would that include the children of wealthy parents who go abroad to be schooled ? as for the child benefit of ‘high earners’ being “spent here and going back into the economy” how many of those high earners use the money from c.a to pay for holidays abroad ? that is not spending the money here or putting it back into the Irish economy.
why don’t we just do away with c.a altogether and use the money to provide a truely free childcare and education system, that way it would ensure the money is going to benefit the child and not the parents.

Eric, because you cant feed books to children or make clothes out of them. There are people who rely on this money to feed and clothe their kids.

So if you’re working in Ireland (paying tax), but your children are not resident then you should not get child benefit?

I’m not sure that’s what the rules are, but it doesn’t matter. It doesn’t seem right that you pay tax but are denied any of the benefits that are not even means tested.

The child benefit thing is a joke anyway. It should be scrapped. People who genuinely need this money should be looked after some other way. Perhaps utilising our social welfare system for its intended purpose.

Means testing would allow the self employed and farmers to walk rings round the system like they do already with Third Level Grants . Look outside your urban world and understand the bigger picture.

Mick Collins,

Not possible. In case you didn’t realize, the Third Level Grants system now demands every applicant furnish details of their parents income regardless their status (single, married, etc). One can no longer walk around it.

The tax rate on the wealthy has been declining since the 80s with more and more of the tax burden falling on the middle class (who can’t afford lobbyists). Seems to me there’s been a long standing assault on the middle-class by the wealthy. Now, when some start saying “maybe a tax rate is to low for someone with millions in income”, ya’ll flood the press with this class warfare cra.. er, stuff.

The average effective tax rate paid by the top 50% of adjusted gross incomes in 2009 was only 20%.

Including contributory old age pensions?

The successful election of Hollande and the socialists to power in France was greeted with a flight of wealth and businesses from France. Most fled to Britain, Switzerland and Singapore.
A similar, less pronounced, flight of wealth is ongoing in the US.
Italy has increased marginal tax rates in a number of areas and has seen exchequer revenues decrease.
In 1991, Russia abandoned progressive taxation in favour of a flat 13% tax on all incomes. They saw a 25% increase in tax revenues. 13 other nations have followed this model.
Increasing marginal rates of taxation is not a solution to an economic crisis. Irrespective of being applied to rich or poor, direct or indirect. It ultimately results in lower revenue yields, less growth and more unemployment.
http://mobile.bloomberg.com/news/2012-05-10/entrepreneurs-in-france-flee-from-hollande-s-rejection-of-wealth.html

I don’t regard my JSA and rent supplement as a “benefit” – and it is means tested.

The use of gross income to promote the myth that some tax heaven exists for some is misleading. A factory or other producer employer may not make enough NETT profit to pay wages, rates etc. how or why should it be accused of not doing good

Tax the dole ,most of them are better off than those working.

@Dublinland

They are!! The only 2 that arent are the over 70s medical card and the invalidity pension which is taxable income for couples where one person is in full time employment.

Sean O’Keeffe,

It is clear that Ireland need changes to narrow the wealth gap. Even though one is smart, one do not deserve a wage 300 times higher than the average level. Therefore, it is fair to tax the richest people. However, the way to tax it and the future use of tax is still under debate. Personally, I prefer the analyze of Ilyana Kuziemko, Michael I. Norton, and Ellis Cose. Michael Noonan needs to take an audacious and effective step to settle the wealth distribution problem.

Rob, if the objective of increasing wealth tax is to punish the wealthy for being wealthy, then remember that you’re cutting off your nose to spite your face. Increasing wealth tax will result in reduced revenues and a reduced working population to make up the gap. Expect higher taxes on the less well off to close the deficit.
If your objective to promote fiscal sustainability, then you are better off abandoning progressive taxation to achieve this end.
You are correct that their is a growing wealth gap, but taxation policy will not remedy this. Neither is it a product of taxation policies, but rather of monetary policies.
I’ve attached a BBC radio4 programme that offers an introduction to explaining this.
http://money-market-account.blogspot.ie/2012/06/radical-economics-yo-hayek.html

Child Benefit should not be paid to children who don’t reside in the state. You couldn’t make it up, it’s a joke!

Exactly. The rich must pay their fair share.

6 super-rich people who say ‘tax me more’:

http://thedailyedge.thejournal.ie/6-super-rich-people-who-say-tax-me-more-436415-May2012/

Raising taxes on rich would help reduce deficit. Any sane government will enact new taxes on the wealthy, restructure the tax code and approve short-term spending measures as part of a budget plan aimed at boosting job growth and helping the middle class.

Why don’t (maybe they do) the 6 super rich write out a check to the government for the amount extra they believe they should be taxed?

Hey Tim. Just so you know, those mentioned in that article you linked are not Irish citizens and therefore would not be paying taxes in Ireland. We haven’t had six Irish rich people come forward asking for more taxation.

Kevin

O’Leary is, Vin B and many of his very well paid panelists have stated publicly that they would have no problem paying higer taxes and there are 3 people who comment on the J who have also stated that they would have no problem paying more income tax. On the other side you have the likes of Boneo and his crew that will do whatever they have to to AVOID taxes and a very wealthy Minister for Health who likes to avail of tax breaks.

Does any one know why people from other countries working .here can claim child benefit . Even though the children are not living here with them

More parlor tricks again to deceive the fact anyone earning above 80K is well-off.

The top 10% (and clearly rising) of the country that pays zero (or negative) income tax really likes paying zero (or negative) income tax, while those voters get to use government tax breaks and services, and so in most instances they’ll view a vote for the Blueshirts as rational. The very few who pay the great bulk of the taxes are clearly numerically deceptive, manipulative, and greedy with self-righteous beliefs. Overall, this therefore gives the Gov’t a likely structural voting math advantage.

It would be interesting to see the enormous amount of presently hoarded cash on the sidelines of individuals and businesses not spent/invested. Tax it.

Is it about how much people spend in tax or how much people spend on their children, though? If we really see this as a payment for children, I have a lot of problems with the idea that any child is worth more than others to the government.

Agree 110% Sam..

We (the wife and I) are borderline 80k and we sure as hell don’t have a penny left at the end of the month.
I work 80-90 hours a week to keep my company afloat, and are getting to the point where I’ll just say feck this, sack the 3 people I have working for me and go on the dole. It’s just not worth it any more.

The perception that anything above 80k means that you are loaded is so wrong its unreal.
Yes, if you have no mortgage and no kids = happy days. But stick in two mortgages (yes, we did the usual stupid thing of believing the hype and “invested”) + 3 kids childcare + normal bills and there is less than nothing left.

If we lost child benefits wife would have to stop working, this is a fact.
3-4% more tax this year and we would be better off with me closing down the company.
Result.. Two more people (+ the 3 who work for me) on the dole, but hey it will be a nice and relaxing ride for us from then on compared to now.

Brian, If your wife stops working you’d then be eligible for the child benefit that not being eligible for caused her to have to stop working.

Although she could probably retrain in Child Care, I understand it’s quite lucrative.

Brian – you wouldnt get the dole if you’re self employed. Dont go blaming those financially worse off than you for your greed. You and your wife made the decision to buy that second home and probably used your childrens allowance to fund it. Which in itself proves that you didnt rely on CA to put food on the table or clothes on your childrens back. I’m sure when childrens allowance was introduced our founding farthers didnt do so to help pay for that extra jaunt abroad every year and most certainly not to fund a new landlord class with second homes.

@Ann

1. I don’t blame financially worse off people. I know there are lots out there, but what I also know is that there are a hell of a lot who never worked a day in their lives and ARE better off than us.

2. As for greed, well I am very bloody sorry for ever allowing myself to believe that hard work should pay off and that I might just might be able to provide for my family should something happen to me. And for actually providing jobs and exports that benefits the country. What are YOU doing to help your fellow countrymen/women?

3. “probably used your children’s allowance to fund it”. Not even going dignify that with an answer.

4. It’s been 6 years since we were last on holidays, the money is just not there. When was yours?

Last holiday abroad was to Italy seven years ago becuase my brother in law married an Italian girl. I went for 10 days and it took me 2 years to pay the credit union loan back. You didnt have to buy a second home to look after your family, you are using this as justification for your purchase. As for what I do to help my fellow countrymen and women, I look after my old neighbours, I check on them everyday, I go to the shop for them if the weather is bad and they cant get out. If they are not well I will cook dinner for them. If any of my neigbours are unable to collect their children from school, I collect their kids for them and mind them for the afternoon if need be. None of my friends or family are allowed to throw out jumpers, because in the depths of winter I walk around the city center handing out jumpers to those (addicts or not) who have to sleep on the streets. Thats what I do for my fellow man.

As for those who have never worked a day in their lives – then 150 euros welfare payment is all they should get which just about covers council rent, esb and food. IMO those who have never worked or kept a job for more than 5 years should not be in receipt on any secondary benefits such as fuel allowance.

Thanks Tracey. I was trying to write a post to Tim to make that point but you’ve done it far more succintly that I could do.

its much cheaper than having to constaly buy new cloths and “stay with the fashion trend” in schools. Plus its less stress on parents to organise new clean cloths every day, get the child into the uniform, eat their breakfast and out the door. It saves money in the long run, as children only need -non school- clothes in the evening and weekends.

Nah, it’s to create uniformity and it’s a tribal symbol as well.

the same system as used for means testing for the third levels grants can be used

How much would it cost to expand that system? Does that system, in itself, give value for money?

Mr Noonan?

Tim Jackson doesn’t answer any reasonable question on his gobbldygook economic statements because he is unable to back up anything he thought he heard at the cadre meeting.

”Tim Jackson doesn’t answer any reasonable question on his gobbldygook economic statements because he is unable to back up anything he thought he heard at the cadre meeting”

What’s the matter Mick, can’t get what you want?

thats the point i was making Lorna but i was told if i said that in public id get a punch in the face

Is food a childs item? How do you seperate/quantify bread and milk for kids and bread and milk for adults?

Nice idea, but it fails the practicality test.

-How would we pay for childcare with that?

-How is it managed… do tesco now have to put in a system where they identify items as ‘for children’ and not ‘for children’. How pays for this to be installed and maintained.

-Is baby formula included in your ‘for children’ pile, because it is anti-breastfeeding to subsidise formula.

-What if I buy from small local shops like a corner shop that doesn’t take cards? It would be unfair to those small local traders, and give all the money to the likes of massive chains instead.

-Second hand school books and uniforms… do I now have to buy all new ones?

We own the banks so the cards should be no problem. And I live in the country about 50 miles to the nearest city and laser machines are common place. There could be audits on these accounts as to how there being spent eg no beer fags holidays etc

Colman, what is your point with the lasercard? There’s money on that surely… not anything else like vouchers for the cinema, or milk coupons.

Money is the universal voucher system, that’s why it works easily. Otherwise you are into the territory of listing and maintaining what every child’s needs are from birth to adulthood. Go ahead and start that list… see how long it gets. Then add a disabled child’s needs.

When your child goes to school, and a note comes home saying they need money for an outting, or a leaky roof…. what do you do with your voucher for milk then?

It’s communist era stuff. Over-regulation leads to us being stranged by red-tape.

Did I mention laser-card? No re read. These cards could work on that system. As for ur communist remark some states in the USA use this system for there social welfare.

Colman, what other card is there, visa? Your mythical child support card doesn’t exist, so I doubt they take that.

By the way, that system in the US is widely held up as how NOT to do things. The vouchers are exchanged for drugs and drinks by those who are inclined, and just inconvience the rest of the people.

What is the point of creating an expensive to run and administer system, for no perceivable benefit? It solves no problems, and causes a boatload of hassle for people, at an exorbitant cost to the exchequer.

No thanks.

the power to make decisions for and on behalf of the people of this county was given over to the euro crates the day that the 2 Brian’s signed up for the bail out , since then any choice of being able to control or decide how and where money is spent has been further eroded by the fiscal treaty, voting ‘ yes’ to this piece of euro legislation was nothing more than handing over full control to the troika,i.m.f and Europe. all this because our spineless political leaders didn’t have the guts to stand up and be strong when their country need them, instead they cow towed to Anglia Merkal and her cohorts in exchange for keeping their pensions and extravagant wages. never mind ‘burning the bondholders’ we should ‘burn’ these economic traitors as well.

But here is the thing Anita.

THEY would still get child benefits, you would possibly not.

That is class warfare envy. People who lost their jobs (through no fault of their own) have already contributed the lions share into the system. The economy collapsed and the government failed to invest in public jobs or infrastructure. Of course people are unemployed. You now want them to be sleeping on the streets?

thats the thing Tim these people have never worked a day in their lives and brag about how much they get on the social

Anita,

Stop putting words into my mouth. You never understood the meaning of unemployed. That is a very dangerous thing to say and I’ve seen people get slapped or punched in the face with those remarks. It’s easy to brag from behind a computer but in public, I think you would be different.

how am i putting words in your mouth? im telling you my neighbours have never worked a day in their lives cos thats what they told me so why would i get a punch in the face for that?

Tim, you’re constantly going on about people getting slapped and punched for having an opinion. What sort of violent milieu do you come from? I ask this in all seriousness as I have never punched or been punched in my life – much less for having an opinion.

Anita, I presume you’re just referring to your neighbours? Of course, there are unfortunately those who never worked a day in their lives and are ripping off Social Welfare in the way you described. However, it would be unfair to tar all recipients with the same brush, the majority having worked hard when they had jobs and paid their taxes. They became unemployed through no fault of their own and there’s virtually nothing out there for them now, so they’re fully entitled to support from the State; which, in the guise of the FG/Labour coalition and at the beckoning of the IMF and the EU, seems to have forgotten these workers’ contributions to the public purse.

As regards those buying cans with their Welfare money… again, in some cases it’s those who are abusing the system. But I also believe its because people who suddenly find themselves out of a job, and face bleak futures, just cannot handle the stress. A lot of suicides have been linked to people losing their jobs and their dignity, and as someone said elsewhere they should be treated with compassion and understanding.

You’re complaining that then went and bought clothes? – What, you want them to go around naked?
How do you know they don’t work? – Do you watch them 24/7 and see where they are going?
So what if they have a few beers? – Do you exactly how much they bought? What wrong with having a few beers? Just because they might or might not have a job doesn’t mean they can’t have the odd beer.

And finally – Do you not have anything better to be doing then spying on your neighbours the whole time? Do you not have a job to go to? Or is watching what your neighbours do you job?

no Eddie im definitely only talking about the ones that i know… i am completely all for those who are entitled to what they get and i definitely dont tar them all with the one brush… i agree with your comment totally…and no Damien i dont think they should go around naked but there are a lot of working people out there who cant afford to put clothes on their kids backs and thats the point im making… too much welfare going into a house and it should be means tested

There is alot of welfare that is already means tested. And if someone has a job where they can barely afford anything, then what do you want people to do? Feel sorry for them? It’s not other people’s fault, but if a couple has a job and kids, then there is help there for them through welfare to help.

I’m on welfare at the minute and i can tell you right now i can hardly afford to buy clothes. After paying rent, bills food for the week and other outgoings i’m lucky to afford to buy a pair of socks never mind anything else. So don’t for one second assume that everyone on welfare is getting all these things thrown at them, because that is a damn lie for a start.

Agreed.

The problem is, once means testing is introduced they can keep increasingly the threshold, which is why I voted NO.

I agree with orla here

It would need to be more refined than that Orla, which is where it would get messy.

For instance a household with an income of €80,000 who bought at the height of the boom may easily be paying €15,000 per year of a mortgage. Whereas a couple with no mortgage and a household income of €70,000 would be in a better position to not receive child benefit but would still qualify under your criteria.

We have to get it right, for it to be fair and equitable. That’s why I have absolutely no confidence in this government to do so.

How did you pop up that magical figure of 80k?

The average wage in this country is 36k. AVERAGE. So half the people in the country earn this or above. Two people who have bothered their backsides putting themselves through college and working hard in their career will be earning around 40k by the time they are in stable relationships and start a family. So you are talking about Mr and Mrs Average Joe there. They currently pay 52% tax each because of tax individualisation.They bought their home and have a 2k a month housing and car costs to take them to work. They now also pay 10,000 euro a year in creche fees, a boatload in medical costs, can’t even afford another child now, or to get some basic dental work done, and you want to wipe out their childrens allowance as well. People earning 80k in a family are nowhere NEAR wealthy. Far from it. They live on about 300 to 400 quid a MONTH.

Next door, mr&mrs never worked a day in their life is on their 3rd child, council house, and has a medical card. They have enough time on their hands to be politically vocal and demand every benefit in sight. 188 per week per person, and the childrens allowance increases per child. They have a lot more disposable income than your 80K couple.

The problem with means testing, is that is complex and expensive to do, and is almost never fair.

P Wurple,

Why don’t you change your lifestyle by doing without a car and using public transport? Why don’t you hire an Au-Pair for cheaper instead of paying high Creche fees? Why don’t you have no kids if you are that concerned about the cost of siring a family? Why don’t you rent instead of spending money you don’t have buying an expensive house? For you, it’s a one-way street. Everything is wrong but you.

“Why don’t you have no kids if you are that concerned about the cost of siring a family?” And that is my problem with this debate. No one, whether unemployed or working, should be told that they “shouldn’t have children due to the cost.”

I think whatever the upper limit is, you would not see massive protesting if Orla’s suggestion was applied with an appropriate upper limit on household income.

If, in the future, this limit and the sliding scale was messed with then you would see groups which represent children opposing such a move.

@Tim – public transport is not as available or reliable around the country as it is in some areas. By looking at the numbers for an Au-pair, it’s questionable as to whether you’d save much at all.

Tomy,

You prove my point – people don’t want to change their lifestyle. Just keep spending spending spending. Tax increases come as part of that. It doesn’t work just because someone has self-righteous beliefs. If you cannot afford kids, don’t have them. If you cannot afford a car, use public transport. Speaking out against the profligate spending automatically puts oneself as unpopular, not to mention much smarter people than me are advocating my proposal.

I’m actually not talking about me Tim. But it’s seriously disengenuous to suggest that people go back in time and somehow un-conceive their child, or not buy their home, or not get that job.

Taking them one at a time.
Car. Getting to work with the irish public transport system is not possible for plenty of people. Take a contractor for example. 4 different sites a week, all in remote spots.

Au-pair. Au-pairs are to help a family with light housework and learn english. Not be a fulltime carer for an infant. They are not trained, and that is not the purpose of an aupair. That is slave labour you are talking about.
Renting. I’m sure people would love to, but if you sell while in negative equity you still have to pay off the mortage. You end up worse off per month.

Getting a job and working to support yourself and your family should not be considered a mortal sin in this country, deserving of nothing but punishment. You should not be penalised for working.

TTL

means testing takes into account the amount of dependents in a household and mortgage repayments.

So in your scenario couple A would be entitled to recieve childrens allowance while couple B wouldnt.

I think most people agree that the very well off don’t need children’s allowance. However the problem with means testing, especially when applied in this country in my humble opinion is that it always, always hurts those in the middle, those who are borderline, those just north of the cut off points, those who are just managing to pay their way, those who probably can least afford it and who get no help from anyone –
the ‘walking revenue streams’.

100% in agreement with you P Wurple,
Mr Jackson seems to believe owning ones house is a sin, working and earning money is crass. Would it be better if i were to pack in my job, sell my house and car, seek a medical card, subsidized council housing, and try to glean as much as is possible from the welfare system. I may as-well because those poor suckers who choose to work and god forbid earn a combined 80K a year are to be taxed out of existence.
Your comments are insulting to those of us who look to be contributors to our society, not just spongers looking for the next handout.

It’s easy again to just go to hard working tax payers and extract money and do nothing about those on welfare scamming the system, make efficiencies in welfare first, some people on welfare are better off than those working.

Bottom line, it will just be cut by a certain % as this government are to incompetent to tackle all the issues it will create or solution it properly.

THANK YOU for writing this comment.

I was scrolling down the page, getting more and more horrified that nobody was picking up on what for me is the most obvious problem with means testing the child benefit: that “family income” doesn’t necessarily imply equal access to the funds.

It’s an awful blind spot, that will have truly sickening consequences if/when it goes ahead.

Excellent comment Sinead.

What’s really crazy is this:

step 1: government puts its hand in my pocket and extracts “taxes”
step 2: government returns some part of my tax money (minus a hefty “management” fee)
step 3: government expects my vote in return for their largesse

Child benefit is a con. They’ve a bunch of other similar schemes. Tax me less, use the tax revenue for those who are genuinely in need, and forget about these silly payments.

i completely agree Nydon i dont know why the amount increases for third child doesnt seem logical to me….good point

That’s mad, when my mum used to get it for us in the uk there was a big amount for the eldest and the small for subsequent, then when the eldest passed 16 the next eldest got the big amount and the rest the smaller and so on until the kids are all over 16

It’s not illegal Ann.
Illegal?
What law is being broken.
Can you be charged with breaking a law and if so which one?
As long as your children are not collected you don’t have to collect anything.

Tim please try to educate yourself just a little bit. Listen to others more frequently than you spout and accept that sometimes a person might know more than you on a particular subject. I accept that this would not occur that frequently because your such a clever fellow…you did finis Primary school or it’s equivalent didn’t you. On the subject of Third Level Grants it is quite easy to reduce your income as a self employed person in the period running up to the application and then Bobs your aunt or whatever.

FG penalizes low to middle income workers by offering tax breaks to the wealthy. What should be the centerpiece of discussion is why FG are giving tax breaks to the top 10% during a time when we need revenue most.

Quite a lot of people have asked that.

It is illegal NOT to collect childrens allowance, as the payment is for the welfare of the child. If you dont collect it you are breaking the law. I can only hope that those at the moment who get it and dont need it give to one of the childrens hospitals or childrens charities.

Cora I agree with you that social welfare needs reform. The current system is deeply flawed and there are definite savings to be made. Child benefit is however one of the areas that should not be cut.
It is however likely to be cut because of it’s simplicity- the fact that it is applied equally means that it would be realtively easy to cut in practice.
Also it is easy to drum up rhetoric along class lines in favour of cutting it, whereas doing a proper assessment and reform of other areas of the system is faaaaar too difficult- politically and intellectually- no matter how warranted it may be.

Means testing the child benefit is about Taking it from those who dont need it, not from those who do. Our country is in a serious mess, we need to stop throwing money at people who dont have a need for it, but, an entitlement.

Rabble rabble rabble, Bondholder, rabble. Please post something constructive… Won’t somebody please think of the children!

Sadly, FG believes in corporate socialism.

So millionaires need help raising their kids. Pull the other 1.

Yep, I also believe that some other eejit should fund my lifestyle.

As for the claim that these kids will be funding my pension etc. Laughable. I’m sure most of them will be on the dole, having been trained by their parents.

@censored
The only thing laughable is your trolling. But genuinely, thanks for funding my lifestyle all the same. Good man.

Case proven, good luck with training the next generation.

Go away back under your bridge there now little troll, theres a good fella. *pat pat*

Sorry about that it seems the post I was replying to got deleted so my response was posting here… red thumb away!

*Posted even

I think we can easily guess for where/whom this was intended :-)

You have higher inflation and less purchasing power. Also, the British Pound is overvalued against the Euro. That’s why nobody is buying up there now. There is nothing lucky about being unemployed here and people are entitled to benefits having paid into the system.

and the price of food is a fraction of the cost down here. I know from travelling to the Uk. One point. Tesco sell everything medication wise and its dirt cheap. Here tesco is not allowed sell medication only paracetamol. Ye also have extremely cheap high street shops like ASDA. None of that here. You cannot compare like for like. Its not as simple as that. Costs here are way higher.

Who are the unfortunate few working to pay for this colossal welfare bill, its not fair on them paying tax for those so well off on the dole. What school leaver would want to work knowing their so well off on the dole. The quicker we get a united Ireland the better, we want a piece of the pie too.

If people are only waking up to that now, we have to ask ourselves why this unfair system has been allowed to exist for so long. Why are we giving the rich tax breaks and voting for governments that facilitate this. Just a reflection.

Tim: it’s because we’re punch drunk from all those slaps in the face.

I’m opposed to it and trust me, I’m not rich. I’m really uncomfortable with the idea that the government subsidises some people to have children and not others. Either you view the child benefit as being a pure payment against child poverty (in which case, you probably should limit what it can be spent on) or you see it as the government making it less expensive for people to have children. I see it as the latter and of course people are welcome to disagree with me, but that doesn’t mean all people who oppose it are rich dilettantes.

If it’s implemented perfectly. Which seems unlikely.

Are you saying that the unemployed should be stopped from having children?

Because Children are as much citizens as you are. Or are children only for the rich?

If you can’t afford to fund yourself 100% when you retire, then don’t get old and don’t expect someone else’s kids to pay for your pension…
People could afford kids if they weren’t screwed over by tax and had to pay over 1000 every month on creches etc…

Maybe have one child, and yes if you can’t afford a child why have one. Maybe concentrate on yourself and your own employment before you try to bring a child into the world and teach them about how to conduct their life. Have kids all you want being unemployed but surely I’m not the only one who thinks that children fed and clothed by the state because their parents have no interest in upskilling or finding gainful employment is inherently a bad thing?

The real question of course, Ruaidhri, no matter how sincere your motivations, is how do you stop them? Child licenses? Fines? Forced contraception? Forced abortions? Force them to give up their children?

It’s all very well saying that responsible people won’t have kids they can’t afford, but irresponsible people will act irresponsibly and you’d have to deal with that irresponsibility.

Ruaidhri.
A friend of mine is unmarried, has no kids and is of the simplistic view if you want kids, great, pay for them yourself.
He hasn’t any and he doesn’t want to pay for anybody else’s kids.
This sounds like a somewhat reasonable argument to some until you say ‘well who will look after you in your old age?
‘I gave a pension fund, I can afford to pay for my welfare’.
Great. You have a pot of money.
But the money can’t mind you.
People look after you.
The children of today will be the carer’s of tomorrow. So we need children for the world to function and people who have kids, bring them up as good citizens to make a positive contribution to society should be valued.
If we all decide to not have kids then the whole system would grind to a halt very quickly.

@Sean: Not necessarily as you say pot of money, I never said I dont want children, I said whilst I can’t afford them.

@Damocles: Sterilization for drug addicts; Homeless & long term unemployed lol

@Ruaidhrí
Your utopian vision of Ireland being a place full of childless, self absorbed, nominally middleclass, servile wagemonkeys sounds like a lovely place altogether. Please do send me a postcard when you get there.

@ Ruaidhrí Maxwell, shame on you for such callous remarks re sterilization for long term unemployed, drug addicts etc. Should we salute you now or wait till you get your swastika ?

Conor, my thoughts exactly…

I think it was pretty obvious that Ruaidhri was joking when he suggested “Sterilization for drug addicts; Homeless & long term unemployed”, the “lol” was a big clue.

The problem is that while he is joking there are people who will think “Wow! That’s a marvellous idea.”

On the plus side, while such tools will exist they will never get into a position of power to allow them to do so.

Raising taxes on the wealthy creates the political will for reforming the workforce for highly qualified professionals to come here. Without that political will, labor market reform doesn’t happen. If we taxed all earnings over €80k, it would close this year’s deficit. The Fine Gael and Fianna Fail Tax Cuts for the Rich created the recession. By increasing taxes on the rich, we can restore proper funding to teachers and for infrastructure to meet the economic demand and create more jobs.

@Tim Jackson, Could you provide proof that “Fine Gael gave tax breaks to wealthy businessmen to bypass immigration”. I’d be quite interested to see this. And “Google is your friend” does not qualify as a vaild answer.

Also I’d dispute that the basic salary in Ireland is considered €40k. I though €35k was considered the industrial average in Ireland, never mind basic salary. And even at that, €35k is high because the cost of living in Ireland is through the roof compared to the rest of Europe.

08/02/2012

”Top executives of some foreign-owned multinationals could earn up to €650,000 tax free”

”Finance Minister Michael Noonan has been fiercely criticised for a 30% tax break for the highest earners included in the Finance Bill”

”The Special Assignee Relief Programme will cut tax bills by 30% on money earned between €75,000 and €500,000 for employees moved to Ireland to work for at least one year.”

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/reforms-offer-top-bosses-tax-breaks-539091.html

Tim are you suggesting the State should increase the tax rate to generate funds that could be used it invest in Public Transport? Tim you need treatment.

”And even at that, €35k is high because the cost of living in Ireland is through the roof compared to the rest of Europe”

lol. That doesn’t justify benchmarking it based on your perception of the cost of living. Irrelevant. It is bench-marked to inflation and to the Eurozone average.

School uniforms should be abolished – they are an extra cost, they are unnecessary.

Because 40k a year isn’t a big salary if you have to pay 1000 a month on a creche. It would be different if Ireland was like Sweden where the max creche fee per month is 140 per child, but such a scheme would of course cost even more than Child allowance. People like that would be better off on the dole. At the rate it’s going, you’ll have to be rich to be able to afford to have a job and kids!!!

You obviously don’t have children or a mortgage??? At least 1000 euro per month for full time childcare for one child….huge mortgage..no entitlement to medical card etc. on 40,000 per year you are in the top tax rate of 41%!!!
A family on a low wage of 17000 is entitled to family income supplement, back to school allowance, medical card, and a subsidised place in a community crèche, and most likely a council house where just 15% of total income is paid in rent, plus falling outside tax limit.
Plus that crap about college….some of us worked and went to college part time to get a education!!!