Ireland’s debt is forecast to reach a little above €203 billion or 111 per cent

[mikehunt]

€8.25 billion in interest payments is a total waste of money. The government should govern on behalf of the people, not global financial blood suckers.

The government borrows the money to pay salaries. There is no such thing as a free lunch, not even in the civil service.

This is the biggest problem, yet it hasn't been addressed. James Reilly had to make massive cuts in the Health Budget. Close on 80% of costs in the HSE are wages yet this couldn't be touched. Who suffers? People are dying so as middle managers can keep their inflated salaries.

[seafoid]

€8.25 billion in interest payments is a total waste of money. The government should govern on behalf of the people, not global financial blood suckers.

The government borrows the money to pay salaries. There is no such thing as a free lunch, not even in the civil service.

This is the biggest problem, yet it hasn't been addressed. James Reilly had to make massive cuts in the Health Budget. Close on 80% of costs in the HSE are wages yet this couldn't be touched. Who suffers? People are dying so as middle managers can keep their inflated salaries.

Civil service salaries are sacred. In many cases it's  their kids who end up emigrating. Zero coherence.

And debt projections are not set in stone

d=debt/GDP is influenced by 3 main factors

Primary surplus/deficit
real interest rate
real GDP growth rate.

And nobody can guarantee the real GDP growth rate.

[armaghniac]

This is the biggest problem, yet it hasn't been addressed. James Reilly had to make massive cuts in the Health Budget. Close on 80% of costs in the HSE are wages yet this couldn't be touched. Who suffers? People are dying so as middle managers can keep their inflated salaries.

Civil service salaries are sacred. In many cases it's  their kids who end up emigrating. Zero coherence.

Civil service salaries aren't very sacred when they've been cut by 20%!
Health, education need people to deliver them, saying that wages are a large part of the cost sheds no useful light on the situation. The issue is whether these people are doing what they should be doing and many health managers are not doing anything useful. 

[mikehunt]

This is the biggest problem, yet it hasn't been addressed. James Reilly had to make massive cuts in the Health Budget. Close on 80% of costs in the HSE are wages yet this couldn't be touched. Who suffers? People are dying so as middle managers can keep their inflated salaries.

Civil service salaries are sacred. In many cases it's  their kids who end up emigrating. Zero coherence.

Civil service salaries aren't very sacred when they've been cut by 20%!
Health, education need people to deliver them, saying that wages are a large part of the cost sheds no useful light on the situation. The issue is whether these people are doing what they should be doing and many health managers are not doing anything useful.

Are you including a pension contribution to a defined benefit scheme as a pay cut? Ha ha, typical response from a down trodden civil servant. Next they'll want to take away your privilege days.

[Esmarelda]

Hi Mike,

Do you not think it's right to include an increase in pension contributions when talking about cuts?

I get mixed up with which type of pension is which but I thought that the type that our civil servants pay into is the one where the ultimate benefit isn't affected by the amount they pay in. Therefore, shouldn't an increase in what is paid in be regarded as pay cut?

After all, if your take home pay is reduced isn't that what a cut is?

[seafoid]

Hi Mike,

Do you not think it's right to include an increase in pension contributions when talking about cuts?

I get mixed up with which type of pension is which but I thought that the type that our civil servants pay into is the one where the ultimate benefit isn't affected by the amount they pay in. Therefore, shouldn't an increase in what is paid in be regarded as pay cut?

After all, if your take home pay is reduced isn't that what a cut is?

Disagree

The PS pension scheme was unfunded so it was like promising pixie dust when the neoliberal model crashed and interest rates hit the floor.

[Esmarelda]

Hi Mike,

Do you not think it's right to include an increase in pension contributions when talking about cuts?

I get mixed up with which type of pension is which but I thought that the type that our civil servants pay into is the one where the ultimate benefit isn't affected by the amount they pay in. Therefore, shouldn't an increase in what is paid in be regarded as pay cut?

After all, if your take home pay is reduced isn't that what a cut is?

Aren't they all Defined Benefit Schemes (I looked it up) and so, regardless of what you've just said, the contributors' benefits on retirement would not increase by them contributing more?
Disagree

The PS pension scheme was unfunded so it was like promising pixie dust when the neoliberal model crashed and interest rates hit the floor.

[seafoid]

Hi Mike,

Do you not think it's right to include an increase in pension contributions when talking about cuts?

I get mixed up with which type of pension is which but I thought that the type that our civil servants pay into is the one where the ultimate benefit isn't affected by the amount they pay in. Therefore, shouldn't an increase in what is paid in be regarded as pay cut?

After all, if your take home pay is reduced isn't that what a cut is?

Aren't they all Defined Benefit Schemes (I looked it up) and so, regardless of what you've just said, the contributors' benefits on retirement would not increase by them contributing more?
Disagree

The PS pension scheme was unfunded so it was like promising pixie dust when the neoliberal model crashed and interest rates hit the floor.

The cost of funding the same level of DB benefits more than doubled when Lehman crashed.
Because the days of earning 8% a year on assets are gone
So if PS workers put in more they wouldn't get anything extra at retirement.

[muppet]

Without getting intot the private versus public row, it does raise a serious question.

Why is the Governemnt debt not inclusive of their commitments to PS pay, Social Welfare payments and pensions? These are real liabilities that should be at least included in a combined projected debt figure.

[Esmarelda]

Seafoid, by your last line,"So if PS workers put in more they wouldn't get anything extra at retirement", I think we're in agreement?

[armaghniac]

Without getting intot the private versus public row, it does raise a serious question.

Why is the Governemnt debt not inclusive of their commitments to PS pay, Social Welfare payments and pensions? These are real liabilities that should be at least included in a combined projected debt figure.

Since the government is more less obliged to educate people, pave roads etc you could regard almost all future government expenditure as a "debt". This isn't useful.
If you have children do you regard all their requirements to age 18 as a debt?

[muppet]

Without getting intot the private versus public row, it does raise a serious question.

Why is the Governemnt debt not inclusive of their commitments to PS pay, Social Welfare payments and pensions? These are real liabilities that should be at least included in a combined projected debt figure.

Since the government is more less obliged to educate people, pave roads etc you could regard almost all future government expenditure as a "debt". This isn't useful.
If you have children do you regard all their requirements to age 18 as a debt?

Eh of course. I make provision for money I will have to pay in the future. Their bills are relatively low now, so I put money away for when they will be a lot higher.

[armaghniac]

Eh of course. I make provision for money I will have to pay in the future. Their bills are relatively low now, so I put money away for when they will be a lot higher.

Exactly, you look at the upcoming changes in expenditure. Likewise at national level provision might be made if there was going to be a variation from the steady state in the future, for instance if people were going to live longer. This was the idea of the Pension Reserve fund which was then frittered away on banks. Ireland has a modest enough problem as its population is relatively young, countries on the continent or even the UK have much more need of provision.

[muppet]

Eh of course. I make provision for money I will have to pay in the future. Their bills are relatively low now, so I put money away for when they will be a lot higher.

Exactly, you look at the upcoming changes in expenditure. Likewise at national level provision might be made if there was going to be a variation from the steady state in the future, for instance if people were going to live longer. This was the idea of the Pension Reserve fund which was then frittered away on banks. Ireland has a modest enough problem as its population is relatively young, countries on the continent or even the UK have much more need of provision.

I think the pension reserve was the only attempt by anyone in Government ever in Ireland to save for future financial commitments. The EU/IMF insisted we spent that money before they would bail us out. They may have been worried that we elected a populist governemnt who would default on the bailout and live for 6 months on the pension reserve, before the inevitable oblivion,  but surely even our biggest spoofers would hardly have tried that. With that in mind it was still staggering behaviour by the EU/IMF. f**k your future commitments to your citizens, you need to payoff private Bondholders first.

[magpie seanie]

Eh of course. I make provision for money I will have to pay in the future. Their bills are relatively low now, so I put money away for when they will be a lot higher.

Exactly, you look at the upcoming changes in expenditure. Likewise at national level provision might be made if there was going to be a variation from the steady state in the future, for instance if people were going to live longer. This was the idea of the Pension Reserve fund which was then frittered away on banks. Ireland has a modest enough problem as its population is relatively young, countries on the continent or even the UK have much more need of provision.

I think the pension reserve was the only attempt by anyone in Government ever in Ireland to save for future financial commitments. The EU/IMF insisted we spent that money before they would bail us out. They may have been worried that we elected a populist government who would default on the bailout and live for 6 months on the pension reserve, before the inevitable oblivion,  but surely even our biggest spoofers would hardly have tried that. With that in mind it was still staggering behaviour by the EU/IMF. f**k your future commitments to your citizens, you need to payoff private Bondholders first.

That's exactly what a ban would do with you if you were in bother. Difference is if you turned around and told the bank to f**k off it would end up hurting you more than the bank. We had a good hand and our treasonous politicians folded up like a deck chair.