town.

Zhou_Enlai wrote:

Can't listen to the clip. What exactly is F.O'T. proposing? Does he want to retrospectively tax my pension contribution from the last number for years or something ridiculous like that?

Fintan O'Toole wrote:

Fairness isn’t an optional extra, but a crucial precondition for a deal.

Take the so-called public sector pension levy, for example. Objectively, it may be rational for the workers who are affected to take the pain, since they have most to lose if the State is bankrupted. But they won’t do so if they feel they’re being given an unfair ultimatum. And they’re absolutely right to feel that way. For one thing, the 92,000 lower-paid public servants, earning less than €35,000 a year, will pay more than those who earn twice as much. The internal balance of the levy is grossly unjust.

Even more unjust, however, is the basic logic of the levy. It may seem obvious that public sector pensions are a problem because they’re paid for from a declining public purse. But they’re not the only pensions that are subsidised by public money. My most recent pay slip reminds me, for example, that I paid nearly €400 in additional voluntary contributions (AVCs) to my pension scheme.

These AVCs are deducted before tax, meaning, in effect, that the State is giving me about €160 a month towards my pension. That alone is one tenth of the total monthly salary of a cleaner in the public service.

Why should she pay a 3 per cent levy on her measly income, while I continue to get these handouts?

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2009/0303/1224242144730.html

I guess he's saying those who get a healthy private pension and make addtional voluntary contributions which are supported by the Govt. shouldn't get these supplementary payments now for three years.... It would get 2bn - 3bn into the economy in a year he says.


http://www.rte.ie/radio1/player_av.html?0,null,200,http://dynamic.rte.ie/quickaxs/209-rte-todaywithpatkenny-Wednesday.smil

johnfás wrote:

cactus flower wrote:

)

I agreed with a lot of what Tom O'Connor had to say this morning on Morning Ireland. http://www.rte.ie/news/morningireland/index.html

[Specific article
http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0305/morningireland_av.html?2501707,null,209 ] (Audi)

Amongst other things, he said is was madness to be considering spending 13 billion on the Luas and Metro North. Imo, one billion on new buses and bus infrastructure would be more cost effective by far.

He pointed out that as against that, and vast motorway spending, only 276 million was earmarked in the NDP for renewable energy.

He was the first person I have heard who was thinking strategically rather than just hacking about the place randomly.

The problem with buses, and I say this as a regular user of Dublin Bus, not as a random outsider, is that there are various bottle necks around the city owing to narrow roads through some of the suburbs nearer the city. It is all well and good to say invest in bus infrastructure if you think that all bus routes are like the 46A - whizzing down a dedicated lane of a 3 lane carraigeway the whole way into the city. If you want to put a proper buslane system in where I live it would require the demolition of whole streets of homes.

If you put enough buses on the road they take up a lot of road space and provide a good service. Car numbers drop off naturally.

Do they? I live on the intersection of roughly 13 bus routes... the buses in fact get in the way of each other because the roads can't handle them. I'm not saying that we should be getting rid of them or anything, but the idea of providing these buses with "infrastructure" is a little in the clouds.

Biggest problem for Dublin Bus is the route network. The routes are still largely based on the old tram routes and there is a huge amount of repitition between routes where things could be consolidated in order to provide better services in other areas. Of course, try changing anyone's local bus service and see what happens...

Auditor #9 wrote:

Zhou_Enlai wrote:

Can't listen to the clip. What exactly is F.O'T. proposing? Does he want to retrospectively tax my pension contribution from the last number for years or something ridiculous like that?

Fintan O'Toole wrote:

Fairness isn’t an optional extra, but a crucial precondition for a deal.

Take the so-called public sector pension levy, for example. Objectively, it may be rational for the workers who are affected to take the pain, since they have most to lose if the State is bankrupted. But they won’t do so if they feel they’re being given an unfair ultimatum. And they’re absolutely right to feel that way. For one thing, the 92,000 lower-paid public servants, earning less than €35,000 a year, will pay more than those who earn twice as much. The internal balance of the levy is grossly unjust.

Even more unjust, however, is the basic logic of the levy. It may seem obvious that public sector pensions are a problem because they’re paid for from a declining public purse. But they’re not the only pensions that are subsidised by public money. My most recent pay slip reminds me, for example, that I paid nearly €400 in additional voluntary contributions (AVCs) to my pension scheme.

These AVCs are deducted before tax, meaning, in effect, that the State is giving me about €160 a month towards my pension. That alone is one tenth of the total monthly salary of a cleaner in the public service.

Why should she pay a 3 per cent levy on her measly income, while I continue to get these handouts?

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2009/0303/1224242144730.html

I guess he's saying those who get a healthy private pension and make addtional voluntary contributions which are supported by the Govt. shouldn't get these supplementary payments now for three years.... It would get 2bn - 3bn into the economy in a year he says.


http://www.rte.ie/radio1/player_av.html?0,null,200,http://dynamic.rte.ie/quickaxs/209-rte-todaywithpatkenny-Wednesday.smil

Yes Auditor - I think it might be a good idea actually. The really rich people who are greedy and won't pass through the eye of a needle in a fit same as a camel won't like it but do they really need 300 and 400k a year for the yacht, second and third home, 3rd level education for the grandchildren etc. etc. etc.

You are making an increasing number of bibical references, Auditor...

johnfás wrote:

You are making an increasing number of bibical references, Auditor...

Whaddaya mean by that ?

I was always crazy

Apparently this programme will contain 'optimism' .... the first mention of optimisim was straight out of Mark Little when he spoke about the people fighting against the 'recession' ...

'Recession' being optimistic at this stage ..

So ... Fintan O'Toole's pension or that man's and woman's carer's allowances ?

Eh ????

Someone broke Maire Hoctor.

€1400 a week saved because of home carers.... 2.5 bn a year ...

Somethings wrong somewhere ..

I suppose we paid for Maire's hair do.

Auditor #9 wrote:

€1400 a week saved because of home carers.... 2.5 bn a year ...

Somethings wrong somewhere ..

Can't be right. 160,000 carers did they say ?

5 Million in the country means 1 in 30 is a carer. That sounds reasonable


But 1400 pw does not sound reasonable. Ah, is that 1400 saved by not paying for professional caring ?

EvotingMachine0197 wrote:

Auditor #9 wrote:

€1400 a week saved because of home carers.... 2.5 bn a year ...

Somethings wrong somewhere ..

Can't be right. 160,000 carers did they say ?

5 Million in the country means 1 in 30 is a carer. That sounds reasonable


But 1400 pw does not sound reasonable. Ah, is that 1400 saved by not paying for professional caring ?

Yeh nurses and stuff like that - other medical gear - I heard somewhere that carers use nappies for those they care for and the cost of these nappies is an issue ..

We're could save 2.5 billion employing more home carers or that is what home carers are costing us? I missed the programme.

Apparently RTE can save 60 million by cutting back on expenses and a few bits and bobs.

By cutting back on a few bits and bobs they probably mean gutting the whole independent production sector.

A refund of 10% off the VAT inclusive price for designated labour intensive work carried out by tax compliant providers, who must supply a copy of up to date TCC with the invoice, otherwise no refund.

This could apply to small scale building work, home improvements, installation of energy saving equipment such as solar panels or double glazed windows and so on, car servicing, car body work, carpet cleaning and a whole lot more work carried out by small businesses and self employed providers.

* 3% VAT is better than no VAT
* Lots of work for providers + profit & labour taxes for Government.
* Encourage providers to be tax compliant.
* Help keep people in work paying tax and off the dole, saving social welfare payments.

tonys wrote:

A refund of 10% off the VAT inclusive price for designated labour intensive work carried out by tax compliant providers, who must supply a copy of up to date TCC with the invoice, otherwise no refund.

This could apply to small scale building work, home improvements, installation of energy saving equipment such as solar panels or double glazed windows and so on, car servicing, car body work, carpet cleaning and a whole lot more work carried out by small businesses and self employed providers.

* 3% VAT is better than no VAT
* Lots of work for providers + profit & labour taxes for Government.
* Encourage providers to be tax compliant.
* Help keep people in work paying tax and off the dole, saving social welfare payments.

This is an idea that passed through my mind the last time I got my car fixed. I think VAT on repairs should be less than VAT on new stuff (in theory).

I am getting cross here. My mother, 97, is in a nursing home that costs €60,000 a year. Her pension? A pathetic €18,800 a year. You talk about home carers in the most uninformed way. She managed to stay in her home until the age of 93. She called it 'being independent' and bless her, while we could do it it was preferable. That 'independence' came without a damn bit of state support. Unless you count free travel she could not use or the TV licence which she could. She had a paid housekeeper, a private meals delivery, paid the gardener, maintained her house, which is now subventing her in a nursing home, and had overnight carers from a private company. On €18,800 a year? Do you have any grasp at all of the economics of old age?

If she were childless I assure you she would have been in terible straits. If my parents had not always worked hard (in the despised public sector; trust me, pensions were not always as they are now, not even for the idealists who created this Republic ) and bought their own home, she would be thrown on the mercy of the HSE and the state. Heaven help us.

You talk about home care in a manner that tests my forbearance. It takes two trained carers to move my mother. Three to provide her with a bath. Others to prepare and feed her meals. Nurses and doctors to adress the recurrent pneumonia and infections. There is no home carer in a position to provide for high dependency patients whatever our romantic ideals.

I bought my current house with a view to having her here. Downstairs bedroom and adjoining bathroom and no, Jhonfás, not the 1880s house I would have preferred. Naive of me. Advanced old age is not just a matter of negotiating the stairs.


Home care my foot. Calculate your own pensions and see if you can find €60,000 a year (without extras). Don't make the calculations on the basis of assumptions of parents, offspring, partners or divine intervention. Just you. Now. And remember the real value of a house is only calculated in Nursing Home Years, NHYs.

Get real and get kind.

Woah, no need to implicate everyone here in it... people were merely trying to ascertain what the situation is on a national basis, there is constructive reasons for examining such issues. I am quite sure there are many people here in a similar situation to that which you find yourself. For the 9 months prior to my grandfather's death last year my mother was spending 3 to 4 days of every single week in London caring for him and commuting back to work in Dublin on the other days.

I have a huge amount of sympathy for your position, but there is no need to make out that none of us share it.

candide wrote:

I am getting cross here. My mother, 97, is in a nursing home that costs €60,000 a year. Her pension? A pathetic €18,800 a year. You talk about home carers in the most uninformed way. She managed to stay in her home until the age of 93. She called it 'being independent' and bless her, while we could do it it was preferable. That 'independence' came without a damn bit of state support. Unless you count free travel she could not use or the TV licence which she could. She had a paid housekeeper, a private meals delivery, paid the gardener, maintained her house, which is now subventing her in a nursing home, and had overnight carers from a private company. On €18,800 a year? Do you have any grasp at all of the economics of old age?

If she were childless I assure you she would have been in terible straits. If my parents had not always worked hard (in the despised public sector; trust me, pensions were not always as they are now, not even for the idealists who created this Republic ) and bought their own home, she would be thrown on the mercy of the HSE and the state. Heaven help us.

You talk about home care in a manner that tests my forbearance. It takes two trained carers to move my mother. Three to provide her with a bath. Others to prepare and feed her meals. Nurses and doctors to adress the recurrent pneumonia and infections. There is no home carer in a position to provide for high dependency patients whatever our romantic ideals.

I bought my current house with a view to having her here. Downstairs bedroom and adjoining bathroom and no, Jhonfás, not the 1880s house I would have preferred. Naive of me. Advanced old age is not just a matter of negotiating the stairs.


Home care my foot. Calculate your own pensions and see if you can find €60,000 a year (without extras). Don't make the calculations on the basis of assumptions of parents, offspring, partners or divine intervention. Just you. Now. And remember the real value of a house is only calculated in Nursing Home Years, NHYs.

Get real and get kind.

I'm certainly not making light of the work carers do - the opposite in fact.

candide wrote:

I am getting cross here. My mother, 97, is in a nursing home that costs €60,000 a year. Her pension? A pathetic €18,800 a year. You talk about home carers in the most uninformed way. She managed to stay in her home until the age of 93. She called it 'being independent' and bless her, while we could do it it was preferable. That 'independence' came without a damn bit of state support. Unless you count free travel she could not use or the TV licence which she could. She had a paid housekeeper, a private meals delivery, paid the gardener, maintained her house, which is now subventing her in a nursing home, and had overnight carers from a private company. On €18,800 a year? Do you have any grasp at all of the economics of old age?

If she were childless I assure you she would have been in terible straits. If my parents had not always worked hard (in the despised public sector; trust me, pensions were not always as they are now, not even for the idealists who created this Republic ) and bought their own home, she would be thrown on the mercy of the HSE and the state. Heaven help us.

You talk about home care in a manner that tests my forbearance. It takes two trained carers to move my mother. Three to provide her with a bath. Others to prepare and feed her meals. Nurses and doctors to adress the recurrent pneumonia and infections. There is no home carer in a position to provide for high dependency patients whatever our romantic ideals.

I bought my current house with a view to having her here. Downstairs bedroom and adjoining bathroom and no, Jhonfás, not the 1880s house I would have preferred. Naive of me. Advanced old age is not just a matter of negotiating the stairs.


Home care my foot. Calculate your own pensions and see if you can find €60,000 a year (without extras). Don't make the calculations on the basis of assumptions of parents, offspring, partners or divine intervention. Just you. Now. And remember the real value of a house is only calculated in Nursing Home Years, NHYs.

Get real and get kind.

Its the same story in our family. At the moment people are managing because there are big families supporting parents. Now a lot of people have lost their pensions and in the next generation average families are smaller and people are living longer. Its not going to get easier.