Deputy finance minister warns of wage freeze, 'looming fiscal crisis'

doubletrouble

Expert Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2012
Messages
1,226
R1.2 bil a week X 52 weeks = R62.4 bil per year.

National Treasury said that the R59 billion that Eskom was set to receive under the Special Appropriation Bill may be used to settle its debt and interest payments and nothing else.
So basically we are borrowing money every week so that we can pay Eskoms debt? Is it only me, or does it seem that there doesn't need to be a financial crises?
 

Johnatan56

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 23, 2013
Messages
25,084
R1.2 bil a week X 52 weeks = R62.4 bil per year.



So basically we are borrowing money every week so that we can pay Eskoms debt? Is it only me, or does it seem that there doesn't need to be a financial crises?
Even if no borrowing for Eskom, then there would be financial crisis because Eskom power cuts. Either way you're in need for wage/employee cuts and restructuring, preferable for all seo and government but we all know that's not going to happen until it crashes.
 

Scooby_Doo

Executive Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2005
Messages
6,356
can't you read? a real ratio growing from 22 to 29% is huge within this context
That ratio is not the right stat to be looking at. That stat is really bad, and the reason it keeps going up is because tax rates are increased while GDP stays the same or tax rates are maintained and GDP shrinks. In a healthy environment that ratio should go down.

Growing GDP with lower tax to GDP ratio indicates efficient use of tax money and healthy expanding economy.
 

Brenden_E

Expert Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2006
Messages
4,238
What infrastructure? Are you kidding? Perhaps 5% of tax money is spent on infrastructure. The rest is all wasted on one off expenses and salaries.
Actually we spent a shite load on education and social grants. That doesn't mean it gets results, but those are massive in terms of budget percentage.

They are directly tied to population growth. Old Saturnz can't think past his arse to realize this.
 

saturnz

Honorary Master
Joined
May 3, 2005
Messages
12,196
That ratio is not the right stat to be looking at. That stat is really bad, and the reason it keeps going up is because tax rates are increased while GDP stays the same or tax rates are maintained and GDP shrinks. In a healthy environment that ratio should go down.

Growing GDP with lower tax to GDP ratio indicates efficient use of tax money and healthy expanding economy.
I agree, that just further supports the view that the tax collection is not "low"
 

saturnz

Honorary Master
Joined
May 3, 2005
Messages
12,196
Actually we spent a shite load on education and social grants. That doesn't mean it gets results, but those are massive in terms of budget percentage.

They are directly tied to population growth. Old Saturnz can't think past his arse to realize this.
an ever increasing expense budget has nothing to do with revenue being low, a point that you can't realise

the tax pool has essentially shrunk, along with a host of other issues which is suppose to put a drag on it, but what we see is an increase in the tax to gdp ratio- some one even commented its growing too slowly, LOL!
 

Vrotappel

Bulls fan
Joined
Feb 22, 2005
Messages
17,205
I agree, that just further supports the view that the tax collection is not "low"
"Low" in this context means lower than expectations and lower than forecast.

Now who would have thought that this could ever happen comrades?
 

Brenden_E

Expert Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2006
Messages
4,238
an ever increasing expense budget has nothing to do with revenue being low, a point that you can't realise

the tax pool has essentially shrunk, along with a host of other issues which is suppose to put a drag on it, but what we see is an increase in the tax to gdp ratio- some one even commented its growing too slowly, LOL!
The biggest shortcoming in tax collection was corporate tax - so make of that what yo uwill. I think you have a different understanding to what the article is trying to say than 90% of the population. I understand it completely and it makes sense.
 

Unhappy438

Honorary Master
Joined
May 25, 2011
Messages
18,826
I've already responded to this exact point
No you havent, you have just added your own subjective view on what you think is low. Given the increase in taxes over the last few years, revenue has not increased as expected (wrongly of course). Thus revenue is low.

Thats really all there is to that statement.
 

evilstebunny

Honorary Master
Joined
Dec 20, 2007
Messages
19,486
Ah, the Zuma years come home to roost.

Not long now comrades, soon you'll learn to love the taste of sand just like Zimbobwe..
 

rietrot

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 26, 2016
Messages
15,469
No you havent, you have just added your own subjective view on what you think is low. Given the increase in taxes over the last few years, revenue has not increased as expected (wrongly of course). Thus revenue is low.

Thats really all there is to that statement.
Revenue is high, as taxes are high. We've reached the peak(fiscal cliff)of what we can possibly tax.
 

Unhappy438

Honorary Master
Joined
May 25, 2011
Messages
18,826
Revenue is high, as taxes are high. We've reached the peak(fiscal cliff)of what we can possibly tax.
That's not necessarily true, or it depends what you mean by possibly tax?

An increase an austerity, combined with a decrease in something like fuel taxes could well see overall tax collection increase.
 

Pitbull

Verboten
Joined
Apr 8, 2006
Messages
62,238
Didn't they just raise VAT by 1% a year ago, introduced the super tax bracket from March 2017, as well as haven't increased the income tax brackets by inflation for the last three tax cycles.

Taxes have just been raised in almost every way possible and this dummy is acting like its something that they don't want to do or haven't just done.
The day they announce this, I will divorce my wife and cash out 50%, then marry her again :D
 
Top