Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
TOGETHER WITH OTHER civil society organisations – the Spectacle of Defiance and Hope, the Campaign Against Household and Water Taxes, and the Communities Campaign Against the Cuts – the Dublin Council of Trade Unions is organising an Anti-Austerity March on November 24. In advance of the Budget, we believe it is necessary to send a clear message to Government Buildings: not only is austerity damaging to society and individuals – it is resulting in a stagnant economy characterised by high unemployment and low growth.
Since October 26, as part of a 30-day countdown to the march, the DCTU has been issuing daily ‘Reasons to March’. They are all available here – but I would like to focus on four specific issues which contradict the narrative that has dominated political and media discourse during the past few years.
We could call them busted myths. Despite what we are told, the facts are that:
The Troika has made it quite clear that its primary interest is in the bottom line – that is, reaching the deficit-reduction targets. How we, as a people, choose to do that is a matter of choice. The Government is free to introduce a Budget focused entirely on taxation increases, entirely on spending cuts, or a combination of the two. The only requirement is that the measure in question raises or saves the amount projected.
Unfortunately, the current and previous governments have chosen to focus on spending cuts – and the evidence is that spending cuts do more harm to the economy than other measures such as increasing taxes on wealth and high earners.
Both the ESRI and the Nevin Economic Research Institute have examined the relative impacts of spending cuts vs tax increases. The ESRI found that €3 billion in spending cuts will drive down the domestic economy by nearly two per cent. On the other hand, €3 billion in tax increases will reduce growth by less than o.5 per cent. Because spending cuts are so much more damaging, they are less successful at reducing the deficit. Again according to the ESRI, a package of €3 billion in spending cuts will reduce the deficit by only €1.8 billion. €3 billion in tax increases will, however, reduce the deficit by €2.4 billion.
So the evidence shows that spending cuts are not only socially damaging – they are economically inefficient. Every time we cut a public service, or reduce a benefit, or raise taxes on low and middle income earners, we are taking more money out of the economy and out of people’s pockets – people who had very little to start with. That is why we need to focus tax increases on wealth and high income groups – rather than on those who spend everything they have in the economy.
Which brings us to another reason to make our voices heard on November 24: the claim that, four years into the crisis, we are all still ‘paying ourselves too much’.
That myth, too, is busted by the facts.
Low pay remains a major issue, damaging individuals, communities and the economy, in both the private and the public sectors.
Irish hotel and restaurant workers cost their employers seven per cent below the average of other EU-15 countries. When compared with the average of core EU-15 countries (excluding peripheral countries), labour costs here fall 16 per cent below average. Retail and wholesale workers cost their employers even less. During the last two years, the gap between Irish and other EU labour costs has widened further.
Low-paid Irish workers are near the bottom of the European low-pay league. And that includes low-paid public sector workers. Clerical workers in the public sector have pay levels well below that of other countries measured by the OECD. For instance, Irish clerical workers would need a pay increase of almost 50 percent to reach Dutch pay. And this was before the 2010 pay cuts.
Low pay is not just an issue for the individuals concerned: it reduces the amount of money people have to spend in the economy. And that puts business and jobs at risk.
We know that spending cuts are economically damaging. We know that low pay (and low levels of social protection) are economically damaging.
So it is not surprising that the current economic approach has not worked. It is driving up unemployment, emigration and deprivation while cutting incomes and living standards.
Yet supporters of austerity say this is the price we must pay to get our deficit under control.
But austerity is not even cutting the deficit.
Since the crisis began, depending on the calculation used, there has been between €24 and €25 billion in austerity measures – spending cuts and tax increases. But the underlying deficit (that is, excluding special bank payments and income) has actually increased since 2008. And since 2009, when the big austerity measures started, the underlying deficit has only fallen by just €3.5 billion.
Despite this spectacular policy failure, the austerity cheerleaders tell us we need to cut more. That is because many supporters of austerity are using the crisis for their own political agenda – to cut public services, social protection and public investment. And to cut wages, in the mistaken belief that low wages equate to competitiveness.
The past five Budgets have been driven by false premises – by myths. We’re in a bailout and have no choices. We can shrink the deficit if we shrink spending. We’re all paying ourselves too much.
And the only reason austerity hasn’t worked is because we haven’t had enough of it.
Now, as we come up to Budget 2013, we need to send a collective message to the Government: austerity cannot work. Rather than continuing to shrink the economy and the living standards of ordinary people, we need to invest in growing the economy, putting people back to work and putting more money in people’s pockets. On November 24, we have a chance to make our voices heard.
Michael O’Reilly is the President of the Dublin Council of Trade Unions, and served on the Administrative Council of the Labour Party for ten years.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
And now a party political broadcast … Bit like having John waters come to write an article on social / religious affairs. Hardly fair or impartial with lots of unsupported assertions.
If their is a min pay, why don’t we have a max pay?
And how can this govt. preach cuts/austerity etc when our so called leaders enjoy pay above German leaders, US President and most other countries leaders, we have a population of over 4 mil but we still pay them more,,why??
And how do you think these high salaries are viewed by the other leaders while we request a bailout/help.
The truth is, that making people desperate and having a low minimum wage will bring jobs into the country at a point after poor people have already suffered a lot. It’s a horrible tactic that only the detached, big picture people can make. To them, poor people are out of sight out of mind.
The ‘elephant in the room’ is that governments around the world have no idea how to tell people that their pensions are wiped out and that, in fact, the entire financial system is going to have to be reset, but at the expense of pensions, both private and sovereign.
‘Joe & Mary’ have average jobs, earning average incomes and want to plan for their own (pension) and their kids’ future, so they ask ‘Ben the Banker’ and ‘Frank the Fund Manager’ to help them get returns on their savings.
Ben & Frank, who are highly incentivised to find high yield returns, get them into a mix of Government Bonds / Treasuries, Company Shares, Commodities, Property Funds and Cash accounts all-in-all which are projected to give Joe & Mary their pension and pay for the kids college expenses.
Of course, this mix is also repackaged and included in a derivative fund (or funds) and sold by another ‘Ben & Frank’ to other ‘Joe & Mary’s’ etc etc etc
Now, let’s look at the perfect storm,
• the properties are not renting because consumer spending has tanked, shops / offices are closing, therefore the yield (rent), which was probably ‘guaranteed’ in the fund, is not there
• this of course means that the capital value of the property will fall below its’ projected exit-strategy value, leaving a deficit (or even wiping out) in the fund
• Interest rates remain at historic lows in order to keep stimulating the flagging economy, meaning that deposit returns on cash are low
• Key commodity prices (energy, food, metals, water etc) are spiraling upwards due to demand from emerging economies, causing upward pressure on inflation throughout the world, but the Central Bank’s cannot risk increasing Interest rates for fear of killing other elements of spending
• Joe & Mary are now living a lot longer than previous generations and will need to be drawing out of the pension pot for 20/25 years beyond retirement
• Initially, some of the peripheral economies Government Bonds / Treasuries default (eg Greece)
• But who was holding these Government Bonds / Treasuries, well among them the Sovereign Wealth funds of slightly less peripheral economies (France, Germany etc) which are used to pay Public pensions in their countries. Also, private banks & wealth management funds (the ones that Ben & Frank work for).
• In some cases, the Sovereign has told Public Sector Joe & Mary that their pensions are defined benefit but, as the yields / returns are behind, the Sovereign has to borrow a little to top up the fund and additionally, the Sovereign has to confront Public Sector Joe & Mary with the reality that their retirement age is raised and their pension will now be defined contribution
• Of course, these Sovereign Wealth funds also hold a mix Company Shares, Commodities, Property Funds and Cash accounts
• Oh and look, because the Sovereign rating of the previously AAA country has been downgraded by Moodys /S&P/Fitch, the Ben & Franks have to reduce their exposure to this country, raising the interest rate that the country has to pay on their borrowing, causing a more austere budget, reducing consumer spending, closing retailers etc etc
• Company Share prices, well, if the economy is not doing too well, consumer spending is down, the % profit increase per share is hit, funds sell the shares etc etc
• and on & on & on & on……
Does any of this sound familiar?
The above is the reason that Ireland Inc. was told to guarantee (ie. not allow default) the bondholders in our (then) private banks.
Many Eurozone economies are borrowed to the hilt (including Germany, France, Italy, Spain); the US, well that’s unraveling as we speak; the UK, watch ‘Britain’s Trillion Pound Horror Story – Channel 4′, frightening stuff; China, well the sovereign appears to have a lot of cash and they have been investing in……yes, you guessed it US Bonds, Property, Shares etc etc
In my opinion, the problem is that Pensions & Investments, as we know them today, are only relatively new (c 100 years?) – these are the cornerstone of the financial system – but basically, as I have tried to outline above, this is a house of cards, everybody (as an individual or country) is just on a different part of the pyramid and this is collapsing – the ‘kicking’ the can down the road that happened in previous recessions is no longer working, debt ceilings are being breached, the world population is growing, information technology is whipping more people into a ‘get rich quick’ frenzy etc etc
I believe that financial system ‘reset’ is required and this will be very painful i.e. goodbye to pensions.
You paint a painfully truthful picture. That is one of the most astute posts I have seen here on the journal.
You are correct in pointing out that our bank guarantee was only given to protect the German and French banks from the debt exposure to Irish banks, and that fact alone should have given us a much stronger hand for negotiating with Herr Merkel. Instead we chose to bend over and politely ask for a jackboot up the hole.
Well said Declan. One issue only: the defined-benefit pension promises are NOT funded so yields don’t come into play. What comes into play is government revenue which will have to increase in order to be able to keep those promises. I think it is clear the borrowing model is broken so the only other option is that those in the workforce will have to pay more tax for upkeep of the baby-boomer generation now retiring or about to retire. Either that or the government will have to break the pension promises. Those pension promises are in fact unsustainable given the demographic trends and already diminished economic growth. To further compound the problem, there is the fact that these promised pensions are not shown as liabilities on the (already properly shafted) government books. The baby boomer generation has engineered a society which promotes their selfish interests. They have destroyed savings as a virtue, they created transfers from current and future generation that benefit them greatly, and they have created a vast network of safety-nets for which someone needs to pay.
As for the article, it is a pile of socialist rubbish which is already ruining the western world. First of all, austerity is not reducing the deficit because in fact we don’t have austerity, at least not where it is needed. There has been a negligent reduction in current spending and most has come out of capital expenditure – which hurts growth the most. Secondly, perhaps I can accept that on the short run tax increases will be less damaging for the growth than current expenditure cuts but on the long run it is the increasing government spending that has brought the economic growth down from 4% average to measly 1.something% in the OECD countries. The primary reason for decline in the growth of the western countries is that the risk taking on the productive side has been reduced through taxation and transferred to financial wizardry. The excess borrowing of the governments combined with the enormous risks accumulated in the derivatives trading is the reason why we are today facing the fiscal and monetary abyss.
Change comes through choice or through collapse and knowing enough of the recent history of government decision making process, I can say for sure we will continue to muddle through until the house of financial cards comes down. I will for sure work until I drop dead as the pensions will be gone either through money-printing, confiscation or both. At the same time I will continue to be the milking cow for those who benefit from protection of the government and the likes of Michael O’Reilly, those who will continue to enjoy (for a while at least until Armageddon) Rolls-Royce pensions I can only dream about.
If you would like to know where is it that we are having the so called austerity, please look at the graph of current versus capital spending.
Dom Morgan
Typically, capital spending is things like infrastructure – roads, schools, hospitals etc. All of which require ongoing renewal investment in order to maintain their use & ongoing serviceablity. Often, slashing this budget so deeply will end up costing far more in future. Penny wise, pound foolish springs to mind.
In economics terms, also, capital spending employs people in the economy in just the same way as ‘current’ spending. The only difference is an accounting treatment where what it is spent on is intended to last beyond the ‘current’ accounting period – somewhat arbitrarily, usually one year. So, cutting any spending that is required to maintain the totality of public services is still ‘austerity’. It all involves both direct job losses & indirect job losses thru both private contractors &, vitally, the knock on effect of the reduced spending ability of those who lose jbs.
That is, the kind of self-defeating economic destruction that Michael Reilly is talking about in the article. (If you can get past your ideological blinkers & distorted view of what the full role & economic value of government spending actually is. ie stop thinking government is like a household – it isn’t.)
Moreover this failure of austerity to even address the deficit is precisely the IMF’s conclusion (& major about face) – the ‘multipliers’ – in it’s recent publications which looked at empirical data rather than the usual ideological nonsense of mainstream economists, most of whom are handsomely paid by the extractive financial sector.
Indeed, this is the basis of the current, serious, disagreement concerning Greece’s next bailout terms, between the IMF and the EU/ECB authorities. The IMF now believes (rightly) that imposing yet more severe austerity on Greece will mean that its failure to reduce its deficit, or be in any position to repay the loans in future, is absolutely inevitable, because such austerity will further destroy an economy already decimated by austerity.
The IMF have still not (& may never) properly grasp the full implications of their recent admission on the counter productive nature (even in its own terms) of austerity policies. Their approach to Greece is still what could be called ‘austerity-lite’, rather than the stimulus that should be urgently & properly required from their own economists’ conclusions.
However, that the EU/ECB authorities are still blindly ignoring such conclusions, from an important ‘establishment’ body, is something we should all be very concerned about. It becomes even more obvious that Euro authorities continue to follow an ideological script that benefits the top few percents’ interests, especially those in the casino finance sector, at the expense of the wider economies & majority of ordinary citizens.
Democracy in the interests of the people needs to be reasserted (was it ever asserted?) not just in Ireland but the wider Eurozone & EU institutions as well.
Mike, the problem being that reduction of capital spending hurts employment in the real productive sector which is already suffering from the real austerity. With the actual problem being the government deficit and the inability to carry on borrowing, the austerity discussed here isn’t the austerity or correction if you like in the overall economy, which is happening by nature for all not protected by irrationality of government policies, the austerity discussed here and in Greece is that of government spending. The reduction in spending is necessary and this is not where the IMF is in disagreement. The IMF hasn’t turned overnight into some Keynesian outlet. It is in disagreement with the Europeans over the necessity to, at the same time while reducing spending, reduce the unsustainable Greek debt by means of write-off. The Europeans can’t do it as they have moved vast part of the Greek debt from private creditors to ECB books.
Now, I think I remember you from some previous discussions and I believe a tirade will now follow about a government money-tree that will heal all our ailing.
So, what you’re saying is that the FF policies over the previous Governments, increasing PS pay, increasing the numbers in PS, increasing SW payments and increasing overall spending was correct?
Either they were right or wrong?
Can we expect any comments today to say they believe FF policies were correct when they wholeheartedly agree with this article?
FF, FG its all the same. Im sick of hearing party bashing like it means anything, its all the same load of waffle no matter how its fried.
What is the difference between FF and FG apart from which side they fought on in your badly publicised civil war?
Excellent point
And what happens when the high earners just feck off to UK?
The attractiveness of Non working is more socially damaging than unemployment. The US had to reduce welfare making the genuine suffer to stop the flood of welfare seekers.
“And what happens when the high earners just feck off to UK?” you ask.
The UK’s wage bill goes up.
No, really, serious question. What is the difference between FF and FG?
@Damocles i believe the only difference is the second initial.
Actually had you read the article he is talking about tax increases
Austerity really works, look how well Greece is doing, ….
Greece was doing so well before “austerity”. I’m sympathetic to the Greeks, but for God’s sake all they have to do is say they don’t need the money, then they can do as they please.
This nation of Ireland is a a confused nation. A nation made up of so many contradictions. For such a small country it’s baffling why there isn’t more of a unity in thoughts and goals. In one hand this nation is made up of very greedy people with representation from every social strata… But then again donations to the poor or the devastated in other countries are high.
Come on Ireland… Get rid the greed. Force politics to be accountable to the people… Come together, make a long term plan for the betterment of this country and make it happen.
Hah, written by a union lackey. Lovely to see all of the references backing up assertions. Not.
Yes Stephen. A union boyo writing that his members should be happy with employment circumstances in difficult times…a turkey voting for Christmas! So many union boss’ are so far removed from reality, it is sickening.
Moodys downgrade france – the old supertax not working too well there
The supertax is destroying Norway too….. Oh wait it’s not!!! Do you ever open your mind to perhaps it’s more than a supertax that’ll make or break a country.
To my knowledge norways tax rate is nowhere near the 75% french supertax, also we dont have huge national resources like norway.
My point is in agreement with the sentiment of the first poster on this article, we shouldnt blanket super tax high earners, we should stop paying people more than they deserve for what they do publically and stop wasting money. Why would you bother working hard if 75% would be taken away?
Ah come on. Norway has more natural resources than it knows what to do with. That’s why it does well. Not cause of a super tax
Palo, no where in the article does it say that the ‘supertax’ should be 75%, even today SF who would be a pro supertax party only submitted a claim for an extra 2%. Also the supertax would only come into effect over €100k, only 5.5% of the pop earn over this amount so all the lower and middle classes and even upper middle classes would be exempt.
France is the most visited and touristic country in the world, perhaps it’s the drop in tourists due to the worldwide recession that his have a much greater impact than a tax that effects a tiny proportion of the working population.
@cooper, thank you for reinforcing my original point (even thou I don’t think you meant too). Palo implied that France suffered a down grading cos of the supertax, I made the point that Norway too has a supertax and is no where near a down grading. I also said that the downgrading is due to many factors not one single issue which you seem to agree with.
Might be something to do with Norway’s massive oil reserves……
Eric, first of all the tourism is around 1% of French GDP. The effects of fluctuation in tourist visits is negligent compared to troubles in the overall economy. Secondly, Palo did not infer that the supertax is the cause of downgrade. The downgrade is linked to to the overall state of the country finances and economic outlook. What Palo inferred was that the application of the supertax did not improve either of the two sufficiently to stop the deterioration. This is entirely different to what you are claiming. And thirdly, there is no logic by which the fact that Norwegian has enormous resource wealth per capita reinforces your claim that high taxation levels work. What works in Norway does so in spite of punitive taxation levels as the GDP is supported by oil revenues. This country cannot be compared with other European countries where the economy depend on actual production.
Dom; do people even read comments in full anymore? Do people just see a point they disagree with and head off in a tangent?
Palo above implied that the supertax was the reason France got a down grade ‘Moody’s downgrade France – supertax not doing so well there’. I then made the point that Norway has a supertax and it wasn’t downgraded. The whole point was to show that one form of tax will not make or break an economy. There are many countries that have a ‘supertax’; UK, Netherlands, Denmark and that just off the top of my head.
The reason I brought tourism into the argument was to show that a country collects revenue from many sources, France is the world premier destination and as such that along with a multitude of reasons is the cause of the downgrade (which I said in the final sentence)
Finally Dom, a quick look on the Internet found that tourism accounted for 10.9% of the french GDP, not the 1% claimed by you (Reuters.com). If you made such an error with this fact perhaps similar errors may exist in the logic of your argument or in the reading of my posts?
Yeah, I plucked the figure out of thin air – surprised it’s that much but in any case a developed country should not derive much of its income from selling Eiffel tower souvenirs. Tourism is low value added activity with low paying jobs and low return on capital. Don’t know where Reuters got their figures from, the official figures of French tourism ministry are about half that. In any case, it is a small proportion of economy and policies that affect 95% of economy have much greater impact on how country does. Now, if your point was to show one form of tax won’t break the economy, then you haven’t done a great job explaining that in your initial response. You quoted Norway, the example of which is as irrelevant as quoting Saudi Arabia in comparison with France. If your point was that one form of tax won’t save or ruin the country, then you have to talk to Hollande (and Obama while you’re at it) because the supertax forms the basis of their proposals for resolving the fiscal problems of their governments. This was the gist of Palo’s comment and he is entirely correct. To address your point that one tax won’t matter – that is true but only taken out of context of where France is today with high punitive taxation and vast government spending. Moving further in the same direction is going to break not only France but the rest of the developed world. Your comment that one tax won’t make or break things although technically correct (to an extent) is irrelevant however in the context of the overall direction where France is going with taxation (and where Obama wants to take US).
The real loser in all this is democracy. Sure we can still vote but there is no meaningful choices. All politicians are in the business of forcing through austerity for the wealthy elites to hang on to their wealth. The trade unions have been useless as well. My view is every worker must down tools and withdraw labour until the elites have no choice. Flying in millions of developing country workers into Europe will not be a practical proposition for them! That is however the end stage of all this for us, reduced to sweatshop conditions. If we don’t work then capital can’t make money. We need solidarity to end this misery
i have no problem with wealthy people holding onto their money, but when everyone else has to pay for it
That’s interesting and clear but can you say who is going to be taxed and what revenue that will create?
Tax increases are worse than spending cuts, not the other way around as you claim. Most economists agree on that principle and it’s backed up by a lot of statistical evidence of previous budget problems in other countries.
Eh, no actually you’re wrong there. Even the most basic economics courses teach that spending cuts are more damaging than tax increases. It’s all to do with the perception. People see spending cuts and it negatively impacts on their will to spend money, while taxes also have this impact only less so.
Any economist who says otherwise is clearly forgetting his introductory lessons.
Are FG listening to different economists to the ones FF listened to? No, they’re still using the same rent an economist agency I think.
Soft landing anyone?
Claim: Tax increases are worse than spending cuts, not the other way around as you claim.
Evidence: Most economists agree on that principle and it’s backed up by a lot of statistical evidence of previous budget problems in other countries.
Grade: F
Whereas taking more money of MY pocket via taxes will make me less focused on my personal spending cuts? Good grief. Where is this school of basic economics you speak of? Was it the same one that Bertie went to?
No nation has ever ever taxed itself out of recession. The only path back to growth is to reduce government spending and default on debts Ireland will never be able to repay.
1961, John Cowperthwaite (London government appointed Scottish Civil Servant) began the process of transforming the Asian island of Hong Kong from one of the largest refugee camps in the world to one the most economically dynamic and affluent enclaves on the planet.
Hong Kong was the original tiger economy and it’s transformation was so impressive that other nations in the region began to imitate it’s economic model. This resulted in a litter of tiger economies.
Hong Kong’s economy grew for 30 consecutive years. Within a few years of launching his reforms the colony was able to finance a massive public housing programme. More recently Hong Kong, literally, built a new international airport in the sea.
By the 1970′s China under leader Deng Zhong began reversing the collectivist policies that had resulted in depravations and famine over decades to also imitate Hong Kong’s rapid economic growth.
In 1991, Russia (following an IMF bailout) also began adopting Cowperthwaite’s ideas. Progressive taxation was abandoned in favour of a flat 15% tax rate. Within one year tax revenues had swelled by 25%.
More recently, Latvia has opted for Cowperthwaite-like reforms.
Like Ireland, Latvia found itself in trouble at the onset of the the current crisis. It’s banking system too disintegrated in the wake of Lehman’s collapse. Unlike ireland, the Latvian government did not foist the cost of resolving the crisis onto it’s taxpayers. Instead dramatically cutting government spending ( public sector pay by 30% in one year). Today their unemployment rate is falling rapidly (below 11%) and their economy grew by over 5% last year.
Austerity is the way to go if you have soup kitchen,s in place and a place to put family,s that can’t pay for their home,s
Does your keyboard not do apostrophes?
mr patrick irrelevant auburn
All apostrophes have been removed as an economy measure.
What the hell is wrong with people , austerity like this has never worked anywhere . But that’s what the elite class want the more desperate people are the easier they are to control . The whole world is gone crazy , the gap between the rich and poor has never been so big , people give out about people on the social welfare , who are barely surviving and you have bankers who caused this whole mess getting 500k a year , but that’s ok cos you have to pay these guys cos it’s the market rate . Absolutely insane I really can’t get my head around it . If you had to try to explain it to a child they would laugh at you because it’s ridiculous and even they would see it .
Cant belive i wasted 5 mins of my life reading this rag
“And the only reason austerity hasn’t worked is because we haven’t had enough of it.”
then…….”.we need to send a collective message to the Government: austerity cannot work.”
might just go and bang my head off the back wall for half an hour…….
You do realise he was being sarcastic in the first sentence don’t you?
If more people emigrate then the cuts can be somewhat justified, but not to the extent they are planning on… just going to drive more young fellas like me out, Im already out! In Hamerica.
Good lad. send home some money. And ohh, have ye heard about the gathering..
all well and good harry, but the downside is that the more young people that leave the smaller our future workforce becomes, the smaller the workforce the lower the tax take, the lower the tax take the smaller the future pension pot , the smaller the pension pot , the smaller the future pensions. also there are a lot of people who through no fault of their own can not just up sticks and leave, these are the ones who will suffer most from all this austerity, it won’t affect the politico’s and the bankers as they have their massive pay packets and protected pensions already sorted.
Austerity has NEVER WORKED in history. But that’s not even the worst part! Nothing has changed to avoid this ever happening again, therefore it will happen again sooner or later. Politicians by nature live for the short term in order to get reelected, the public service runs on regardless (have seen administrations come and go) and the banking fraternity rule them all.
When pressure has built to boiling point the only alleviating factor is war!
What’s the solution is I’m not sure except the system operated in the “free world” changes history will be repeated.
You can see by the the votes on the comments. You have the haves and the have nots. but remember haves you can become a have not over night.
Perhaps Mr. O’Reilly and his fellow union bosses could divert some of their 100k+ salaries (plus expenses) to helping the lower paid and the poor in society, or take severe pay cuts in solidarity with the average worker? Didn’t think so. When those lecturing us about fat cats have become fat cats themselves it’s beyond a joke, Larkin would be so proud!
“…the claim that, four years into the crisis, we are all still ‘paying ourselves too much’. That myth, too, is busted by the facts. ”
I disagree, it’s a fact that union bosses are paid far too much and have lost touch with reality.
I just hope people get out and March on Saturday or we will be rightfully seen across Europe as complete fools who deserve everything they get, I for one am sick of being abused 6 ways from Tuesday…
Our government have have screwed us at every opportunity and are in power under false pretence and even my Union have let me down but I’ll be there anyway despite this as a message has to be sent..
If there was an election in the morning, I would be voting for whichever party looks like it will tackle current spending, while maintaining a sensible approach to taxation that won’t strangle business and productive sectors in our economy.
Do not suffer under the delusion that it is backbones/foolishness/timidity that keeps the Irish off the street. I fully support deficit reduction measures, divided as current spending cuts : taxation in the ratio of 2:1. We have bloated current spending and an eroded tax base which needs to be repaired.
There are many more like me, and we will keep those profligate innumerate soundbite-generating policymakers holding placards on the street, and selectively quoting statistics on moaning side of Leinster house.
You see, some of us realise that this (resource poor) economy cannot sustainably produce 50billion in taxation (even if we did it for a couple of years with boom froth taxed on foreign inward lending) to support the current schedule of expenditure.
Agree with your first paragraph. It’s not a delusion. I looked outside this morning: empty streets. Listen to what people have to say about it – it’s lack of backbone/foolishness/timidity. Why aren’t you out there protesting, because this government is certainly not implementing anything even close to what you describe in your first sentence?
The unions have about as much credibility as FF/LAB/FG now days. Basically none. AS for the ESRI did they not do a study recently saying private pensions should be reviewed and allowance be removed to increase tax take? Odd they did not mention the public sector pension over hang at the same time. Or maybe not so odd seeing as they are public sector. Our only hope is that before some credible new parties emerge before the next election to allow us some choice when voting. Otherwise nothing will change…
Kerry
That’s like Having a Santa wish list. Why not join an existing Party and contribute to its change or from a new one instead of bleating like a tethered goat.
Used to be a member of a party (now defunct) Garry. I even canvased for my local candidate. I resigned the day they went into power with FF. There are currently no parties in the Dail that I would consider worthy of my vote. So as I say hopefully some of the new parties that are appearing may provide an alternative to the current establishment or I guess I’ll be hoping to find a independent in my part of the electoral area that is not a 1 trick pony.
The ECB exceeded its authority in coercing the Irish government into the repayment of private banking debt in the bondholder bailout. A legal case needs to be taken to the European Court of Justice in relation to this blackmail of a sovereign state.
Payment of all outstanding banking debt including the promissory notes should be withheld pending the verdict of the ECJ.
If the Irish government continue to refuse to take this legitimate measure to protest the Republic then the Irish people should force them do so by initiating a national Mortgage Strike.
The ECB wasn’t involved in the decision of the bank guarantee back in 2008. It was the Irish government on its own which guaranteed all the debts of the Irish banks. In fact as I remember it our European partners were rather displeased with the action of the Irish government at the time. The ECB got involved a few years later when it became clear that Irish government couldn’t stand over the debt mountain it had taken on.
The ECB certainly ‘got involved’ all right Jim. As the 2 year blanket bank guarantee was close to expiring during the summer of 2010, the ECB forced the Irish government into full repayment of all bank bondholders from junior unsecured through to senior secured under threat of withdrawal of liquidity funding from the Irish banks. They ECB exceeded its mandate in this and should be held to account.
You are correct that the FF led government introduced the blanket bank guarantee in 2008. You neglected to mention that they were fully supported by FG in that decision and FG have continued to enthusiastically support and enforce the payment of private banking debt by the Irish people ever since.
The imposition of austerity for the last four years hasn’t worked. The only reason it’s been forced upon us is for political reasons. If there is no policy to stimulate growth to reduce unemployment, we will keep going down the slippery slope. A good indicator that austerity isn’t working is the 1600 people waiting for their food parcels every Wednesday at The Capuchin day centre. If you look into those poor unfortunate people’s eyes, you can see the indelible stamp of austerity the government has imposed on the vulnerable! Now there are soup kitchens, like they had in the famine, beginning to appear – like the one in Galway. Austerity is the solution to fix the wrongs of the rich people, and it’s the poor that’s paying the price! It’s the way the system works and will continue to do so.
What are the stated goals of austerity by which you have measured it’s success/failure?
It’s all well and good to say ‘austerity hasn’t worked’, but I’m interested to know by which measures you make this assertion?
Tax hikes and spending cuts are only applicable to the plain people of Ireland. The great and the good (?!) – including the trade unuion leadership – are barely touched. We’re being shafted from both ends, stealth taxes which affect lower wage earners and spending cuts to vital services which again affect the low to middle income earner. If you haven’t been thrown on the dole, that is.
LOW PAY IS NOT PART OF ANY SOLUTION IT ONLY WORSENS THE SITUATION YE TROLLS.OH AM I ANGRY.
If I were 30 years younger I would be out of this Europe.
Ah yes, the usual union talk, “we are against having less money and in favour of having more money.”
Sort of. But what’s in the other corner Giovanni? “we are in favour of having less money, and against having more money” ? :D
Could the financial system being reset be what the Mayan’s were talking about for 2012?
According to Brendan Keenan last thursday indo and it seems
confirmed by Declan Kilbred today €3.5Bn cuts should
only be €1.8Bn approx to satisfy external restraints ….
Why are we being forced to walk a shorter plank ??
Who benefits… , wilbur
BY THE WAY WHY DOES THIS GOVERNMENT AND THE TROIKA BRAINWASH US ALL INTO BELIEVING THAT THE PUBLIC SERVICE LABOURERS ARE BEING OVERPAID!!!I AM LIVID!!! x-(
They want tax increases but we tried that and the Unions and the can pay won’t pay crowd wouldn’t have any of it.
So cuts it is.
Ohh I see they meant more taxes, as long as they themselves aren’t paying the taxes.
have your say