Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

It would only take 4 weeks for the country to turn itself around!

Options
1235»

Comments

  • Options
    #122
    97i9y3941
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,616 ✭✭✭97i9y3941


    daithicarr wrote: »
    As for child benefit that should not be dropped, but perhaps be made means tested, a household which has lost one or both wages and has children will be in extremely dire circumstances if they face large reductions in both child benefit and welfare.

    wasteing your time,no offence,but the welfare/grant system as it is,only accesses your income,so if your self employed and own acres of land and have a big house,you can fiddle with the books you can undeclare your income and get it for your family...


  • Options
    #123
    cyclopath2001
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,359 ✭✭✭cyclopath2001


    daithicarr wrote: »
    As for child benefit that should not be dropped, but perhaps be made means tested
    Don't you know why it was decided not to means test the child benefit?


  • Options
    #124
    Festus
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,087 ✭✭✭Festus


    daithicarr wrote: »
    why not increase tax so wages are reduced by 10 % across all levels, minimum wage payers etc, and a 10% decrease in social welfare, that way everyone shares the burden and its not too much for any one section to carry.
    a 25 % decrease in social welfare seems a lot, considering most of those people have already taken a huge hit in their earnings. it would probably provide more money for the state as well that just dropping social welfare.

    As for child benefit that should not be dropped, but perhaps be made means tested, a household which has lost one or both wages and has children will be in extremely dire circumstances if they face large reductions in both child benefit and welfare.

    You're forgetting a couple of things here. Most workers in the private sector have either forgone salary increases for at least the last year, if not two and many have taken pay cuts up to 25%. No need to mention what has happened private pension pots in the hands of hedge fund managers.

    During the same period the Public sector have had salary increments.

    It is time to take the axe and scythe to the public sector. Benchmark them back to realistic salary levels and treat their golden balls pensions as taxable under benefit in kind.
    Put them on performance review as well and no pay rises unless they actually do some real productive value added work.

    As for sharing the burden - anyone earning a six fugure salary should be paying 40% up to 150K, 60% up to 300K and 80% over 300K.


  • Options
    #125
    dvpower
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,183 ✭✭✭dvpower


    cyclopath2001 wrote: »
    Don't you know why it was decided not to means test the child benefit?

    I didn't realise a decision had been announced on this. Got a link?


  • Options
    #126
    cyclopath2001
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,359 ✭✭✭cyclopath2001


    dvpower wrote: »
    I didn't realise a decision had been announced on this. Got a link?
    Ok, let me rephrase that to: 'it has not been decided to means test child benefit.'


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #127
    cyclopath2001
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,359 ✭✭✭cyclopath2001


    Festus wrote: »
    As for sharing the burden - anyone earning a six fugure salary should be paying 40% up to 150K, 60% up to 300K and 80% over 300K.
    In the PS, for anyone on an average salary, the current marginal tax rate including levies is already in excess of 60%.


Advertisement