Yep , this should not be universal payment , why would anyone on say 100k plus require state subsidies . Still belive it should only come after the high earners in the civil and public service are brought into line with Euro colleagues , this should of course include TD and politicians in general. I am talking about all those guys in County and city council and in the civil service earning 30- 50 % more than their Euro conuterparts . but the government are shameless cowards and the union are in goverment dressed as labour.

Fintan and Maura ate absolutely right. Why in earth are a so called anti poverty lobby complaining about a badly needed change to focus child benefit payments on those who actually need them.

To give you an idea, one of my sisters friends lives off her dad who has a next worth of about 400 million. As a patent, she is entitled to children’s allowance but is to embarrassed to claim it. There are lots of greedy little people who feel no such shame. How can any sane person possibly justify such a system when many live on very little? Why are we even debating this? 60k is a very reasonable cut off after which surely you can fund your own children.

Original idea. I can see the merits. But, what about the children not yet at school, pay the benefit up to five?

Crèche, Montessori. Use it all the way up to when the limit for CB expires. But hey, I think this makes sense, but sense doesn’t usually apply when it comes to Government policy…

@ dublinlad: It’s too easy to say sense doesn’t apply. Public policy decision making always has to take a lot of variables into consideration.

What would you suggest was done for school holidays?

Fine Gael are a rich boys party with policies consistently favoring the top 10% wealthy. Hardline Conservatives are very dangerous,aka Irish Taliban.

Well said.

Too many repetitions of same comment re bondholders. Regular readers know what you think on that. What do u think about the universality of child benefit? Can u propose a fairer approach than the one we have now? I think it should be treated the same way pensions are treated when it comes to income tax. If you are due to pay income tax, then child benefit should be treated as benefit in kind.

Spot on Tim.

Really awful comment from Tim.

Thanks, journal for removing tim’scomment that I referred to

The choice is to means test the Allowance or to reduce it if savings are required. The former would be a fairer way to reduce overall spend. Perhaps in addition to this the Department could look at other countries who offer disincentives to single parents by substantially reducing the payment for additional children. This Allowance should never be seen as income replacement.

Public policies in this country consistently favour the sponger.

“Tax the rich who pay no taxes compared to the other OECD countries.”

According to the OECD Tax database (www.oecd.org/ctp/taxdatabase) looking at “Top marginal combined personal income tax rates on gross wage for a single individual”, and the All-in rate (Personal income tax & employee social security contributions) Ireland is in the top 10 on 34 OECD countries with a rate of 52%.

The figures do not support your claims.

Damocles, no the jobs that once paid union wages 18-25 hour have been replaced by jobs at 8-12 hour, with no retirement of very limited health care that workers pay about 20%. The wealth gap in Increased in Ireland since the 1980’s when taxes on the rich were higher.

Thanks Damocles. I’m sick of ‘the rich pay no tax’ line. I’m not rich but I pay a hell of a lot of tax!

@ Damocles

In a survey of 8 of the largest OECD nations in 2006, Ireland was the second wealthiest country – second only to Japan. This wealth of the top 10% diminished only slightly since the financial crisis. Ireland’s wealth distribution among worst in OECD:

”A new study has reportedly found that the level of wealth distribution in Ireland is among the lowest in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)… ” …15.8%, compared to 31.3% in Sweden…” While the rich-poor gap has reached a high in 2012.

”In particular, net worth is not perfectly correlated across people within each country. Many of the people classified as income poor do have some assets, although both the prevalence of holding and the amounts are clearly lower than among the general population”

http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/2/40/40774821.pdf

Fintan people fling out claims and pretend to cite major bodies and many people will just take them as read if they are stated unequivocally.

In fact most major bodies make their figures easily available such people are easily fact checked.

If reducing the deficit were an important goal, surely it is more humane to do so through moderate tax increases on incomes of those who have large incomes than to reduce the safety net, already thoroughly riddled, for those in poverty or who would fall into poverty with job loss or high medical costs. Maybe a low, progressive total assets tax for corporations and individuals would be even better. Currently, it is far more important that we stimulate the economy through expansionary fiscal policy so as to increase employment, production, and incomes, particularly at lower income levels; this will happen with spending increases by the government for direct hire and production or transfers to counties and individuals, so that they can spend more. Worrying about deficit reduction in our current situation is a total distraction from the real problem.
No one is talking about confiscatory, incentive-eliminating tax rates. After the 1980’s tax increases on high incomes and tax credit increases for low-income filers, we continued what became the longest economic expansion ever documented in this country, and we balanced the budget, and poverty rates decreased, and median real incomes rose, and the wealthy and the poor got wealthier. If that be socialism, bring it on.

Strange Tim, the paper you cite refers to datasets for Canada, Germany, Italy, Sweden and the US.

Ireland is not mentioned in that paper at all. Not once.

Damocles,

The 2006 source is here: http://www.breakingnews.ie/archives/2006/1012/ireland/cwidaugbeyau/

Your source is a 6 year old press release with no link to the actual paper? That’s very amusing Tim.

While you’re here and responding may I draw your attention to a question you were asked yesterday which you seem to have missed?

You’ve been laying out terms for a new tax regime which you seem to think will save Ireland. Under such a regime how much additional tax would you be liable for?

@Tim I think the Gini co-efficient is the most recognised measure of income equality. In terms of this figure, Ireland is a mid-ranking country alongside the likes of German, Canada and France:

http://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?QueryId=26067&Lang=en

To actually redistribute wealth, would involve something like asset tax which is a pretty dangerous road to go down during these uncertain time. For example, is agricultural land and plant an asset?

Domocles:

Whatever gave you the idea that progressive taxation is a Marxist idea? Progressive taxation is the concept that taxes should be based on the ability to pay them. It is an idea that is as old as capitalism itself–after all, it was extolled in Adam Smith’s “The Wealth of Nations.” Marxists don’t need progressive taxation since their goal is to equalize everyone’s income. These concepts are not the same thing at all.

Fintan,

Don’t think redistribution of wealth. Think fairness in the return we all enjoy from our common investment in creating and maintaining the Irish money-making machine. The rich get a larger share of the return. Are they smarter by that much? Work longer hours? Assume greater personal or financial risk? No. A progressive tax system allows them the fun and glitz of working where they do while distributing the returns, built on the great nation that we share.

Rab,

When did I mention Marxism?

As usual, Damocles, your commentary displays no relevance; no identifiable context and thus no sense.

So none then.

You postulate a tax regime that would mean that other people will pay more tax so that you don’t have to.

Unbelievable how some people can justify benefits for the wealthy. This is indeed a fascinating study in human behavior, and I agree it needs to be made more widely known.

Tim you keep rolling out this line of tax the rich. And we know whom you consider “The Rich”. Any household with an income of €80 k plus. You forever pipe on about taxing this middle income bracket into oblivion. And where do you propose spending this vast untapped wealth. Well let me see, the dole. Increased social welfare payments. It’s frankly ridiculous, oh and sure while your at it go after the corporations. Are you utterly out if touch with reality. As much as we like to think they are here because of infrastructure and an educated workforce( worthy attributes). The biggest draw is the low corporation tax. Profit is the name of the game and we offer advantages in that area.
Remove that and they leave. It’s already been seen, I might bring your attention to ulster bank moving its IT service to India.

Not without nationwide strikes and shutdowns. This will paralyze the country.

Glad to see you advocate tax breaks for the wealthy who don’t need them.

yes even the poor deserve a holiday. yeah twit

@ Dimebag

I am assuming you are commenting on my post? More often than not “the few days never happened”!! The few days were in a cheap hotel or B&B in Ireland midweek, so by the end of the Summer my two children could say that they were on a holiday when many of their peers rabbited on about their villa’s! or their ponys!

Not that I want sympathy from you or anyone else, but I have not taken a holiday in over 5 years! Just like many others in my situation.