Ireland to go bust

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Being

Therefore, you also believe that taking redistricting away from the legislature is insane?

---

No, though the public COULD have gotten it through elected representatives if they weren't so myopic. Or with a much more limited direct democracy system, calling for a constitutional convention to reform/revamp a section of the state constitution, rather than our constantly rewriting lines a few lines of it every year.

And the redistricting issue isn't over by a long shot. It's going to crop up again *still with our expansive direct democracy system, where every special interest group, including the legislature, can drape itself with the proxy of "direct public support"* two years from now, or four, it will run without a competing measure on the ballot, and because it says "reform" in the title the California voter will pass it. And then wonder WTF just happened.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hazir

You are wrong. EU/EER rules applied, which most likely made the actions of the Icelandic government with regards to all foreign savers illegal (reason for the words 'most likely'; Iceland may challenge this in court). They were bound to treat all EU/EER savers in the same way as their own citizens. They didn't and that's why the UK and NL are not letting go of the demand that Iceland pays back what they advanced to their respective savers. Iceland is still on the hook for something to the tune of 4bn.

---

Wasn't aware of the particulars, though obviously it's still a bit of a controversy. Though in that case, I think the problem is more of a national financial crisis than earthJoker's assertion that banking itself is somehow fundamentally flawed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hazir

No, it's a non-issue because

1. it's hardly bringing Ireland any real business
2. the tax collected is dwarfed by any other consideration, which made it all the more stupid the Irish government was willing to risk financial ruin of the state and Irish banksector for it.
3. just because a PM on his way out acts like the gates of hell will open once it's scrapped doesn't mean it will be quite as popular with his successor. Chances are that his successor will be the one scrapping it, without any pressure from outside.

---

If anything, it seems the corporate tax rate is still pretty sacrosanct. But the idea that it hasn't brought Ireland any real business is patently absurd, come on. If that's the case, why does it concern so many other governments?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dreadnaught

Wasn't aware of the particulars, though obviously it's still a bit of a controversy. Though in that case, I think the problem is more of a national financial crisis than earthJoker's assertion that banking itself is somehow fundamentally flawed.



If anything, it seems the corporate tax rate is still pretty sacrosanct. But the idea that it hasn't brought Ireland any real business is patently absurd, come on. If that's the case, why does it concern so many other governments?

---

The advantage for the company; they evade higher taxes in other countries. The advantage for the country; collecting a little tax from a foreign origin company is more than none at all.

I may be mistaken but the Irish collect less than half a billion a year with this tax. That doesn't really sound to impressive to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hazir

The advantage for the company; they evade higher taxes in other countries. The advantage for the country; collecting a little tax from a foreign origin company is more than none at all.

I may be mistaken but the Irish collect less than half a billion a year with this tax. That doesn't really sound to impressive to me.

---

Actually, it leads to the creation of high quality job, diffusion of technology, increases in human capital, and higher incomes for the government tax.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hazir

The advantage for the company; they evade higher taxes in other countries. The advantage for the country; collecting a little tax from a foreign origin company is more than none at all.

I may be mistaken but the Irish collect less than half a billion a year with this tax. That doesn't really sound to impressive to me.

---

That's because you're myopic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hazir

The advantage for the company; they evade higher taxes in other countries. The advantage for the country; collecting a little tax from a foreign origin company is more than none at all.

I may be mistaken but the Irish collect less than half a billion a year with this tax. That doesn't really sound to impressive to me.

---

So the only advantage you see is taxes to the government. Gee that says a lot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lewkowski

Gee that says a lot.

---

Yes, yes it does. And your pithy attempt at framing that as a bad thing says volumes more about you. Look how far we've progressed in the discussion! What valuable contributions we're making! I'm fucking amazed you managed to use the quote function properly, so huge props for that, it only took you a fucking decade but baby steps just like grizzly momma teaches. Anyhows, the point is, flesh out your points or don't post, you dim-wit!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lewkowski

So the only advantage you see is taxes to the government. Gee that says a lot.

---

Well, since we are talking about tax-havens that would be a central issue indeed. Maybe you should do some reading up on how that works and how they are only about taxation by one government in order to evade taxation by another.

What your reply mostly told me is that you don't really know anything about the issue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

Actually, it leads to the creation of high quality job, diffusion of technology, increases in human capital, and higher incomes for the government tax.

---

Except that it really doesn't do that all that much. Most of it is just POB presences in order to be able to evade taxation where the real business is done. The Irish aren't the only who are playing this game, and they're hardly the best at it.

Also, let's not confuse the separate entities that Google uses for its presence in Ireland. Google Ireland is not Google Ireland Holdings, nor is it Google Ireland Ltd.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hazir

Well, since we are talking about tax-havens that would be a central issue indeed. Maybe you should do some reading up on how that works and how they are only about taxation by one government in order to evade taxation by another.

What your reply mostly told me is that you don't really know anything about the issue.

---

Tax haven? That's rich.

Even if we were just thinking about tax, you're missing a lot. How about income tax from those jobs? VAT from goods purchased by those employed? Income tax and VAT etc by other related companies supplying them? A reduction in unemployment and welfare payments? Local taxes (rates or whatever they're called there). Seems a lot more than just the one tax you're so short-sightedly looking at.

Even if corporation tax itself were eliminated, the government would take a lot in other taxes from the companies there.

Of course Ireland is a tax haven. Even one of the German companies I jobbed at, with an employee count of ~200 had a small Irish subsidiary for tax reasons.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandBlade

Tax haven? That's rich.

Even if we were just thinking about tax, you're missing a lot. How about income tax from those jobs? VAT from goods purchased by those employed? Income tax and VAT etc by other related companies supplying them? A reduction in unemployment and welfare payments? Local taxes (rates or whatever they're called there). Seems a lot more than just the one tax you're so short-sightedly looking at.

Even if corporation tax itself were eliminated, the government would take a lot in other taxes from the companies there.

---

I am not short sighted at all; I merely stated that this particular tax is NOT something any sane person in charge of the Irish economy would dare describe as essential. It is NOT a tax that actually attracts business, it's a tax that attracts tricks like the Irish-Dutch sandwich. And all that does is transferring money to the point where it infers least taxes at any particular moment in the taxation cycle. It does not mean actual business is being done.

Any business that would claim that this tax is doing any actual good for it's real business (besides fancy accounting) is lying through its teeth because the Irish tax only nominally is lower. It's not actually lower.

So the thousand people Google or the 500 that Facebook employ in Ireland are what exactly, Lemmings?

Nessus- Mama bear...have you somehow been watching Sarah Palin's show? :confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hazir

The advantage for the company; they evade higher taxes in other countries. The advantage for the country; collecting a little tax from a foreign origin company is more than none at all.

I may be mistaken but the Irish collect less than half a billion a year with this tax. That doesn't really sound to impressive to me.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Khendraja'aro

Of course Ireland is a tax haven. Even one of the German companies I jobbed at, with an employee count of ~200 had a small Irish subsidiary for tax reasons.

---

It's really silly to see this as a zero-sum game. The number of jobs in Ireland created by their tax structure is clearly a massive benefit. 1/8th of their workforce works for a multinational corporation, many of whom set up shop there in the last 10-15 years.

But more importantly, if you're complaining about companies setting up Irish subsidiaries, doesn't that suggest to you that maybe your tax rates are just too high? If all this "fancy accounting" (which really isn't that fancy) is deemed profitable enough, that should say something to you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hazir

Except that it really doesn't do that all that much. Most of it is just POB presences in order to be able to evade taxation where the real business is done. The Irish aren't the only who are playing this game, and they're hardly the best at it.

Also, let's not confuse the separate entities that Google uses for its presence in Ireland. Google Ireland is not Google Ireland Holdings, nor is it Google Ireland Ltd.

---

So the quality of jobs in Ireland hasn't increased over the last decade or two? The GDP just magically increased all by itself?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dreadnaught

Nessus- Mama bear...have you somehow been watching Sarah Palin's show? :confused:

---

No, but I am aware of the public image she seeks to portray.

I've heard the show is maddening.

There was actually a female Marine character in Independence War: Defiance (the game that brought me here/there) that sorta sounded like Palin and whose codename was Mama Bear.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dreadnaught

But more importantly, if you're complaining about companies setting up Irish subsidiaries, doesn't that suggest to you that maybe your tax rates are just too high? If all this "fancy accounting" (which really isn't that fancy) is deemed profitable enough, that should say something to you.

---

Right. Because anything is higher than ZERO percent.

And what do you propose? A race to the bottom? Like, getting rid of those pesky environmental and safety laws because those cost money, too?

Moronic idea.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandBlade

So the thousand people Google or the 500 that Facebook employ in Ireland are what exactly, Lemmings?

---

One doesn't exclude the other. Of course some real business is done in Ireland. But there is also business just shifted virtually to Ireland to be taxed there. This is actually well known, and the same thing happens with the holdings in Schwyz and Zug (cantons of Switzerland) too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by earthJoker

One doesn't exclude the other. Of course some real business is done in Ireland. But there is also business just shifted virtually to Ireland to be taxed there. This is actually well known, and the same thing happens with the holdings in Schwyz and Zug (cantons of Switzerland) too.

---

Exactly, the two are separate issues. But that's hard to understand, obviously.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dreadnaught

Nessus- Mama bear...have you somehow been watching Sarah Palin's show? :confused:





It's really silly to see this as a zero-sum game. The number of jobs in Ireland created by their tax structure is clearly a massive benefit. 1/8th of their workforce works for a multinational corporation, many of whom set up shop there in the last 10-15 years.

But more importantly, if you're complaining about companies setting up Irish subsidiaries, doesn't that suggest to you that maybe your tax rates are just too high? If all this "fancy accounting" (which really isn't that fancy) is deemed profitable enough, that should say something to you.

---

Again, the holdings set up in Ireland very often do not create any jobs at all.

Also the Irish tax is not really lower. It just looks lower.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hazir

Well, since we are talking about tax-havens that would be a central issue indeed. Maybe you should do some reading up on how that works and how they are only about taxation by one government in order to evade taxation by another.

What your reply mostly told me is that you don't really know anything about the issue.

---

This may be a language thing, but there's more to a tax-haven than just evading taxation by one country. It's about pretty much evading taxation by any country, at no real cost. All these corporations are actually heavily involved in Ireland, AFAIK, it's not just a matter of corporate registration. Companies choose to locate there because of lower taxes yes, but the level of investment happening invalidates any attempt to describe it as a tax-haven.

And the idea that it's somehow "unfair" for countries to seek lower taxation is a silly isolationist impulse. Economies can and do compete over sensible things like business policy.

Khend's particular example of environmental regulation competition is especially silly considering that Ireland isn't some kind of Chinese manufacturing backwater. They have plenty of environmental standards, but they've chosen to compete over something very real that everyone is aware of: In many places Western tax rates are so high (and policies so complicated/expensive) that they will readily shift to another developed country.

The constructive solution is self-examination, not whining.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Khendraja'aro

Right. Because anything is higher than ZERO percent.

And what do you propose? A race to the bottom? Like, getting rid of those pesky environmental and safety laws because those cost money, too?

Moronic idea.

---

The very language of "race to the bottom" shows how ideological and not economical your concern is. Yes, lowering your tax rates could make your economy both more attractive and more efficient.

Interesting to compare the unemployment rates across Europe. Portugal has unemployment rates of around 20% and serious debt problems as a result, the fundamentals of Irelands economy were strong it is the banks that are the problem. Maybe lower tax rates could reduce unemployment in other nations.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandBlade

The very language of "race to the bottom" shows how ideological and not economical your concern is. Yes, lowering your tax rates could make your economy both more attractive and more efficient.

---

At the cost of ecology, human suffering and universal fairness. But these are a non-issue for a robber-baron Capitalist :rolleyes:

Once again, define "fairness" and how low tax rates preclude sensible environmental regulations.

I can't define fairness in terms you could understand or accept.

Unfettered capitalism doesn't give two shits about the environment, just dump everything wherever is cheapest and out of sight, out of mind. The trend, the fucking history of the past 50 years has been that corporations have to be punished via taxes in order to do the right thing for the environment. It's fucking shameful how often I have to lean back to my idea about the reward and punishment apparatus in the right-winger mind but it's fucking true. That's how it works. Corporations will do what they want unless they are punished by a super-entity such as the gummint.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nessus

I can't define fairness in terms you could understand or accept.

Unfettered capitalism doesn't give two shits about the environment, just dump everything wherever is cheapest and out of sight, out of mind. The trend, the fucking history of the past 50 years has been that corporations have to be punished via taxes in order to do the right thing for the environment. It's fucking shameful how often I have to lean back to my idea about the reward and punishment apparatus in the right-winger mind but it's fucking true. That's how it works. Corporations will do what they want unless they are punished by a super-entity such as the gummint.

---

While you're right about corporations not taking externalities into account unless forced to (why would they?), I think you're ignoring the alternatives there. Most governments don't care about the environment either; the difference is that there's no one to police the government. There's a reason most command economies had one ecological disaster after another. Your idea works only if A) the government is responsive to the people, and B) the people actually care about the environment. Needless to say, these conditions are not satisfied as often as you seem to think they are.

Edit: By the way, the enforcement of property rights is done by courts, not directly by governments. The role of the government should be to collect and publicize information about the externalities caused by firms, and encourage lawsuits against them. When you consider the cost of a lawsuit along with the damages the firms would have to pay (triple damages in some cases), a realistic threat of a lawsuit should be sufficient in deterring most negative externalities.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nessus

I can't define fairness in terms you could understand or accept.

Unfettered capitalism doesn't give two shits about the environment, just dump everything wherever is cheapest and out of sight, out of mind. The trend, the fucking history of the past 50 years has been that corporations have to be punished via taxes in order to do the right thing for the environment. It's fucking shameful how often I have to lean back to my idea about the reward and punishment apparatus in the right-winger mind but it's fucking true. That's how it works. Corporations will do what they want unless they are punished by a super-entity such as the gummint.

---

Okay, so you can't have low taxes and strictly enforced laws against dumping stuff? It's not like this is a novel concept.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nessus

At the cost of ecology, human suffering and universal fairness. But these are a non-issue for a robber-baron Capitalist :rolleyes:

---

Garbage, you can have lower taxes while still ensuring the environment is maintained etc, etc - most of what are tax money goes on has nothing to do with anything you said.