Will it take the pensioners of Ireland to stop the IMF in their tracks?

Ghandee

Taken from this mornings independent.


Some of the most vulnerable in our society, ie the Pensioners, look set to be the next victims on the IMF's hit list.

At least the pensioners of this land had the balls to make a stand the last time FF tried to take away their medical cards!

Lets hope they stick together once more, and make these a-holes in Europe do a u-turn on this one also.


http://www.independent.ie/national-news/pensions-free-travel-and-medical-cards-on-imf-hitlist-3038459.html

im invisible

Mr Sherlock wont like that...

Ghandee

im invisible wrote: »

Mr Sherlock wont like that

He'll be fine.

MickySticks

- Payments to the elderly have risen by 20pc since the economy collapsed in 2007.

Says it all really.

Pensioners do nothing all day so they can go protesting all they want, students the same. Ordinary working people have jobs that pay for these "vulnerable" people so therefore can't be taking time out to go protesting.

lugha

Ghandee wrote: »

Some of the most vulnerable in our society, ie the Pensioners, look set to be the next victims on the IMF's hit list.

At least the pensioners of this land had the balls to make a stand the last time FF tried to take away their medical cards!

Lets hope they stick together once more, and make these a-holes in Europe do a u-turn on this one also.

Zero sum game. The pensioners victory was at the expense of some other (unknown) group who had to suffer additional, extra cuts instead. And possibly (probably!) were harder pressed than the pensioners.

HalloweenJack

Cuts have to come somewhere. At least the IMF have the balls to stand up to the 'untouchables' of Irish society.

The fact is, we're spending too much money and the loans we got are on condition that we make some cuts. Everyone's going to bitch about the cuts when it affects them but those cuts still have to be made. If it's not the pensioners, it'll be someone else.

Simply put, we can't keep going on with the way we are now. Cuts have to be made somewhere and it's going to hurt someone.

daltonmd

The "vulnerable" are not the target at all - more sensationalist journalism designed to scare people. It clearly states in the article that "more means testing to target those who need help".

flutered

actually there is a lot of truth in that, recently i believe that i have seen an oap getting a free trip to dublin on the train, the pensioner is a millionaire to booth, has he oap + a private one as well, the days when some pensions are not means tested are long gone, when a guy who has had a small buisness and goes bust cannot get state help but some one who has enough stamps up are not means tested does not make sense.

twinQuins

MickySticks wrote: »

Pensioners do nothing all they so they can go protesting all they want, students the same.

Yeah, it's not like you're defined as being a student because you're studying or anything... No, they just spend their days reclining on leather couches with velvet trims, fondling moonbeams and exchanging witticisms over expensive wine paid for by taxpayers.

It amazes me how people can take even the most tangential of points to get a dig in at some group they don't like.
I sometimes wonder if it's anti-intellectualism or jealousy of others bettering themselves that makes people criticise students so ardently.

the_syco

TD's won't be full time students again, so student loans/fees/college funds/etc can be cut.

TD's may be unemployed, but most likely won't be drawing the dole so that can be cut.

TD's for the most part won't be having any children, so that can be cut.

TD's will become old, and have a good chance of being a pensioner before they die, so this they do not want to cut. Everyone who works will become a pensioner, and most people know a pensioner, so IMO this is why no-one wants to cut the pensioners allowances.

Chuck Stone

There should be no automatic entitlement to 'free'* stuff because of seniority of age.

Simple as that.

*It's not free. The cost is displaced to other people who are probably struggling with mortgages and young children.

Chuck Stone

the_syco wrote: »

so IMO this is why no-one wants to cut the pensioners allowances.

It's because older people tend to vote, have time on their hands, and read newspapers.

TD's hate to lose a vote.

Ghandee

flutered wrote: »

actually there is a lot of truth in that, recently i believe that i have seen an oap getting a free trip to dublin on the train, the pensioner is a millionaire to booth, has he oap + a private one as well, the days when some pensions are not means tested are long gone, when a guy who has had a small buisness and goes bust cannot get state help but some one who has enough stamps up are not means tested does not make sense.

Jeez, you seem to know quite a lot about this particular OAP. :cool:

Skid

Ghandee wrote: »

Some of the most vulnerable in our society, ie the Pensioners, look set to be the next victims on the IMF's hit list.

That expression gets thrown around very loosely.

Not every pensioner is struggling. Many of them have very good pensions, and sold property at the height of the boom.

Why should every pensioner get their bag of goodies regardless of their circumstances?

They should be means tested like everyone else, and benefits only given to those who need them.

TwoShedsJackson

the_syco wrote: »

TD's won't be full time students again, so student loans/fees/college funds/etc can be cut.

TD's may be unemployed, but most likely won't be drawing the dole so that can be cut.

TD's for the most part won't be having any children, so that can be cut.

TD's will become old, and have a good chance of being a pensioner before they die, so this they do not want to cut. Everyone who works will become a pensioner, and most people know a pensioner, so IMO this is why no-one wants to cut the pensioners allowances.

They won't cut pensions until the very end, because the old vote. That's why they're happy to cut stuff that affects lower and middle class people first, because they are relatively much less likely to vote.

Also, what ex-TD is going to have to survive on a state pension when they retire? One like Cowen say?

Oh no wait he's on 150,00 a year until he dies, and is 53 now. Or Dermot Ahern say - no way these guys are going to be relying on a state pension.

Ghandee

Skid wrote: »

That expression gets thrown around very loosely.

Not every pensioner is struggling. Many of them have very good pensions, and sold property at the height of the boom.

Why should every pensioner get their bag of goodies regardless of their circumstances?

They should be means tested like everyone else, and benefits only given to those who need them.

Tbf, the word SOME, does appear in the sentence.

number10a

Most vulnerable?!?!? Me hole. This is why it needs to be means-tested. There are people who do not need it.

My aunt's parents, between their pensions, fuel allowance etc. haul in just under €500 per week. They own their house and they go absolutely nowhere. Their utility bills are almost entirely covered by the SW allowances, so nothing to spend there. Even the mother says it's ridiculous the amount of money that the government is giving them. They're small farmers and are getting more now than they ever got in their lives. Your pension is supposed to be smaller like! She said even €200 per week would be loads for the two of them to live quite well on. But it's all or nothing. One cannot apply for a reduction, so she just draws and draws and saves and saves. Means-tested pensions have to come in, even if the IMF were not here.

tigger123

twinQuins wrote: »

Yeah, it's not like you're defined as being a student because you're studying or anything... No, they just spend their days reclining on leather couches with velvet trims, fondling moonbeams and exchanging witticisms over expensive wine paid for by taxpayers.

It amazes me how people can take even the most tangential of points to get a dig in at some group they don't like.
I sometimes wonder if it's anti-intellectualism or jealousy of others bettering themselves that makes people criticise students so ardently.

Ah, I remember my moonbeam fondling days with such great affection, but alas, those days are over

Kensington

How do you means test it though?
Does the couple who lived a life of drinking, smoking, partying and foreign holidays get pitied because they've nothing to their name and are landed with all the benefits, while the couple who lived within their means, didn't smoke, didn't drink large amounts and took it easy to put some money aside for their later years get told to kindly piddle off as they've plenty to look after themselves?

You coud set a very dangerous precedent if you're not careful...

daltonmd

Kensington wrote: »

How do you means test it though?
Does the couple who lived a life of drinking, smoking, partying and foreign holidays get pitied because they've nothing to their name and are landed with all the benefits, while the couple who lived within their means, didn't smoke, didn't drink large amounts and took it easy to put some money aside for their later years get told to kindly piddle off as they've plenty to look after themselves?

You coud set a very dangerous precedent if you're not careful...

In a nutshell yes. If you have plenty to look after yourself and have a nice pension to live out your days comfortably, then you are by far better off then the person on 230 euro per week.

I have huge respect for pensioners, particularly those who worked during the 80s paying horrendous taxes on top of huge mortgage interest rates, I feel that they have a genuine axe to grind if they think that incoming policies will impair on their standards of living.

Yes many made money by selling and downsizing during the boom, that was by accident rather than design, the timing was in their favour - it still doesn't take away from the fact that they paid for their homes, they were frugal and sensible because they had to be - they didn't have cheap credit, they had to have a proven history of savings and a history of responsible money management.

We will all be pensioners at some stage and it's in our interests to insure that the most needy are looked after - we could be them.

Edit to add - We don't have the money to have such a generous system, it#s not about picking on a certain set or class of people, it's about using the money that we have in a more direct way.

Nonoperational

MickySticks wrote: »

Says it all really.

Pensioners do nothing all day so they can go protesting all they want, students the same. Ordinary working people have jobs that pay for these "vulnerable" people so therefore can't be taking time out to go protesting.

Ha, swap places with me for a week and then talk about doing nothing.

ArmaniJeanss

Kensington wrote: »

How do you means test it though?
Does the couple who lived a life of drinking, smoking, partying and foreign holidays get pitied because they've nothing to their name and are landed with all the benefits, while the couple who lived within their means, didn't smoke, didn't drink large amounts and took it easy to put some money aside for their later years get told to kindly piddle off as they've plenty to look after themselves?

daltonmd wrote: »

In a nutshell yes. If you have plenty to look after yourself and have a nice pension to live out your days comfortably, then you are by far better off then the person on 230 euro per week.

So how do you encourage people to be frugal and sensible with their money, and save for their retirement? Having a large safety net only for those who don't bother would instinctively seem a bad idea?

daltonmd

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

So how do you encourage people to be frugal and sensible with their money, and save for their retirement? Having a large safety net only for those who don't bother would instinctively seem a bad idea?

That's why the large safety net has to go - it's catching everyone. In every country and walk of life you will have those who won't/can't make provisions for their future - that's a social problem though. You will have people on the minimum wage who will never have enough to save for a pension - do we exclude them when they retire? They pay taxes too.

Over the years there were very generous tax breaks to encourage people to save for their future, many though have seen a huge loss in their pensions and should we then exclude these people?

Target the needy and if you have been fortunate in your life to be in a position to save for your future then you will always be better off than those who didn't.

Ellis Dee

Some of those benefits have a value other than what can be calculated in purely monetary terms. The Free Travel Pass (and the Senior Smart Pass for travel in Northern Ireland that goes with it) is a good example, because a lot of the trains and buses are half empty anyway and the situation would be even worse if over-66s like me didn't use them. In addition, it is certainly a benefit in terms of the environment to reduce the amount of cars on the road and road safety likewise benefits from doddery old cnuts driving less.:):):)

ArmaniJeanss

daltonmd wrote: »

That's why the large safety net has to go - it's catching everyone. In every country and walk of life you will have those who won't/can't make provisions for their future - that's a social problem though. You will have people on the minimum wage who will never have enough to save for a pension - do we exclude them when they retire? They pay taxes too.

Over the years there were very generous tax breaks to encourage people to save for their future, many though have seen a huge loss in their pensions and should we then exclude these people?

Target the needy and if you have been fortunate in your life to be in a position to save for your future then you will always be better off than those who didn't.

Slighly confused now, because it seemed in post #20 that you wanted the €230 safety net to remain for those who had decided not to bother being sensible. But now you want the safety net gone. Not having a pop, genuinely confused.

By the way imagine a pensioner has saved up enough so as to have a comfortable €450 pw private income throughout their retirement, and a decision is made that they are therefore not entitled to the states €230 pension because they are comfortable.
It may seem correct but what you are effectively doing is taxing them at 52% on their €450.

44leto

But the IMF/ECB funds are paying the pensioners.

Freddie59

Ghandee wrote: »

Some of the most vulnerable in our society, ie the Pensioners, look set to be the next victims on the IMF's hit list.

Key world above - some. Not all pensioners are on the breadline. Those who are must be cared for. But there are many thousands with good pensions who do not need state assistance.

Regarding the other items, glad to see the free travel being tackled at last. It is a complete farce. There are people on "disability/invalidity" pensions (many of whom should not be on them in the first instance) who are able to drive regularly - yet are entitled to free travel. Seriously. WTF?

Medical cards also need to be examined. But it is disappointing that they have yet to tackle fully the biggest guzzlers of state capital and the cause of us borrowing €400m every week: the Public Sector Pay/Pensions bill; and the Social Welfare system.

But it will come. And not a moment too soon.

Freddie59

Ellis Dee wrote: »

Some of those benefits have a value other than what can be calculated in purely monetary terms. The Free Travel Pass (and the Senior Smart Pass for travel in Northern Ireland that goes with it) is a good example, because a lot of the trains and buses are half empty anyway and the situation would be even worse if over-66s like me didn't use them. In addition, it is certainly a benefit in terms of the environment to reduce the amount of cars on the road and road safety likewise benefits from doddery old cnuts driving less.:):):)

Here's the other side. A chap I know brought his elderly father on a bus to Tramore last year. Bus packed, not even standing room.

This chap and one other person were the only ones who paid on the bus. EVERYONE else had travel passes. And it was across all age groups. He said it was incredible to watch. And we wonder why there's an €18Bn deficit?

BTW, does anyone know how many people in this country are in receipt of "disability/invalidity" allowance? Can't find it anywhere.

goose2005

Ellis Dee wrote: »

Some of those benefits have a value other than what can be calculated in purely monetary terms. The Free Travel Pass (and the Senior Smart Pass for travel in Northern Ireland that goes with it) is a good example, because a lot of the trains and buses are half empty anyway and the situation would be even worse if over-66s like me didn't use them. In addition, it is certainly a benefit in terms of the environment to reduce the amount of cars on the road and road safety likewise benefits from doddery old cnuts driving less.:):):)

One could use the same argument to make public transport free for everyone; as it is, poor people under 66 still have to pay, the wealthy over-66s get to go for free.

number10a wrote: »

Most vulnerable?!?!? Me hole. This is why it needs to be means-tested. There are people who do not need it.

My aunt's parents, between their pensions, fuel allowance etc. haul in just under €500 per week. They own their house and they go absolutely nowhere. Their utility bills are almost entirely covered by the SW allowances, so nothing to spend there. Even the mother says it's ridiculous the amount of money that the government is giving them. They're small farmers and are getting more now than they ever got in their lives. Your pension is supposed to be smaller like! She said even €200 per week would be loads for the two of them to live quite well on. But it's all or nothing. One cannot apply for a reduction, so she just draws and draws and saves and saves. Means-tested pensions have to come in, even if the IMF were not here.

What's worse is that that a lot of that money will go to their children and grandchildren, thereby strengthening class divides. A person in their 20s with well-off parents to subsidise him/her through the recession has far more opportunities than someone in their 20s without well-off parent.s

daltonmd

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

Slighly confused now, because it seemed in post #20 that you wanted the €230 safety net to remain for those who had decided not to bother being sensible. But now you want the safety net gone. Not having a pop, genuinely confused.

By the way imagine a pensioner has saved up enough so as to have a comfortable €450 pw private income throughout their retirement, and a decision is made that they are therefore not entitled to the states €230 pension because they are comfortable.
It may seem correct but what you are effectively doing is taxing them at 52% on their €450.

Sorry, firstly I never said, "that I wanted the €230 safety net to remain for those who had decided not to bother being sensible" - what I said was, "In a nutshell yes. If you have plenty to look after yourself and have a nice pension to live out your days comfortably, then you are by far better off then the person on 230 euro per week."

Now there are many reasons why people can't/don't/won't make provisions for their future. But that's irrelevant - the safety net we have now catches everyone - we do not have the money, it's as simple as that.

SW should be directed at those who need it - it should not be an all or nothing system, if you have a little pension saved but it's not enough then you should of course receive a state benefit of some kind, after all you have paid your dues.

You have to also remember that a lot of people availed of the huge tax incentives in order to provide for their future - so they received state help in order to fund their pensions already.

It simply isn't just or fair for very wealthy people, with no mortgages and plenty of disposable income to draw on an overstretched Social Welfare system "just because it's there" it defeats the purpose of a welfare system.

Chain_reaction

In fairness...

Didn't they end up paying 75% tax on every pound they earned for a while years ago?

lividduck

Chuck Stone wrote: »

There should be no automatic entitlement to 'free'* stuff because of seniority of age.

Simple as that.

*It's not free. The cost is displaced to other people who are probably struggling with mortgages and young children.

Well put and true, we need to get away from thinking we can afford to give free services. Everything has a cost and shoukld have a charge.

lividduck

Chain_reaction wrote: »

In fairness...

Didn't they end up paying 75% tax on every pound they earned for a while years ago?

No, no one in the history of this state has ever had to pay 75% on every pound they earned, ever!

daltonmd

lividduck wrote: »

No, no one in the history of this state has ever had to pay 75% on every pound they earned, ever!

It wasn't far off - I think (can't find the link) it was 65% on earnings over 9k (not including PRSI). When you then consider that interest rates averaged about 12% in the 70's and 80's and add in indirect taxes on goods and services you can absolutely say they paid their dues!

And if I am not mistaken wasn't there a property tax introduced in 1983 and abolished in 1987?

This not being able to quote articles will be hell for the mobile users.

dxhound2005

daltonmd wrote: »

It wasn't far off - I think (can't find the link) it was 65% on earnings over 9k (not including PRSI). When you then consider that interest rates averaged about 12% in the 70's and 80's and add in indirect taxes on goods and services you can absolutely say they paid their dues!

And if I am not mistaken wasn't there a property tax introduced in 1983 and abolished in 1987?

Interest rates and inflation are linked so people were no worse off. When I bought my house mortgage rates were 18% and rising.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2010/1015/1224281145830.html

There was for more real poverty in the past in this country than there is now. Plenty of pensioners are well off and can afford not to take as much from the current taxation/borrowing.

daltonmd

dxhound2005 wrote: »

Interest rates and inflation are linked so people were no worse off. When I bought my house mortgage rates were 18% and rising.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2010/1015/1224281145830.html

There was for more real poverty in the past in this country than there is now. Plenty of pensioners are well off and can afford not to take as much from the current taxation/borrowing.

I would argue that they were worse off. See below.

"However, he says despite house prices as a multiple of disposable income being the same in 1981 and 1998, repayments as a percentage of disposable income were 41.3% in 1981 versus 24.3% in 1998. Clearly this has a material impact on a household's decision to purchase and a banks willingness to lend. As of Q4 2009, a household with two earners on the average wage who purchased the average house at €220k would be using 15% of their disposable income servicing the mortgage, the lowest amount on record."

Edit - I agree though that there are plenty of pensioners in this country who are very well off.

BlueSmoker

I read the article, and agree with it, even though I'm a carer for my elderly mother, who has had to have 2 major surgeries in the last two years, one this week.

I also agree with the posters who mention some and I think it is valid to have the elderly means tested. The one thing I can't stand is these generalisation that some people here on boards and in real life have about every group (social or ethnic) basically any group that is a minority. These posters are great at making a mountain of a mole hill, and seeing how everyone else is taking rights away from them, maybe if they stopped doing the "act of the dieing maggot" and opened their eyes, they might actual see that there is alot of people on their level who want to help sort the sh1t pile out of a country.

The other thing I be slightly worried about with the IMF idea, which in theory is great, I really worried about the muppets they get to implement it.

elaverty

IMHO 2 words come to mind for all/any of these payouts,,,social,pensions,etc....and they are MEANS TESTING...

hatrickpatrick

HalloweenJack wrote: »

Cuts have to come somewhere. At least the IMF have the balls to stand up to the 'untouchables' of Irish society.

LOL
When will we see them targeting politicians, advisers, and nationalized bankers then?
The true untouchables of Irish society.

Run_to_da_hills

The IMF want all old age pensioners issued with travel smart cards so that they can track all their movements and then see if they are worthy of the privilege.

woodoo

Freddie59 wrote: »

But it is disappointing that they have yet to tackle fully the biggest guzzlers of state capital and the cause of us borrowing €400m every week: the Public Sector Pay/Pensions bill; and the Social Welfare system.

But it will come. And not a moment too soon.

How do you sleep at night freddie with your obsession with the Public Service.

Big day for you tomorrow too. Sindo is out

Glenbhoy

Ghandee wrote: »

Taken from this mornings independent.


Some of the most vulnerable in our society, ie the Pensioners, look set to be the next victims on the IMF's hit list.

At least the pensioners of this land had the balls to make a stand the last time FF tried to take away their medical cards!

Lets hope they stick together once more, and make these a-holes in Europe do a u-turn on this one also.


http://www.independent.ie/national-news/pensions-free-travel-and-medical-cards-on-imf-hitlist-3038459.html

They may be vulnerable, but as they hold the vast majority of the wealth in our society, it's time they started to pay their share. The financially vulnerable will still be protected, the perks enjoyed by the rest (and cynically awarded by govt after govt over the years) have to go.

ejmaztec

Glenbhoy wrote: »

They may be vulnerable, but as they hold the vast majority of the wealth in our society, it's time they started to pay their share. The financially vulnerable will still be protected, the perks enjoyed by the rest (and cynically awarded by govt after govt over the years) have to go.

I didn't realise that they'd never contributed anything in their entire lives.:eek:

Where did these parasites come from?

HalloweenJack

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

LOL
When will we see them targeting politicians, advisers, and nationalized bankers then?
The true untouchables of Irish society.

They aren't taking more money directly out of the system, though.

BlueSmoker

Glenbhoy wrote: »

They may be vulnerable, but as they hold the vast majority of the wealth in our society, it's time they started to pay their share. The financially vulnerable will still be protected, the perks enjoyed by the rest (and cynically awarded by govt after govt over the years) have to go.

Is there any way you can say "No Thank You" to a post, ( I really hate this assumption that most of the elderly hold the wealth of this country, most of them are actually paying for the mortages, so that there kids could own properties during the celtic tiger, and for alot of other reasons the elderly aren't the people holding the wealth, the same way as every age group has a huge range of people within the generalistion people associate with that group ) It gets really boring when people like you seem to think everyone is shafting you, the only person shafting you, is you and you may as well enjoy the sensation:D

BlueSmoker

Totally agree, we should means test everyone, and then the begrudgers will have nothing to complain about, except for begudigng themselves. Sometimes it appears 90% of this country just wants to moan about what the "Jones" have, instead of getting on with it and trying to improve the system, our society (the govnerment) of course everything should be means tested, and I mean Everthing and Everybody, from the richest to the poorest, Mind you then we will become a socialist state, and not that far removed from when we won our Independence, Oh dear back to the drawing board again

Basically guys stop moaning and get out there and sort it out.

kangaroo

People on disability payments got cut twice in budgets + lost Christmas bonus

People on pensions: didn't get cut in either of those budgets but lost Christmas bonus.

I think both groups are similar. In future, I wouldn't be surprised if disability payments are cut again. It seems unfair if this were to happen but the pension rate not cut.
---
A similar difference in treatment occurs in the Public Sector. Current workers have taken a significant cut in their take home pay through the pension levy that doesn't affect retired PS workers. Some newer workers are coming in on lower salary scales again.

---

I too think "untouchables" can be a reasonable word to describe the treatment of pensioners given their special treatment over pretty much all other groups in terms of cuts.

Doc Ruby

Tis a testament to the situation that the IMF are actually the good guys here.

nice_very

Grey Power

TwoShedsJackson

kangaroo wrote: »

I too think "untouchables" can be a reasonable word to describe the treatment of pensioners given their special treatment over pretty much all other groups in terms of cuts.

I think 'voters' may be the word you're looking for.