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.
Updated 10.59am
THE BODY OF a man has been recovered from a Co Tipperary quarry.
It is believed to be that of a 65-year-old local man who was last seen swimming in the Ahenny quarry in Carrick-on-Suir yesterday evening.
He was reported missing at around 6.30pm when he failed to return home and a search by the coast guard, gardaí and local people ensued. The search was stopped last night when it got dark but resumed again this morning.
A garda spokesperson told TheJournal.ie that the body was found at around 9.30am and he was pronounced dead at the scene.
His body will be taken to Waterford Regional Hospital for a post-mortem examination.
It is the 11th drowning since the current heatwave began.
It comes after a 24-year-old drowned while swimming in Co Donegal yesterday evening.
First published 7.40am
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
There should be an ‘It should be means tested’ option Gavan, IMHO.
Neil – I’d agree with you, but that isn’t an option open to TDs voting today, and we were trying to replicate today’s Dáil vote in the poll here.
means test it and that means the people who pay for everything continue to pay more while those who contribute little will continue to drain!!!
Sick of it… Sick of the ultra left wing b****x talked on this site……
So u think that someone that earns €300k should receive the same level of child benefit as someone earning €30k !!?? Clown !
Excellent reply, totally agree, now for the thumbs down.
Declan,
I still cannot really figure out why you’re still commenting on the Journal. I’ve lost track of the amount of times you’ve said you’re sick of people here. Yet you’re still on commenting away.
Child benefits should be means tested. People who earn over a certain threshold are really just getting a tax break for having kids over any meaningful contribution to the advancement of their children. I also think that, if the department of social protection requests, parents should be able to provide evidence that child benefits are actually going towards their children to prevent abuse of the system. We need to provide for those who are disadvantaged but we also need to crack down on those abusing the welfare system. We knew it in the boom times, we know it now. The difference is we no longer have the finances to not address the elephant in the room.
Someone who earns €300k will give at least €150k of it right over to the state. With Indirect taxes, this will move closer to €180k. These huge salaries are rather pointless in an Irish context which is why there’s so few people on them.
The reason why it’s important that higher earners get something, however trivial it might be to them, is that a total disconnect between contributors and takers isn’t created. That leads to polarisation and extremism.
Declan your starting to sound like Jamsie Cotter you self serving loathful man
“The lost lenore”
If you’re earning 300,000 every year and paying 150,000 of that to the state in taxes, 130 per month in child benefits are not really going to make much of a noticeable impact on your monthly income. To say that wealthier people will become dissatisfied and alienated because they don’t get a 130 per month tax rebate is making tigers out of kittens.
I was calling for this and I got a clarification as to the costing involved in means testing. It works out much more apparently.
I agree with you Declan. The better people do in this sh*thole the more they suffer. Why not reward the people who keep this country going, the people who pay for the lazy long term unemployed. Apart from sickness or disability there is absolutely no reason why anybody should be out of work for more than 6 months. I’m an unskilled worker, have never gone to college and have Never been out of work for more than a month. People need to understand that social welfare IS NOT AN ENTITLEMENT that should be seen as a substitute for a wage.
How many times have you heard someone say “it’s not worth my while working for that, I get more on the dole”? Social welfare is not a bench mark to how much you should be offered before getting your arse out of bed every morning. People need to change their attitude and lower their expectations. If there’s n work for electricians at the minute then get a job in Aldi or MacDonalds, or anywhere.
No offence to electricians meant, they were just an example, I would say the same to plumbers, bankers and hookers, if it’s not working out for you try something else.
Not really Declan. Having some level of universal benefits that exist across the board means that those that contribute most can feel they get something, however small, out of it and that there’s an element of fairness at play. You’d be surprised the effect that has in winning people over to the concept of social transfers. The alternative is to have contributors and takes, both poles apart and fighting their respective corners.
I’m really not buying into the SF line that anyone who has educated themselves, succeeded in their field or innovated is almost a criminal and should have two thirds of their money taken off them because FF mismanaged the economy.
Means testing off the bat costs too much, and might not actually produce much in the way of savings for a considerable time at least. But there were alternatives.
A cut could have been applied this year to everyone who was NOT in receipt of a welfare payment – whether that was a jobseeker’s allowance, lone parent payment, family income supplement or whatever. They already know who those people are, so it should have been administratively relatively straight forward to do.
Then include a proviso that anyone below a stated income, but not in receipt of a welfare payment, could apply to be put on the higher rate, subject to review say every 2-3 years. There is then the facility to gradually reduce the level to those not on welfare, while maintaining it to those who are.
It’s different from off the bat means testing, since there will be loads of people who know they would not qualify for the high rate, and thus not apply and cause admin headaches. And as the low rate is reduced more of those who really do need the higher level would gradually get into the system by application.
I voted No because as I have always said…The child benefit should be automatically linked with tax. If you earn enough to be on the 41% top rate tax then the child benefit for that household should automatically be withdrawn with a proviso that you can reclaim it if you pass a means test.
Don’t punish the people that need it, make those that require it, prove it.
Do you think Michael O’Leary is bothered that his child benefit is being cut?
My thoughts as well Kevin. An across the board measure such as this one just hit’s those on low incomes harder. Lazy politics taking the easy option with no thought of the possible consequences to families.
Supply in the form of credit card that can only be used to buy food or children’s clothes/shoes.
Too many are using it for booze and fags.
You will always find wasters drinking the mickey money on collection day in any pub in any Irish town or city.
Interesting Kevin…so by your estimation if someone or a household income is above ?32,800 which is where the 41% starta you shouldn’t be entitled to child benefit? That’s not particularly fair to the ordinary working person/family now is it? Plenty of families on Social Welfare getting that figure and above tax free every year with the little goodies and extras thrown in….not all mind, but plenty nonetheless….
Paul MC… What about when they use the money to pay for the utility bills, the credit union loans, the doctors or pharmacy bills? Will the card be able to do that? Not if the government have anything to do with it.
What about people who use it for rent or electric?
@paul its also used for school costs so i dont see how you could put that on a card, every week the school is looking for money for something else and then theres the fact that if it was put on a card system there would only be certain places you could use it not leaving room to shop around…
toorkeel… yes. If you earn enough to be paying the 41% tax then there should be a website,maybe ROS or revenue.ie, where you can claim the entitlement and yes you will have to prove it by being means tested. Only the people that require the money will bother going down this route. It will be cheaper to test the few than the many.
Well Kevin, to even get to the golden egg figure of ?32,800 where you hit the 41% tax rate probably upwards of 40% + of your salary is already gone between PRSI (just increased in budget) PAYE and the the absolute scourge of the working man the dreaded USC or as like to call it the “Universal Social Welfare Charge).At best that would leave just over ?19500 coming into a household net. Take mortgage payments, commuting costs, possible childcare, school costs, medical, and daily household expenses into account, there wouldn’t be a whole lot left in the well if any….now someone on welfare, few kids, free house etc and all the extras will easily surpass this figure…Tax Free! Now tell me this, how is it fair that Family A get nothing because someone is earning while Family B get Child Benefit because they are not.I understand there are many in society who should not be entitled to it, ie Michael O Leary type earners. What you propose is completely unfair and unjust to ordinary Working families and is ludicrous and encourages people to go on weldare You are clearly not a parent and in the workforce if you think your proposals are correct.
torkeel…If someone feels they are entitled to the child benefit then whats the problem with applying for it?
I am a parent but our son is too old now for us to get this benefit. I was made redundant last year and have since taken a 33% hit in my wages and wont even get near 26k this year and yes we have a mortgage and all the bill’s that go with running a household. We are just scraping along the bottom of the coping class for now. Any government entitlement would be a great help to us but we are out of that group. However i do not begrudge those that are entitled and also do not tar them all with the same brush. I have claimed back medical expenses before by spending a few minutes on revenue.ie, whats the biggy that those that feel they are entitled to the child benefit do the same?
I am sorry to hear Kevin you were made redundant, that can’t be easy. But your argument is baseless. If you say working people/households should have to apply, those earning ?32,800 leaving a net figure of ?19,500 at best after tax. How would you feel about everyone applying, including those on welfare, I guarantee you most of those on welfare would breach ?19,500 annually very easily when you include all the extras and goodies…your thoughts?
torkeel…
I agree that the welfare system is screwed in the favour of the sponger who as you pointed out can claim obscene amounts but that is a system that needs revamping urgently in favour of the working person. However not everyone on the welfare system can be tarred with the stereotypical brush.
I was on the dole for a while and received the married allowance of €312.8 ( €16265pa) and was not allowed to claim any bells and whistles..we cleared our debts and kept the mortgage alive with my redundancy.
Its the supplementary taxes here that are keeping the cost of living high and therefore keeping the welfare rates in line. Long term welfare should be means tested regularly and reduced for those that make no effort to find employment.
however, my main point that those high tax earners who think they are entitled to the CB is still a valid one, to those that bother to take a few minutes out of their day and claim for it should be the ones reaping the reward of receiving it ( if entitled). Why punish the person that works 3 jobs to keep food on the table for their children instead of the ones that save the CB to pay for their child’s year out after uni?
If not at the point that 41% tax kicks in then maybe a higher income..but a floor has to be set.
Maybe not but at least it will stop the miserable bastards that drink and smoke the children’s allowance instead of using it for its correct purpose. Kids going to school hungry and badly clothed is criminal.
Jazus, youse all have a problem for every answer!
Everybody has access to funds of some sort, dole, welfare, wages, whatever. Ring fence in one small portion direct at where it should be spent. Next children allowance day look at the drinks section in shop or in the off licence, always fuller than usual on these days. If you can only spend on food or clothing then use the other source if income for the rent etc, basic common sense
Where’s all the “I’m not paying for people to have children” and “If you can’t afford them don’t have them” comments? Come on People, get the finger out. But who will pay for all your pensions when you are old and grey? Answer that.
I’m not in the “If you can’t afford them don’t have them” camp, but I’ll answer your question anyway.
The same kids will pay currently for the pensions, regardless. I don’t think the birth rate would freeze without children’s allowance – our rate is cultural more than incentive-driven. Children’s allowance doesn’t make tax payers out of children, free education does. Education should be the foundation of all our long term financial planning, as individuals and as a country.
Furthermore, someone who doesn’t have children will, on average, draw infinitely less net benefit from the state for their taxes, so they’ve paid for their pension. While I think we need to support parenting in this country to create a sustainable society, I can see why non-parents would make an argument against paying for other people to have them.
Well Killawalla, I will pay for my own pension thank you very much.
Sorry , i was busy doing some work (some of you all should try it some time) , yeah they should cut off all child benefit , its pointless giving people money to have kids, and so widely abused too
Read Ronan’s response. He nailed it.
ps I’ll be sorting my own pension and suggest you do the same
@ ronan, Read a sensible comment in a long time. Keep up the good work.
Try welfare in England for awhile and see how u get on
I did and it was brilliant. They paid my council tax too! Pints over here can be had routinely for £2, 2l of milk 80p, loaf of bread 20p. My GP and medicines are all free too and that’s true for everyone. Child benefit is €111 over here a month. In the new year 33% of chilcare costs will be tax deductable in the UK. It’s pretty sweet here!
Disgusting attitude to have. Love the way you quoted the price of a pint first. “Pretty Sweet” is it?
No, it’s mainly bitter I drink
@ Eighties black guy. Hopefully loads of welfare spongers have read your comment and will move over there. It would save the tax payers here a small fortune.
Bollocks, I was on the dole in england. Its fifty punds a week paid forthnightly. You have money for about two days then your struggling to buy food.
*pounds
Why does it have to be cash? Why not a tax break for childcare to make employment worth while? And vouchers for clothing, food etc. for families in difficulty? The hullabaloo about this all comes from it being cash.
i would be all up for having free or at least cheaper childcare instead of child benifit cause then it would mean i could go back to work too, as it stands though when i looked into going back to work the childcare was too much and i wouldnt come out with any money at all, so himself works full time (and more) and i look after the kids, when the youngest starts school i will hopefully get something part time
No. A straight cut is not fair.
Exactly … People earning over a certain limit should not automatically be entitled to claim for their children, unless specific circumstances mean the allowance is a necessity.
Every other child should not have their allowance cut. I just can’t figure out the hypocrisy of the childrens right referendum being passed and the very first act afterwards by FFG/Lavour is to cut the childrens allowance.
labour liars,,, arse lickers, all fg independents,, just to keep their seats they lie, they are not for the people they are for fg,,, how can this happen,,, and then the house speaker to make her take back lie,,, they fn lied,,, we still have no jobs,, i need a job, i sold my cloths yesterday, 2 bags for 12 euro, my wedding ring week before just for bread and milk,, and now i am going to end up in court as i just gave up trying to pay my mortgage,, they are killing this country,,
This is just wrong Jackie,wrong on so many levels.
The black hearted vile creature burton does not give a damm and that goes for any of the paracites in the dail ftom the bottom to the top.
burton is a vile black hearted pig that will sit at a lavish christmas feast surrounded by her ilk and feasting on “your money”.
with any luck it will choke them.
How dare they destroy people like this.
I think your lying aswell
But yet, you can still pay for your broadband, priorities Jackie. And did you enjoy all the hols you took in 2012..
2012
Travelled to Maidstone, Kent
Travelled to New York City Ballet
Moved to Sparkhill Park
Travelled to Zákinthos, Zakinthos, Greece
Travelled to Esbjerg, Denmark
Travelled to Walt Disney World
Travelled to Paris, France
Travelled to Cambridge, Cambridgeshire
Travelled to Salou, Cataluna, Spain
Travelled to Venice, Italy
Travelled to Adeje, Canarias, Spain
Travelled to Niagara Falls
From your own Facebook page…Things that make you go Mmmm
Thanks Sue… I loved that.
@ Cholly… Eh !
Take tithe streets if u feel So annoyed , I will join you .
Have done that Ashling.been to most protests (peaceful) and got the colds to prove it lol.
Met a huge amount of likeminded folk from all walks.
oh Jackie lol That’s the biggest owning I have see dished out on the journal.
Sue Sue….. superb stuff
Sue, this is without doubt the biggest Journal ownings I have ever seen. Congratulations I have ever seen. I nominate this for comment of the week!
Ha Ha…Class Sue Sue….time for a nice cold glass of whoop ass Jackie…I fear you may never recover from this public humiliation!
Oh Sue Sue!! You are the F*cking Daddy!! I take my hat off to you.
I also think if she is unemployed then all the people that say some people on benefits have a better lifestyle than the workers have been vindicated
Just revisited this and thanks all. In all fairness Jackie made it very easy. I also agree with Cholly, something is wrong with the social welfare system if a person on unemployment benefit can take so many trips. In this case, however I simply think Jackie is delusional and what she says should be taken with a pitch of salt.
Merry Xmas :) Xxx
sorry guys they are not holidays, they are places i have been, i was born in england, i only put them on some app of places i have been, i have not been out on holidays in years sorry, and internet was a gift for my daughter from my mother,,, who passed in november and gave her a year subscription, so its one thing i dont pay for , ye turn so nasty on here, i dont think even worth coming on here, i have spoken only the truth, my cloths i sold in rock st, and my jewellery in the mall ,, since you seem to want to throw stuff back, yes i am broke, yes i need a job, i have never been out of work in over 30 years, and yes i am begging for a job and cant get one, seems everyone hiring young ones and not someone nearly 50, which i still consider young,, and internet saves lots of money as my son living in usa and i have not been there to see him in over 5 years, which was probably my last holiday, but sue sue, you could have asked and i would have told you, i have nothing to hide, and i dont lie,,
no it will have a knock on effect on. the economy . i am waiting for all the smart comments about John player blue and cider . but the truth is a lot of people really need this money .to make ends meet .
They will vote in favour of it because they don’t give a shite about the people that struggle day to day!!
I suppose they have to cut when benifit is been paid to mothers of children across europe and to the stragglers that make their way into the country just to get on benifit, they need to clean up the system. Some others never see the child allowance which goes streight into a bank account as they dont need it, later used for spending money for the holidays and the like.
Not anymore, it used to be like that but now foreign nationals working and living here have to prove every 3 months that their children are school going in this country and if too young for school a GP letter stating that the child recieves its check ups and needles here. Its all changed
william that’s not entirely true a family member from uk arrived here last december with 2 children. during her marriage she was constantly abused physically and mentally. she sought refuge in eire. she couldnt get any benefits and 2 months after arriving here she was ordered by uk justice to return the children they ordered the children to remain in uk with their father. the case is on-going. the mother returned to ireland and from her arriving here she has received no payments and she is looking for work and is signing on every month as required.
my husband is unemployed due to redundancy 2years ago.
I was a fulltime carer for my late father. we have a mortgage and usual house hold bills, a 17 year old son with adhd depression and agrophobia.
the family member resides with us as there is’nt anywhere for her to turn to for help.
EXCEPT return to uk and put up with abuse and mental cruelty shown by her ex and her own family.
where’s the justice for this woman?????????????/
Not everybody with children need child benefit, ive heard some people say they wont notice the cut.If the government wants savings from the social welfare budget it should reform child benefit via either means-testing or taxation But for one parent families etc it is a cut too far and will make their lives even more miserable. This society is becoming inequitable like Dickens’s society really fast, Victorian Christmas anyone?
My sister in law has saved every cent they ever got for child benefit. This money will be presented to her kids when they finish college. Is this what everyone’s supposed to do with it then?
If your sister in law can afford to save it then she in hard off enough to deserve it! It’s called children’s benefit for a reason! Not young adult benefit!
*isn’t
@Mary,
I have a question.
Not everyone needs free public health care. Should only those under an income threshold be allowed to avail of the public health system, with others needing private health care if they want treatment?
I’m not arguing this point either way, I’m just wondering where you draw the line on entitlements. Currently children’s allowance is a universal entitlement, as is the public health care system. A well-off person can elect to skip private health insurance and use the public system.
Currently well off people can send their children to public primary schools. Some can afford to send privately, and do (arguments about state support for these systems aside, for one minute), but they elect to use the public system. Should we remove this universal education benefit for children of well-off/comfortable parents to ringfence the money for those that can’t afford it?
You see, children’s allowance currently works on the principle that all children have an entitlement to support from the state, regardless of the parental income. My worry with applying a threshold is that an income anomaly could mean parents of almost identical means, living next door to one another, paying roughly the same tax, but one is getting 260/month for their two children while another gets nothing. The parents without the entitlement are now less well-off than their neighbours, despite earning a fraction more, because someone in an office set a cut-off point for children’s allowance.
There’s no simple solution here, and means testing involves creating and tinkering with layers and layers of bureaucracy to apply, with a myriad of complicated exemptions and other nonsense.
I agree with the argument that some wealthy people might not need it, but childrens allowance roughly works like a tax rebate for parents, except that people not paying that much (or any) income tax get the same amount as the high tax paper.
amazing how job seekers benefit can now get means tested after 9 mths but they cant means test child benefit !! but to answer the question no it shouldn’t have been cut , not while bell enda and co never touched their own grotesquely overpaid wages
As a new mum, my pref would be that in a ideal world, the money put into childcare and primary education… Affirdable quality childcare for all parents, whereby a woman is not put in a position to give up work as childcare costs too much. In primary school, the money put towards books, activities etc.
If only everyone in this country shared your integrity. We are more concerned with providing welfare than services in this country.
By the way , if the poll on here is that as close as that, you can be sure that in the real world that people in general are happy to reduce the benefit as opposed to a means test! If its means tested then the people who actually keep Ireland going will get nothing while the drain at the bottom will continue to draw..
In a perfect world TD’s would vote the way the majority of those they represent feel – but this isn’t a perfect world.
This maybe unpopular with some but i wouldnt cut it until after three children then i would offer very little. It will hit decent large families i understand and its terrible for them. However it would discourage criminal types from popping out kids every five minutes. In my experience they tend to have huge numbers of kids which they claim every benefit going for, either that or they get put in care. I would do it on a trial basis for say ten years to see if it has an effect on crime and financial stats. Maybe try and find someway of getting the money back to decent large families in some sort of tax rebate. Just a thought.
Think child benefit should remain the same for the first 2 or 3 children. However, if a parent choses to have more than this then they should be making a responsible decision that they can afford to support more than this without additional assistance from the state. Believe there should be no extra child benefit after having 2nd or 3rd child !
voted no for 2 reasons, they should have cut their own pay, pensions and perks first and secondly, it should be a means tested payment anyway
So the government is against an increase on the USC on those earning over €100,000 (despite the fact that self-employed people pay the higher rate) and yet they’ve no problem cutting child benefit for everyone regardless of income? Something’s not right there…
Maybe they feel that the majority of people who earn over 100k don’t deserve to be penalised for just working hard?!
I wouldn’t see it as being penalised – I just think those earning more, should pay more in tax (which seems to be the basis of our current tax system anyway). And with self-employed people already paying the higher rate, then why don’t all those earning over €100,000 pay it?
Eoin a single person earning 100K pays about 42K in direct taxation, which I think you will agree is a lot.
Because they already pay their fair share. People don’t like to hear that, but it is true. 41% of 100k is a LOT of money, especially when they get nothing but abuse for their endevour in this country. And remember, they are the ones who we want to spend in the domestic economy to keep business’ open.
Pierce, it is a lot of tax, i have paid something similar (a little more, but not much).
However, in all truth, I could afford to pay more tax, and would gladly do so, if it was to avoid broad sweeping measures introduced in this budget, like wholesale slashing of Childrens benefit, regardless of situation. I 100% agree that certain families dont need it, and should not get it… But this allowance was supposed to support Children. If some people abused it, then they shouldn’t get it (i agree with you on that point).
However, for the majority of the population of families of children in this country, the childrens allowance is used for its intended purpose.
Personally, i could well afford to pay an extra couple of percent on all earnings over a certain threshold.
I think Adams summed it up best in response to Kenny the other night in the Dail. Kenny stood there, telling bare faced to the Dail and to the TV cameras, that he, Gilmore and the other ministers who approved the slash and burn approach introduced in the Bill that ‘He felt their pain’.
Adams was very quick to point to the Millionaires row of ministers and said there is no way they were feeling any pain. Kenny/Gilmore and their cohorts deliberately targetted people trying to survive on less than 230 euro per week, while they are sitting there taking money from the same pot, to the tune of 3-4000 euro every week, along with pensions worth 2-5 million euro.
I hope you see where i am coming fro on this one.
Well it’s all relative. I did the maths there and someone earning 50,000 pays 32% in tax (including USC and income tax) while someone earning 100,000 pays 40% in tax (likewise including USC and income tax)..
So someone on 100,000 pays a quarter more in tax than someone earning 50,000 and yet earns twice as much..
Jaysus Eoin. Do the math again and this time finish it. 32% of 50k is….. 16k…. and 40% of 100k is….. 40k!!!! Is that not enough??
Means testing it would of been a lot more logical but that’s Ireland for you, do everything backwards.
This keeps being reported as a €10 cut but thats for the first two. It’s €18 for the third and €20 for 4th and subsequent child. So a family with 5 kids is down 10 + 10 + 18 + 20 + 20 or €78 a month which is a lot for some.
If it must be cut would be better to cut €10 of each. But really the system needs to be reformed. Reduce it but replace with free or subsidized school books and free education.
Education is not free in Ireland. Primary schools name and shame those who do not give the “voluntary” contribution
Secondary schools call it a “re-enrollment fee” and in ours it’s €150 per student!
should have stopped the benefit to those earning over 40,000Euro then would have saved even more.At least find an acceptable earning level to cease paying this benefit,seems they got scared to do this instead of punishing everyone again.
@kev, 40k is not a lot for a family. After deductions, you get aprrox 31.5k take home. From that you have to take into account, travel to and from work, mortgage/rent, electricity, heating, food, clothes etc. Little if nothing is left over.
Now if we compare that, to a family of 4 on social welfare, they get 372.40 pw, along with Fuel allowance of 20pw (19364.80 pa) and help with Rent/Mortgage payments. So we add on to that children benefit of 260pm that would mean that they have 22, 484 without taking into account Rent supplement or Mortgage Interest supplement.
Agree it needs to be based on a threshold, but 40k is way too low.
Sue Sue, I didn’t read your comment, I just green-thumbed it automatically on account of the owning you gave to the troll-liar Jackie. I hope this is ok. If you want me to read your comments, then if course I will. And please accept my apologies if I’ve ever offended you in any way. And would you like a nice cup of tea and a digestive? :-)
Hahahaha, Thanks Robin, but I prefer Rich Tea biscuits! :)
I think we all know that in many cases Child Benefit does not benefit the child but the parents who go from post office to supermarket for alcohol – and I see this in my local town.
Child benefit should be paid indirectly for education uniforms free medical card for child.
As per my own post, I see merit in the child benefit being distributed in kind (Clothes, education, GP etc), but I must say, introducing bad parents, that drink away their kids food, clothes etc, is a bad example of the vast majority of the populace. We shouldn’t let parents like that be the reasoning behind whats best for the vast majority. So if we DO introduce other means of benefit distribution, I don’t think the bad parents you allude to should be the reasoning behind it.
our glorious leaders. should be put on trail for treason against the Irish people . there are people out there really suffering .and thy only worry about what Europe. thinks and about looking good waiting for a pat on the head from Germany
I’d vote no -take a 50% pay cut and table a motion to cut the 11 million in TD expenses before I EVER had the nerve to touch a cent of child benefit and even then, I’d vote no. European financial policy is hurting the most vulnerable first and that is not the way it should be.
Further clarification, I’d then ring fence that social care and say to Europe that is not up for negotiation but reform was. I’d then reform the social care system with heavy divisions of ability to work. Your neighbour who may be taking the piss on the scratch would work for the state, cleaning streets, parks and the like until either he gets fecked off and gets a new job in the private sector or stays a state employee. So the benefit system needs to be overhauled, yes, we now cant afford to dish out cash to those who don’t want to work Just to buy their votes but don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater by just simply (an it is very simple) cutting welfare. Cut from the skivers first. Short term political fix will hit the worthy as well as the unworthy.
So am I correct in inferring that they will save ?13 million from this move? How much exactly would it cost to put in the IT systems that they need to make permanent savings far in excess of this; a damn sight less than the sum which now won’t be going back into the economy because if it was linked to income tax you’d have to be paying tax here which would automatically cut off those claiming it whilst living outside Ireland.
The IT system is not the only cost. The processing requires people and an ongoing cost. Then you have the appeals process.
Means testing is expensive and constantly an area easy to cheat.
I wonder how feasible it would be to cut it altogether, but have all schoolbooks and uniforms free, as well as third level education free and maybe a Christmas bonus of some sort. On top of this, maybe those in need (how this is assesed would probably be an issue), could be given some kind of supermarket vouchers or something. I’m certainly not in the ‘Take it off them spongers camp’. In fact I absolutely LOATHE those attitudes. I want children to have clothes, education, food in their belly, rooves over their heads, and parents being able to care for them. I’d pragmatically seek to achieve this. Maybe the child benefit IS the best way, but I’d be willing to look at other things in place of it as long as we can achieve the above.
Guys again there’s an option there! Tax it as an income
The cut in the carers allowance is a down right disgrace and should be reversed immediately but when it comes to children’s allowance is really have no sympathy. My wife divorced me 3 years ago and we have joint custody. My kids stay with me every second week for the full week and I get no support from the government and on top of that I pay children’s maintain and help out with school books, clothing, Christmas etc. Luckely I’ve a full time job. So this argument is lost on me.
no i don’t. i think it could have been stopped for the rich. but i think there should be a poll on all the cuts that the elderly, sick and disabled are enduring right now. it’s a desperate way of living when you can’t afford your medication, can’t afford heating, can’t afford food. the percentage of vulnerable people in that category has just gone up. and the welfare cuts got through last night. can we see who voted for them and who didn’t. thanks
Have to say, and as others have said, we can argue about the best ways of distributing tax money and benefits etc. However, as long as the Daíl is on the money its on, along with its expenses, then it has absolutely no grounds to pontificate about the troica holding the purse strings, their hands being tied, and the financial mess we’re in. I think the majority of the public would truly understand how bad things are, if they significantly reduced their salaries. Even if they had a caveat of, ‘Until we gain back our economic sovreignty, and achieve [insert economic target here] we will take a fifty – sixty grand pay cut. When we meet our targets, we will bring salaries back up’. Of course, it wont happen, because they DON’T actually care that much.
Pierce-
Have an aunt and her husband who moved to Ireland couple years ago from the uk and he said he’d scrap child benefit altogether
Shane it’s always good to know your family’s travel plans.
child benefit should have been cut more basic paymentof 100 increase the child payment on social welfare by 10? a week and family income supplement by the same so low incomesfamily aren’t effected
The budget didn’t need to be cut in the way the article is portraying, such as social welfare ect.
But what could / should have been cut is the billions of €’a payment to dead banks, unguaranteed bond holders, mad pensions of the retired board of Anglo.
It many be a tired old story; claimed by some, but it is a true story and a chain around our economic future development / sustainment.
Wake up Ireland
Can someone tell me why the state should be paying for children all ? I mean we’ve decided to have them ourselves? Put the money into healthcare, education and proper old age pensions. Bring on the red thumbs!
We all know the 413 yes votes are more than likely well off/ blueshirts / labour or all of the above
Scrap it all together and give it through social welfare payments. I think the days of extra stigma are long gone.
Interesting that since this launched today the No vote is still only 50-51%. Appears not so many opposed after all.
Means test it if you like. My kid doesn’t earn enough. A fiver a week for emptying the dishwasher and tidying his room would hardly be over the earnings threshold. Oh hang on, don’t tell me they’re taking the confirmation money into account? Boy? Transfer that prize bond into your girlfriend’s name!!
Child benefits should not be reduced. For people who earn more than E60,000 PA child benefits should be included in Income Tax Return and taxed at marginal tax rate.
Everyone likes to throw figures about. So here are a few.
Firstly no one actually pays 41% income tax. The first 41,800 is charged at 20% so if you earn 50K the first part is paid at that rate and the money over 41,800 is at 41%, giving a total tax payment of 11722, which is an effective tax rate of 23.44% If that is then offset by a payment out of 130 euro a month that reduces the effective tax rate to 20.32%, a reduction of 3.12%.
As income increases the reduction to the effective tax rate falls accordingly by around 2% at 80K, and 1% at 150K. Someone was throwing around 300K earlier, at that point the reduction is around 0.5% and the effective tax rate is 37.5%
How could it possibly be worthwhile to set a means testing system, with appeals and boards and committees and rigmarole to make marginal impact on people’s overall tax bill?
[Obviously this ignores all the other tax breaks and benefits people can get and assumes a single income for a married couple if you want more detail google for a tax calculator.]
Have you omitted PRSI and USC in your calculations?
Yes. Additional tax paid would of course reduce the tax reduction percentage. Further making my point.
I can see a few solutions that would permit the government to ensure that any such payment is ringfenced so that money intended for the children is indeed spent on the children.
The problem with any such ringfencing is that in order to reduce abuse of that some sort of technological enforcement would probably have to be instituted along with punishments for malfeasance. Few governments have shown themselves able to institute any sort of solution with such requirements.
If they can do a comprehensive Means Test for a medical card or rent allowance they can very very quickly means test for Child Benefit. It’s called a P60, there’s one for everyone in the audience. If you are living together with a child and both working it’s called two P60s. Done and dusted.
To the people who said yes , shame on you all. There are people in this country who need and deserve the previous but there are people who abuse the system….
If I wanted to read The Irish Times I would. If you have a point to make then please do so yourself.
sorry guys they are not holidays, they are places i have been, i was born in england, i only put them on some app of places i have been, i have not been out on holidays in years sorry, and internet was a gift for my daughter from my mother,,, who passed in november and gave her a year subscription, so its one thing i dont pay for , ye turn so nasty on here, i dont think even worth coming on here, i have spoken only the truth, my cloths i sold in rock st, and my jewellery in the mall ,, since you seem to want to throw stuff back, yes i am broke, yes i need a job, i have never been out of work in over 30 years, and yes i am begging for a job and cant get one, seems everyone hiring young ones and not someone nearly 50, which i still consider young,, and internet saves lots of money as my son living in usa and i have not been there to see him in over 5 years, which was probably my last holiday, but sue sue, you could have asked and i would have told you, i have nothing to hide, and i dont lie,,
To all the people who live in a house with annual income over 110k it should be cut by 50%. 90k cut by 40%, 70k cut by 30% and so on down to 40k everybody else cut by 1% that way the people with the most income loss most of the benifet and also the low income pays too we all pay as a nation forever and ever…………
We will have to agree to disagre on this one.
have your say