Low Pay and NWA
national |
miscellaneous |
news report 
Friday January 17, 2003 11:14
by Eoin O'M
Sound arguments against low pay at a crucial time.
Those involved in the ongoing national wage agreement talks and those who believe that Partnership still points the way forward for this economy could do worse than read Polly Toynbee's article in this mornings Guardian.
For far too long we have lived under the illusion that national wage agreeements serve the interests of workers, especially those in low pay. A fallacy spouted by the militant wing of the PD's, ISME, is that higher pay would lead to capital and job flight. Drawing from Polly's article this morning, I suggest that the sick and elderly in our hospitals cannot be cared for in south Asia nor can bar and cafe workers simply be moved to north Africa. The point is that successful capitalist economies (damn me if I just contradicted myself) rely on a certain level of economic activity regardless of conditions elsewhere in other economies.
Wage restraint is a red herring for those who believe that competitveness is more important than a more than living wage or that somehow paying more for basic social provision, like refuse charges, through secondary taxes, is good for us. Enough of the low-taxation and low spend model.
Any takers?
Comments (5 of 5)
Jump To Comment: 1 2 3 4 5I don't mind paying tax if that tax was used properly, to benefit the needy / promote a sustainable society etc., but I am certainly not in favour of higher taxes so that these politicians can WASTE it on themselves and their buddies and their pet projects (including war).
NOTHING IS WASTED MORE EASILY THAN PUBLIC MONEY. I see that in my job.
And the bigger the country (hierarchy) the bigger the waste. E.G. USA. I wouldn't like to be paying more in income tax in USA to fund their murderous wars.
Basically, for me it's about RESPONSIBLE SPENDING, not low tax/high spend/ high tax/ low spend.
AND it's about reducing the scale of the hierarchy. The more local the power the more responsibility those with the power have, the clearer the link between the governor and the governed.
e.g. ESAT. Our c*nt of a government sold it off cheaply at the time, so cheap a man made a couple of hundred million quid selling it on 2 years later. If say each province (even county) had sold off licences for it's own area then at least no-one would have screwed 200 million out of it.
The bigger the hierarchy the bigger the fraud. The more tax they collect the more tax they waste.
If there was no centralised government I'm positive that local people would get together and do a better job for society than these fraudulent scheming greedy power crazed c*nts do.
Business should pay its share of tax for a change, then we would not need extra bin taxes etc being used to oppress poor people.
Well said Eoin O'M (The original posting). Couldn't have said it any better myself. Also the replies have been very good. Looks like this has the potential to become a serious debate on IMC Ireland. Pity that there hasn't been a greater response so far.
But the nuts are too busy slagging doing such things as sf and the swp and having insane conversations about posters. These sort of 'activists' dont care about tax, they are either well off (Daddy's money) or not working, and as we know those who sell their labour pay most tax and cannot afford expensive accountants to advise them how to avoid paying much. They are not too bothered about Harney reducing corporation tax to a mere pittance as many of their families own businesses and are benefiting from the lowest corporation tax rates in Europe. You see while they love having nutty conversations on indymedia they also know which side their bread is buttered on at the end of the day.
Indymedia Ireland is a media collective. We are independent volunteer citizen journalists producing and distributing the authentic voices of the people. Indymedia Ireland is an open news project where anyone can post their own news, comment, videos or photos about Ireland or related matters.