Child payments -cuts

K-9

MoominPapa wrote: »

Why not introduce tax relief on creche fees? It would target relief at those who need it and help to keep these businesses viable and workers in this sector in employment.

That was the original plan until the SAHM Lobby got all cranky and the Govt. bottled it.

Demonique

mamacita wrote: »

You wouldn't ask smokers to supplement the cost of their inevitable healthcare.

Smokers are already paying for their healthcare, in the form of the taxation imposed on tobacco products

Heineken Helen

sunnyside wrote: »

Haven't heard many complaints about this yet. I agree with means testing childrens allowance, in my opinion if people choose to have children they should pay for them themselves.

Anyone else?

so if you choose to have a lifesaving operation you should pay for it yourself? Or if you choose to be unemployed you should pay for it yourself?

Don't be ridiculous... for the record I've no kids and don't want any... but there's no denying they add SOMETHING to this world (not least a future) and they're expensive little feckers.

Heineken Helen

foxy06 wrote: »

With regard to the early childcare supplement I was broke a few years ago and out of work and was able to send my son to a subsidised preschool for 15 Euro a week. It was government funded and my child was even fed while in the preschool.
I will now have to pay 80 euro a week and even though I am working now that is an awful jump. Instead of the early childcare supplement there should be subsidised preschools but not just for single mothers and unemployed people. People on lower incomes should be means tested for a preschool. I would be delighted to pay 40 or 50 euro a week but 80 is crazy and that seems to be the going rate in private childcare facilities.

Not trying to be smart (honestly) but why should unemployed get subsidised preschools? If you're not working, you can preschool your child yourself surely? I'm sorry... if it's for 'mental break' reasons I can see that. BUT I think parents spend little enough time with their kids as it is (not referring to you obviously cos I know nothing about you... but in general). Parents should be encouraged to stay at home or at least work part time while the kids are young... just in my opinion of course:o

carlybabe1

foxy06 wrote: »

With regard to the early childcare supplement I was broke a few years ago and out of work and was able to send my son to a subsidised preschool for 15 Euro a week. It was government funded and my child was even fed while in the preschool.
I will now have to pay 80 euro a week and even though I am working now that is an awful jump. Instead of the early childcare supplement there should be subsidised preschools but not just for single mothers and unemployed people. People on lower incomes should be means tested for a preschool. I would be delighted to pay 40 or 50 euro a week but 80 is crazy and that seems to be the going rate in private childcare facilities.

80 euros?are ye havin a laugh??? If I could have gotten a place for my kids at that rate I could have kept up college. I was payin over 1000 euro a month for 2 kids, one of whom was in school

Darkbloom

sunnyside wrote: »

Haven't heard many complaints about this yet. I agree with means testing childrens allowance, in my opinion if people choose to have children they should pay for them themselves.

Anyone else?

You think every child out there was planned? You're having a laugh.

Abortion's illegal, and contraception can fail. These things happen to normal people all the time.

gcgirl

carlybabe1 wrote: »

80 euros?are ye havin a laugh??? If I could have gotten a place for my kids at that rate I could have kept up college. I was payin over 1000 euro a month for 2 kids, one of whom was in school

It really depends on the area The nearer to Dublin the worse! In Greystones my Friend is paying 450 amonth for 5 morning every 4 weeks! If i sent my DD 5 mornings it would cost me 320 per every 4 weeks in Wicklow Town!

gcgirl

Darkbloom wrote: »

You think every child out there was planned? You're having a laugh.

Abortion's illegal, and contraception can fail. These things happen to normal people all the time.

Your also Forgetting the Catholic Guilt part !!lol

Darkbloom

gcgirl wrote: »

Your also Forgetting the Catholic Guilt part !!lol

Incidentally, my boyfriend laughed pretty long and hard at your assertation that raising children in England is "free".

Max Power1

i cant see any logical reason that people would be opposed to child benefit being means tested. this is how it should have been since its inception (pun intended). It is ridiculous that everyone regardless of income recives the same benefit amount.

tinner777

Darkbloom wrote: »

Incidentally, my boyfriend laughed pretty long and hard at your assertation that raising children in England is "free".

not free but not having to pay €50 for every trip to the dr is a great start

Darkbloom

tinner777 wrote: »

not free but not having to pay €50 for every trip to the dr is a great start

True, but the cost of childcare more than makes up for it.

gcgirl

Darkbloom wrote: »

Incidentally, my boyfriend laughed pretty long and hard at your assertation that raising children in England is "free".

I am going off what a parent where my son goes to playschool and her experience was compaired to over here, You do got to hand it to the English !!

Darkbloom

gcgirl wrote: »

I am going off what a parent where my son goes to playschool and her experience was compaired to over here, You do got to hand it to the English !!

Wow, what a great basis to form a generalisation on!

Clearly these facts are false.(link)

Welease

MonicaBing wrote: »

A former employer of mine has a four yr old and a 2 yr old and both of their Child Benefit payments are paid into a bank account that mum & dad have NEVER touched, that i find fricking astonishing. They obviously are in no need of it whereas, i know people who juggle bills/put off buying kids shoes etc on the last week of the month as they know the Child Benefit's coming through the following week.

Why is it so astonishing?

We do that for our kids.. sad to be losing the college saving plan we had for them (or if they didnt go to college then a decent amount of cash to get them started in life), but hey..

I do think it should be means tested, but lets not go overboard on the "people who don't need it".. The people who "don't need it" are more likely to have gotten off there arses, than a lot of the people in this country, they are more like to have taken education seriously and worked hard to earn that money, and a result pay a lot more tax than those who "need" it. Given the vast majority of middle incomes should'nt need it and the majority of tax would come from middle incomes, it's their money that is funding this.. hardly astonishing that they should be able to keep some of what they worked hard to earn..

gcgirl

Darkbloom wrote: »

Wow, what a great basis to form a generalisation on!

Clearly these facts are false.(link)

She lived there for the best part of her life in London and over here your talking 300/400 before they even set foot in the classroom in September then there is Art/craft materals money has to be in the first week of september then you have to hand up a small amount of money each week!!

Quartet

mamacita wrote: »

Child benefit was originally introduced to guarantee some money in the purses of women who would ultimately guarantee the welfare of their children. For many, it is the only money they can be sure of getting. Most people I know use it to pay for child related stuff and nothing else. Having a negative attitude to giving this payment to families isn't very fair. You wouldn't ask smokers to supplement the cost of their inevitable healthcare.

I was raised by an abusive mother who never once spent a penny of childrens allowance (Benefit) on any of her children...what guarantee is there that parents dont use this payment for drinking or otherwise spending it on themselves. I believe child payment should be in the form of redeamable vouchers not cash....

KittyeeTrix

gcgirl wrote: »

She lived there for the best part of her life in London and over here your talking 300/400 before they even set foot in the classroom in September then there is Art/craft materals money has to be in the first week of september then you have to hand up a small amount of money each week!!

Tell me about it

I had 4 kids in primary school at one time together and each september I had to hand in 40 euro per child for arts and crafts.....160 euro for bloody painting...
Christ almighty, they should have a wing of the National Art Gallery dedicated to their work by now:D

esharknz

Max Power1 wrote: »

i cant see any logical reason that people would be opposed to child benefit being means tested. this is how it should have been since its inception (pun intended). It is ridiculous that everyone regardless of income recives the same benefit amount.

All I hope is that the limit doesn't get set too low in that deserving families don't miss out on much needed payments.

My parents (I'm not from Ireland) were in receipt of a universal child benefit for 5 children, and ended up being cut by the government as apparently my parents were "too rich" to receive it (laughable).

All I can say is that it wasn't exactly easy financially for my family (eg. often enough we'd be served scones for dinner as there just wasn't any money left in the kitty, few pieces of clothing etc). I was often the target of other children's cruel jokes as well as my parents simply couldn't afford what theirs could.

TheQueen

fluffyorganic1 wrote: »

Tell me about it

I had 4 kids in primary school at one time together and each september I had to hand in 40 euro per child for arts and crafts.....160 euro for bloody painting...
Christ almighty, they should have a wing of the National Art Gallery dedicated to their work by now:D

:):)

Idbatterim

Child benefit and all allowances associated it should be abolished. Cut the rate of PAYE and income levy, that way those parent who works and contribute to society are rewarded (and would compensate for loss of child allowance) and it would stop the scum who make a career out of popping out child after child who will be nothing but a drain on this country for the rest ofd their life! The sense of entitlement here is ridiculous, you shouldnt be entitled to anything without first putting something into the system!

KittyeeTrix

Idbatterim wrote: »

Child benefit and all allowances associated it should be abolished. Cut the rate of PAYE and income levy, that way those parent who works and contribute to society are rewarded (and would compensate for loss of child allowance) and it would stop the scum who make a career out of popping out child after child who will be nothing but a drain on this country for the rest ofd their life! The sense of entitlement here is ridiculous, you shouldnt be entitled to anything without first putting something into the system!

Honestly, is there any need to use words to such as "scum" to describe people.
The child benefit has been in operation for many years and is in some cases the only way some families are kept off the breadline.
I do agree with having it means tested but please for crying out loud do not tar all people with the same brush.
i have said time and time again on these threads that unfortunately at the moment most people do not have the choice whether they are unemployed at the moment

Idbatterim

but by means testing, they mean abolishing it for anyone that does actaully contribute to society and have a decent income! the only ones who arent going to have any means are the ones who already benefit most and are just going to continue creaming off the system!

ntlbell

Idbatterim wrote: »

but by means testing, they mean abolishing it for anyone that does actaully contribute to society and have a decent income! the only ones who arent going to have any means are the ones who already benefit most and are just going to continue creaming off the system!

I'm confused.

So if you CAN afford it and don't need it you get it.

If you cannot afford tough sh|t see the SVDP?

or?

Idbatterim

if you cant afford a child withouth the assistance of child benefit dont have one! what kind of life can they expect to have anyway if child benefit is the difference between you being able to feed them or not?

Ludo

Idbatterim wrote: »

it would stop the scum who make a career out of popping out child after child who will be nothing but a drain on this country for the rest ofd their life!

So abolish it just because some people abuse it...right!

Scrap the dole because some people abuse that also.
Why not scrap the government because some people in it are corrupt....hang on that is actually a good idea!

What percentage of people who receive child benefits are scum by the way in your opinion?

Show me some figures and convince me that a large percentage (and by large I mean more that 10% which is actually a small percentage) of people make a career out of "popping out child after child".

Back up your rediculous post with facts and figures and I will respect your viewpoint...otherwise you are just spouting rubbish.

ntlbell

Idbatterim wrote: »

if you cant afford a child withouth the assistance of child benefit dont have one! what kind of life can they expect to have anyway if child benefit is the difference between you being able to feed them or not?

I'm very much for people not having kids if they can't afford to.

but what if you could afford to now you can't? due to job losses redundancies etc?

what do those people do?

You're not making a lot of sense.

Ludo

Idbatterim wrote: »

if you cant afford a child withouth the assistance of child benefit dont have one! what kind of life can they expect to have anyway if child benefit is the difference between you being able to feed them or not?

No-one could ever afford to have a child then other than the uber rich in that case. Situations change. You may be well have been able to afford a couple of kids two years ago but what if you both lose your jobs after having them?
Should put them back in or something?

Accidents also happen by the way.

Idbatterim

i believe you should get back out what you put it! i am well aware that the scammers are in the minority! what infuriates me is all the privilidges these minority enjoy! free health care, free education, child support, free housing, dole, and god knows whatever else they are entitled too! every one should pull their own weight! i just have one question. is anyone here denying that the system here is very cushy and open for abuse?

KittyeeTrix

Idbatterim wrote: »

but by means testing, they mean abolishing it for anyone that does actaully contribute to society and have a decent income! the only ones who arent going to have any means are the ones who already benefit most and are just going to continue creaming off the system!

Idbatterim wrote: »

i believe you should get back out what you put it! i am well aware that the scammers are in the minority! what infuriates me is all the privilidges these minority enjoy! free health care, free education, child support, free housing, dole, and god knows whatever else they are entitled too! every one should pull their own weight! i just have one question. is anyone here denying that the system here is very cushy and open for abuse?

Not denying this at all but some people find themselves having to rely on it now that their jobs have been lost!!!!!!!!!!!!