The final nail - the proptery tax - my rant on TAX

MMAGirl

AlexisM wrote: »

Wow, you should become some sort of national adviser. So, to all those thousands and thousands of people worried sick about their pay cuts and mortgages and bills: “What do you do when you need to increase your standard of living. You get a better, higher paying job.” Simples! A better, higher paying job – such a simple solution, how can we not have thought of this before! Your argument was pretty facile anyway but this plumbs such depths that I’m honestly embarrassed to have engaged in this debate.

You should be embarrassed tbh. You should also be ashamed of yourself.
You can stop whenever you want, but you wont.

And you'll get no apologies from me for being smart enough to make myself employable when there are few jobs.
When I was unemployed I retrained into something that would get me a job. When I wasnt getting paid enough, I went about getting a better paying job, even becoming self employed and going to the UK for a job. Then I wanted to work from home, while still working for a UK company as there is better pay for my skills, so I made that happen.

I was brought up to respect the elderly and to learn how to improve things myself if they will not improve for me. No excuse for being unemployed and just sitting there and not doing something about it.

You or I might be able to do this but OAPs cannot and should not be expected to.

So why dont we just leave it at that.
I'll say that pensioners have paid their debt to society and now its time for them to allowed to enjoy the fruits of a lifetimes work and taxes. A life much harder than anyone posting in here will have.

You can say that we should take their houses, their bus passes and medical care from them.

Hope you never get old. And fair play to your parents for raising you the way they did.

Godge

MMAGirl wrote: »

You are right.
Sure I only pay about 30% myself. The joys of being self employed and contracting abroad.
But it doesnt stop me appreciating what the pensioners have done for me in the past.

Well maybe if the self-employed contracting abroad paid a little more tax then we could afford to look after the pensioners.

tayto lover

Godge wrote: »

Well maybe if the self-employed contracting abroad paid a little more tax then we could afford to look after the pensioners.

I don't think they can do that off their own bat.

Arnold Layne

I'd prefer a council tax, with no exclusions, i.e. everyone has to pay. In my experience it is the habitual social welfare recipients that are the main (ab)users of local services.

This bullsh*t of protecting the "vulnerable" in society who, have never worked, and have more disposable income than I do has to stop.

maninasia

You should be embarrassed tbh. You should also be ashamed of yourself.
You can stop whenever you want, but you wont.

Still telling people what they should or shouldn't think or feel? That's not a debate worth participating in, the old moral high ground, when you look into there's usually no substance to it.

Your argument doesn't even make sense when you drill down into it. First you say they paid 60% tax, then you say that pensioners should only get a pension if they paid tax. Well which is it?

I on the other hand have shown that future pensioners are going to get hit hard, and that current social welfare payments are simply unaffordable, and yet that seems perfectly fine for you. You should be ashamed of yourself.

Maura74

The UK is being very hard on people that are poor as it is charging bedroom tax in council home that have a box room this will give the council extra income as that small box room will be classed as under occupied and they will have to pay regardless of the size of the room. I understand that people wants to downsize in London from say 2 or 3 bedroom council home but there are not enough one bedroom homes for them to be rehoused in and they have not been building any social homes for many years now therefore have to pay or move.

They are going to charges people with second homes with full council tax, this is OK as it is a second home and some are left empty for over seas investors but how are they going to collect that tax

They have capped housing benefit to £400 or £500 a week, which is also OK as this is only benefiting landlords. It is difficult for the people renting them as they have to moved out of London to somewhere up north or pay the extra money to the council or move or become homeless.

They have also capped the tax exemption for pensioners on their income and making them work longer. Perhaps it just better to give up when you reach the age of 70 just to kick the bucket.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/mar/16/bedroom-tax-protests-uk


http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/03/17/government-tax-policies-poorest_n_2897669.html


http://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2011/11/councils-to-be-given-power-to-tax-empty-and-second-homes/

Forgot to mentioned that they are giving people earning over £150k a year a big tax break by bring down their tax rate from 50% to 45%. Well these poor things needs that tax break and why not the poor pay for it, obviously people earning less than £150K and on the minimum wage have very different needs and can be kicked around.

MMAGirl

maninasia wrote: »

Still telling people what they should or shouldn't think or feel? That's not a debate worth participating in, the old moral high ground, when you look into there's usually no substance to it.

Your argument doesn't even make sense when you drill down into it. First you say they paid 60% tax, then you say that pensioners should only get a pension if they paid tax. Well which is it?

I on the other hand have shown that future pensioners are going to get hit hard, and that current social welfare payments are simply unaffordable, and yet that seems perfectly fine for you. You should be ashamed of yourself.

its all me me me me for the celtic cubs isnt it.
you have shown nothing but contempt for those who put you through school.
if you cant even be bothered to find out how much tax rates were for those people who did pay for your upbringing, then dont even look in the mirror. it might crack.

MMAGirl

Godge wrote: »

Well maybe if the self-employed contracting abroad paid a little more tax then we could afford to look after the pensioners.

we all pay the tax we are required to pay. if i have to pay more tax, i will. but i wont ask for others who have paid all the tax required throughout their lives to pay more just so i can pay less.

anyway, i got an infraction for defending oaps so i guess im out.

Farmer Pudsey

MMAGirl wrote: »

we all pay the tax we are required to pay. if i have to pay more tax, i will. but i wont ask for others who have paid all the tax required throughout their lives to pay more just so i can pay less.

anyway, i got an infraction for defending oaps so i guess im out.

But they have not this is the generation that benfited from two Tax amnesty's. I know that the truth hurts but it is still the truth. This is also the generation of pensioners that are by far the wealthiest across the world.

TBH I will not be debating the issue with you as you seem to have tunnsll vision. You have not answered any of my questions/points from previous posts. This is the second time I have corrected your rosy picture about some of this generation of pensioners.

Farmer Pudsey

Mr. teddywinkles wrote: »

e20 get ya 4 pints. You dont have to party like its new years or line up shots.

And a bag of chips on the way home. Where I drink a pint of plain is 4 euro four of them once a week is not exactly splashing out. Especially if you take your own lunch to work instead of buying a breakfast roll or a bap at a convience shop both of which are creeping up in price again

MMAGirl

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

But they have not this is the generation that benfited from two Tax amnesty's. I know that the truth hurts but it is still the truth. This is also the generation of pensioners that are by far the wealthiest across the world.

TBH I will not be debating the issue with you as you seem to have tunnsll vision. You have not answered any of my questions/points from previous posts. This is the second time I have corrected your rosy picture about some of this generation of pensioners.

You have corrected nothing. You have just shown your true colours is all. But we knew them already didnt we.
Well done on the painting everyone with the same brush there.
You are not debating at all. You are just making huge generalizations accross a whole population of people who have made YOUR life better than theirs was.

You remind me of a guy I was talking to in a pub London in the 80's complaining about what pensioners got and they dont need it, and they are only a drain on people like him, but of course this particular idiot wanted more for himself at the expense of the pensioners. The barman was an OAP who was related to my friend of mine so I knew his history. I just asked both of them how many was they had fought in. Yer man says, well thats all in the past so it doesnt count.

maninasia

MMAGirl wrote: »

its all me me me me for the celtic cubs isnt it.
you have shown nothing but contempt for those who put you through school.
if you cant even be bothered to find out how much tax rates were for those people who did pay for your upbringing, then dont even look in the mirror. it might crack.

My parents put me through school and they also get a great pension. What's the point of all this? I will put my kids through school and will likely get next to nothing.

We will have to work 4-5 years more than the current lot that is if anybody would employ us.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/consumer/later-state-pension-may-mean-income-gap-for-many-workers-1.523063?page=3

Where is the current contempt to elderly in Ireland? Ireland has among the most generous benefits scheme worldwide for the elderly, even though Ireland also has a massive fiscal deficit. It's great to look after people but you need money to do that, it doesn't come from nowhere.

FREETV

My question to the people on here is, how much are you willing to pay for a house that you either fully own or for a house that is still owned by the bank when the money should be better spent on maintaining a house, insulating a house, heating a house or health insurance, food etc?
This tax is going to make owning a house a liability.
Hands up here, how many of you think that being burdened with a tax for the liability of now owning a house is fair?

MMAGirl

maninasia wrote: »

My parents put me through school and they also get a great pension. What's the point of all this? I will put my kids through school and will likely get next to nothing.

We will have to work 4-5 years more than the current lot that is if anybody would employ us.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/consumer/later-state-pension-may-mean-income-gap-for-many-workers-1.523063?page=3

Where is the current contempt to elderly in Ireland? Ireland has among the most generous benefits scheme worldwide for the elderly, even though Ireland also has a massive fiscal deficit. It's great to look after people but you need money to do that, it doesn't come from nowhere.

Oh the innocence of the Celtic cub.

shedweller

maninasia wrote: »

it doesn't come from nowhere.

It does if you are a bank!
They magiced money out of thin air for years and now a wee gamble they did went for a poo, just like it was supposed to. Now we are "bailing them out" just like we are supposed to.

We're mugs! And boy are they laughing!

maninasia

shedweller wrote: »

It does if you are a bank!
They magiced money out of thin air for years and now a wee gamble they did went for a poo, just like it was supposed to. Now we are "bailing them out" just like we are supposed to.

We're mugs! And boy are they laughing!

That's not why Ireland is running a fiscal deficit or needs to implement a property tax. The bank bailout s pretty much finished and yet the overspending compared to revenue continues.

shedweller

Wait a minute. Are you saying we are nearly finished bailing out the banks?
So what was all that hype recently about generations of people being saddled with paying for this?

I agree that some people in the public sector should be either paid less or not be employed in the public sector.
Unfortunately what will most likely happen is that frontline staff will get hammered even more while high level execs get paid the same as they ever did.
And tell me this, wrt wage costs. People pay tax dont they? So while PS wage costs are high, doesn't a large chunk of this come back as tax the same day? And isn't there a tax element in everything we buy?
So when we bitch about PS wages, are we taking that into account? I'm not PS by the way.

MMAGirl

FREETV wrote: »

My question to the people on here is, how much are you willing to pay for a house that you either fully own or for a house that is still owned by the bank when the money should be better spent on maintaining a house, insulating a house, heating a house or health insurance, food etc?
This tax is going to make owning a house a liability.
Hands up here, how many of you think that being burdened with a tax for the liability of now owning a house is fair?

dont forget spending that extra money on your house is going to increase the tax you then have to pay in the future on the house.
so the more you spend on it the more it costs you.

Maura74

MMAGirl wrote: »

dont forget spending that extra money on your house is going to increase the tax you then have to pay in the future on the house.
so the more you spend on it the more it costs you.

Also when you spend you pay VAT on the materials that you purchased for your house. Everything you pay tax on and there is no getting away from it. Therefore when voting make sure you vote for someone that is going to do some good for the county and for that person not to get into power to be self serving.

tayto lover

Maura74 wrote: »

Also when you spend you pay VAT on the materials that you purchased for your house. Everything you pay tax on and there is no getting away from it. Therefore when voting make sure you vote for someone that is going to do some good for the county and for that person not to get into power to be self serving.

Labour or Fine Gael lite are a good example of that.
No rise in education fees, no cutting Child Benefit, Carer's Allowance, OAP benefits like fuel allowance, prescription charges and travel etc etc.
Meanwhile they don't forget to pay the Bankers on time or bow to the Troika.

Politicians have punished their own people at the behest of Europe while it was the now elderly people who made the country with their sacrifices over the years.

Short memories.

maninasia

MMAGirl wrote: »

Oh the innocence of the Celtic cub.

I'm an emigrant and lived overseas during the Celtic tiger. Where Ilive there are little expectations of free handouts, families look after themselves. That's my philosophy too. That is the government philosophy too as they raise the retirement age and cut back on welfare due to bankruptcy of the state.

You can be Irish and have different views on society , not everybody has to be a left leaning champagne socialist. Some of us actually live in the real world.

As mentioned already the current crop of pensioners in the Western world have the most generous pension packages ever, these will not be repeated as state after state hits national debt problems due to baby boomers retirement among other issues. Take the emotion out of the debate and look at the statistics.

tayto lover

I love the use of the word "emigrant" in a debate.
It conveys the meaning "i know what i'm talking about".

StillWaters

I don't think anyone is arguing that the most vulnerable in society should not be supported.

It's just a nonsense though that some people think all pensioners, by virtue of their age are vulnerable or more deserving that any other cohort in society. It's really insulting to older people actually.

I don't think anyone is arguing for a cut in State Pension either, whether contributory or not. I think the issue is with the universal benefits paid to all pensioners regardless of their means such as very generous tax allowances, medical card, household benefit package etc.

MMAGirl

maninasia wrote: »

I'm an emigrant and lived overseas during the Celtic tiger. Where Ilive there are little expectations of free handouts, families look after themselves. That's my philosophy too. That is the government philosophy too as they raise the retirement age and cut back on welfare due to bankruptcy of the state.

You can be Irish and have different views on society , not everybody has to be a left leaning champagne socialist. Some of us actually live in the real world.

As mentioned already the current crop of pensioners in the Western world have the most generous pension packages ever, these will not be repeated as state after state hits national debt problems due to baby boomers retirement among other issues. Take the emotion out of the debate and look at the statistics.

Explains why you dont understand our tax system over here then.

FREETV

MMAGirl wrote: »

dont forget spending that extra money on your house is going to increase the tax you then have to pay in the future on the house.
so the more you spend on it the more it costs you.

True, gangsters the lot of them! Revolution worldwide is what is needed, get rid of the monetary system and politics and the politicians. Debt based economy con and we keep letting it happen. The system has failed and never worked efficiently in the first place because it never was meant to as it is a scam run by the gangster bankers and the elites. :pac:

FREETV

shedweller wrote: »

It does if you are a bank!
They magiced money out of thin air for years and now a wee gamble they did went for a poo, just like it was supposed to. Now we are "bailing them out" just like we are supposed to.

We're mugs! And boy are they laughing!

You got it in one and it is the monetary system that has this world along with the control mechanism of religions in the shambles it is in with so much division in society. Everybody should be equal.

"I was in the chipper earlier this evening and the girl/woman working away in there like mad all on her own sweat pouring off of her, and i thought how much is she earning (no a lot i guess) and of that not a lot how much will she hand over in TAX from, at source, after source .IE property TAX, and then the tax on the petrol she has to pay to get to work, god forbid she might smoke how much TAX is that now, and 21% on everything else she may buy"

She may be the owner! Making suppositions about anyone is dangerous. You don't know the reality of her or of anyone elses life. Some can manage very well on a low income, others struggle on the same amount. Some are happy to stay long term on Social Welfare, others hate being on it. You can't judge anyone without knowing their circumstances.

maninasia

MMAGirl wrote: »

Explains why you dont understand our tax system over here then.

Hold it a second, first you had a problem with 'celtic cubs' (I'm probably older than you by the way), then you have a problem with emigrants. I'd suggest sticking to facts instead of less than subtle attacks on people because of their personal circumstances.

It seems I understand the Irish tax system very well indeed, it doesn't generate enough income to match expenditure, not even close! Since I'm the only one who has gone to the bother to find the statistics and post them up here (where they have been ignored) it's pretty cheeky to say I don't understand the tax system.

Here you go, fill yer boots, 10 billion Euro hole in 2011 and 2012, interest burden mounting, 25% overspend compared to taxation.
http://www.finance.gov.ie/documents/exchequerstatements/2012/exchfinaldec.pdf


Ireland reaches tax limit-
http://www.rte.ie/news/2013/0104/361260-brian-hayes-taxation/

Minister of State at the Department of Finance Brian Hayes has said the Government has almost reached the limit of how much taxation it will impose on the public.
In the wake of three years of spending cuts and new tax measures, Mr Hayes said the focus would now be on policies such as public sector reform to achieve the remaining savings required under the bailout programme.
Speaking on RTÉ's Morning Ireland, he said: "I think we've reached virtually the end of the income taxation side, on the basis that 40% of all the taxes we take in are on the income side.
"If we are going to get into a better position in terms of the domestic economy, in trying to ensure that we get greater growth within the domestic economy, we can't tax the hell out of people."

maninasia

StillWaters wrote: »

I don't think anyone is arguing that the most vulnerable in society should not be supported.

It's just a nonsense though that some people think all pensioners, by virtue of their age are vulnerable or more deserving that any other cohort in society. It's really insulting to older people actually.

I don't think anyone is arguing for a cut in State Pension either, whether contributory or not. I think the issue is with the universal benefits paid to all pensioners regardless of their means such as very generous tax allowances, medical card, household benefit package etc.

Well interestingly none of the above seem to have a problem with future pensioners working years more than the current lot, that seems fine for some unknown reason, or that the national pension fund for future pension coverage has been raided already. Then again I guess most of the above posters didn't actually KNOW this before, because it didn't get much coverage, because it doesn't affect CURRENT pensioners. They usually prefer waffling down in the pub about how the government is being mean to people even though it is borrowing 10 billion Euro a year to keep the show on the road.
But, but...think of the (current) pensioners.

BTW, will somebody fix the spelling on the title of this thread, it's doing my head in, it doesn't look good.

MMAGirl

maninasia wrote: »

Hold it a second, first you had a problem with 'celtic cubs' (I'm probably older than you by the way), then you have a problem with emigrants. I'd suggest sticking to facts instead of less than subtle attacks on people because of their personal circumstances.

It seems I understand the Irish tax system very well indeed, it doesn't generate enough income to match expenditure, not even close! Since I'm the only one who has gone to the bother to find the statistics and post them up here (where they have been ignored) it's pretty cheeky to say I don't understand the tax system.

Here you go, fill yer boots, 10 billion Euro hole in 2011 and 2012, interest burden mounting, 25% overspend compared to taxation.
http://www.finance.gov.ie/documents/exchequerstatements/2012/exchfinaldec.pdf


Ireland reaches tax limit-
http://www.rte.ie/news/2013/0104/361260-brian-hayes-taxation/

Minister of State at the Department of Finance Brian Hayes has said the Government has almost reached the limit of how much taxation it will impose on the public.
In the wake of three years of spending cuts and new tax measures, Mr Hayes said the focus would now be on policies such as public sector reform to achieve the remaining savings required under the bailout programme.
Speaking on RTÉ's Morning Ireland, he said: "I think we've reached virtually the end of the income taxation side, on the basis that 40% of all the taxes we take in are on the income side.
"If we are going to get into a better position in terms of the domestic economy, in trying to ensure that we get greater growth within the domestic economy, we can't tax the hell out of people."

no i have a problem with someone who thinks
that all tax payers did not contribute to their upbringing and then goes and says that its only their parents that paid for their schooling.
clearly you dont understand what happens hard earned tax money.
so please dont go trying to cover that little doozy up by trawling the internet for links.

Maura74

StillWaters wrote: »

I don't think anyone is arguing that the most vulnerable in society should not be supported.

It's just a nonsense though that some people think all pensioners, by virtue of their age are vulnerable or more deserving that any other cohort in society. It's really insulting to older people actually.

I don't think anyone is arguing for a cut in State Pension either, whether contributory or not. I think the issue is with the universal benefits paid to all pensioners regardless of their means such as very generous tax allowances, medical card, household benefit package etc.

The UK is bringing a universal pension in a couple of years time, I do not know about Ireland but the UK one will be about £140 a week regardless whether they paid tax or not. I expect this will help people that had to stay at home years ago before it become common for women to work with big mortgages etc., like it has been for the last 20 or 30 years ago. The stay at home mother pensions and benefits are mean tested as they pensions could be as little as £50 a week but it depended on the husbands earnings.

People do not realised that state pensions are taxed at the going rate when the person continuous to work, everything else is mean tested also. When my mother was alive and apply for her medical card in the 90's it was mean tested as I understand then that you could not get it if your income was over a certain limit.

Also when a parent is on their own and lives near or in deed builds a annex to the family that family members also gains from everything that pensioners gets and indeed they some time takes everything and give the pensioner a allowance to live on. This should not be allowed ot happen as the pensioner suffers as a result.

I should also say something about the property tax, in the UK I pay over £700 a year for my small one bed room flat, despite being a pensioners and if I had someone else living with me I would have to pay £1000 a year. Also, they council is from today cutting council tax on residents that are under occupied and they will be charges more if they got extra bedrooms that want to keep for grandchildren etc. I would love to pay a couple of hundred pounds a year but I can dream on.....

Maura74

tayto lover wrote: »

Labour or Fine Gael lite are a good example of that.
No rise in education fees, no cutting Child Benefit, Carer's Allowance, OAP benefits like fuel allowance, prescription charges and travel etc etc.
Meanwhile they don't forget to pay the Bankers on time or bow to the Troika.

Politicians have punished their own people at the behest of Europe while it was the now elderly people who made the country with their sacrifices over the years.

Short memories.

I think having children is life style choice therefore why should the tax payer pay for their choices in life. It is not a life style choice to get old, or is it a life style choice to become disabled or get ill. Therefore these people should not be punished for something that they got no control over.

I feel that people now should be paid for NOT having children, or if they choose to have children they got to make sure that they are able to look after them financially and not rely on some one eles to do it for them such as tax payers. :mad:

1st dalkey dalkey

Agree on the site value, but can't agree that retired people should be expected to bugger off and live elsewhere. It sounds dangerously similar to ethnic cleansing. They are part of the local community, have friends and interests in the locality, feel at home there and a sense of safety and belonging.
I think there should have been some relationship to income in the design of the tax.

ezra_pound

Maura74 wrote: »

I think having children is life style choice therefore why should the tax payer pay for their choices in life. It is not a life style choice to get old, or is it a life style choice to become disabled or get ill. Therefore these people should not be punished for something that they got no control over.

I feel that people now should be paid for NOT having children, or if they choose to have children they got to make sure that they are able to look after them financially and not rely on some one eles to do it for them such as tax payers. :mad:

This is the stupidest post I have read for some time. You need children to pay taxes to cover YOUR pension liability and to contribute to private pension schemes to cover YOUR private pension. No children = no tax payers in 40 years

Its either that or else incrementally increase immigration. Every woman in the country needs to have an average of 2.1 children just to maintain the current population.

Maura74

1st dalkey dalkey wrote: »

Agree on the site value, but can't agree that retired people should be expected to bugger off and live elsewhere. It sounds dangerously similar to ethnic cleansing. They are part of the local community, have friends and interests in the locality, feel at home there and a sense of safety and belonging.
I think there should have been some relationship to income in the design of the tax.

It is not just retired people it affects disabled people as well and people will have to leave their friend that they have built over the years. They will have to move to some place and have to start all over again and that is not easy when elderly or disabled.

Well UK government said in the 80's that there is no such thing as society. We still got a tory government and indeed Labour/Blair years was exactly the same. It will be interesting to see who will get into power in the next couple of year.... :mad:

http://briandeer.com/social/thatcher-society.htm

StillWaters

1st dalkey dalkey wrote: »

Agree on the site value, but can't agree that retired people should be expected to bugger off and live elsewhere. It sounds dangerously similar to ethnic cleansing. They are part of the local community, have friends and interests in the locality, feel at home there and a sense of safety and belonging.
I think there should have been some relationship to income in the design of the tax.

There is! people on low incomes can defer. A pensioner on a fixed income would be crazy to pay it.

Maura74

ezra_pound wrote: »

This is the stupidest post I have read for some time. You need children to pay taxes to cover YOUR pension liability and to contribute to private pension schemes to cover YOUR private pension. No children = no tax payers in 40 years

Its either that or else incrementally increase immigration. Every woman in the country needs to have an average of 2.1 children just to maintain the current population.

People should only have children if they can afford to look after them. Why should the tax payer paid for someone else to have children, this would be much to the benefit of the children as well. There is enough children in the world that needs parents why not adopt some of them. But I expect some would not be allowed to have them as their finances would be gone into before they are allowed to adopt if they were not financially sound to look after them.

StillWaters

Maura74 wrote: »

I feel that people now should be paid for NOT having children, or if they choose to have children they got to make sure that they are able to look after them financially and not rely on some one eles to do it for them such as tax payers. :mad:

Do you understand anything about demographics or economics???

ezra_pound

Maura74 wrote: »

People should only have children if they can afford to look after them. Why should the tax payer paid for someone else to have children, this would be much to the benefit of the children as well. There is enough children in the world that needs parents why not adopt some of them. But I expect some would not be allowed to have them as their finances would be gone into before they are allowed to adopt if they were not financially sound to look after them.

Ok. Fine. So long as you replace all the Irish with indians Chinese and Africans (populations which are actually expanding) then fine, that makes absolute sense.

Maura74

ezra_pound wrote: »

Ok. Fine. So long as you replace all the Irish with indians Chinese and Africans (populations which are actually expanding) then fine, that makes absolute sense.

The world is changing, do you think the state pension will stay as it is now in 20 or 30 years time? I expect in future people will have to take responsibility for providing for their own retirement/pensions, which will be certainly safer than any government taking money from employees pay. Governments will keep moving the goalpost with people reirement age and keep them working longer and perhaps not letting people retire at all as they have spent all their retirement money. :mad:

ezra_pound

Maura74 wrote: »

The world is changing, do you think the state pension will stay as it is now in 20 or 30 years time? I expect in future people will have to take responsibility for providing for their own retirement/pensions, which will be certainly safer than any government taking money from employees pay. Governments will keep moving the goalpost with people reirement age and keep them working longer and perhaps not letting people retire at all as they have spent all their retirement money. :mad:

Great. You go saving. Just don't put any money into a pension fund if you don't want to support the next generation because there won't be a pension fund when you actually need it.

That's really beside the point though. Who is going to fund your state? Who will pay the Gardai to catch criminals, the judiciary to enforce justice upon them. You might want some form of health service when you're old, better put more money aside for that too because the health service will be immeasurably worse than it already is without any state health spendng. But most importantly, move to as close to the centre of a city as soon as you can because a state with no funding will not be a nice place for areas which rely on subsidisation for service provision. If you want roads or any form of transport, these will only be maintained by private individuals where t is in their interest to fund them so cities will be the only place where roads or public lighting will be provided (by the local residents). Essentially public services will become private services.

Our economy, our society and our generation needs more children. The costsof raising children are far greater than any assistance that thestate provides. We should be increasing support for chidlren, not decreasing it.

Farmer Pudsey

Maura74 wrote: »

I think having children is life style choice therefore why should the tax payer pay for their choices in life. It is not a life style choice to get old, or is it a life style choice to become disabled or get ill. Therefore these people should not be punished for something that they got no control over.

I feel that people now should be paid for NOT having children, or if they choose to have children they got to make sure that they are able to look after them financially and not rely on some one eles to do it for them such as tax payers. :mad:

Maura74 wrote: »

The world is changing, do you think the state pension will stay as it is now in 20 or 30 years time? I expect in future people will have to take responsibility for providing for their own retirement/pensions, which will be certainly safer than any government taking money from employees pay. Governments will keep moving the goalpost with people reirement age and keep them working longer and perhaps not letting people retire at all as they have spent all their retirement money. :mad:

Maura you miss understand the fundamentals of a society. At present the birth rate is at about replacement rate. This is 1.1 children/adult. In Ireland we have an issue with dependency rates not birth rates. Our biggest issue is we are planning to support people to have children who intent to live a dependency life style. These tend to be those that are long term unemployed and single parents. We punish low paid working people and refuse or are trying to reduce there benefits such as medical cards, child benefit.

When you allow waivers for household charge/water rates/bin charges, you encourage these people to leave the workforce and join the dependency lifestyle. Nobody is saying that the OAP should be reduced but there is a fundamental issue with the fact that a young working couple with an income of 60K have to seriously think about going to a doctor with a sick child while a retired couple with none of the costs of going to work can walk into a doctor and the state picks up the bill.

I have already suggested that this could be charges to these couple by giving them an opt in choice at 70. The charge could be the same as it costs the state I think around 350 euro.

Most other states have a low rate of CB but then tops up workers with tax allowances for child care. In Ireland we intend the opposite we intend to top up the ''vulnerable''. I do not believe that these young couple should be given a silver spoon but I believe we should target some more resources towards them

maninasia

StillWaters wrote: »

Do you understand anything about demographics or economics???

Just like Farmer said, it depends on the dependency rate, if all you are doing is creating another generation of social welfare claimants they are mainly a burden.

Another statistic that is important is the emigration rate, especially for Ireland. It costs a lot if you are providing support and subsidized education and then they have to or want to emigrate and they don't return.

Having more kids doesn't mean the country is going to be in better shape, otherwise Nigeria and the Philippines would be among the best off in the world!

creedp

MMAGirl wrote: »

so you think other people never had to struggle and work hard for a living. must be a celtic cub.
i grew up in a council estate in the 80s, where noone had a job. And if they did, it was for a few days. when i started working there were no jobs and we all had to emigrate or stay with no job. i only went to uni when i was 24 because i had to go work to send money home to the family.
i think i understand hardship. i also think i understand that this carry on these days of begrudging people anything they have is purely a spoiled celtic cub phenomena. and its sickening.

Bully for you! This is not about you as an individual .. its about how society looks after people and in that respect is the curent and future is the NB not the past. If all curernt/future policy was dicated by what you and your council estate experienced in the 80's then where exactly would we go from here. The idea that certain people should be treated differently now because of what happened in the past is ridiculous. But carry on telling people living/working in Ireland today to pucker up while you enjoy a well paid low taxed income .. its probably not the case but is certainly appears that you some kind of satisfaction from kicking people who are down

MMAGirl

creedp wrote: »

Bully for you! This is not about you as an individual .. its about how society looks after people and in that respect is the curent and future is the NB not the past. If all curernt/future policy was dicated by what you and your council estate experienced in the 80's then where exactly would we go from here. The idea that certain people should be treated differently now because of what happened in the past is ridiculous. But carry on telling people living/working in Ireland today to pucker up while you enjoy a well paid low taxed income .. its probably not the case but is certainly appears that you some kind of satisfaction from kicking people who are down

You should read my posts again.
You are completely off on the wrong tangent here.
But what else is to be expected from you I suppose.

maninasia

creedp wrote: »

Bully for you! This is not about you as an individual .. its about how society looks after people and in that respect is the curent and future is the NB not the past. If all curernt/future policy was dicated by what you and your council estate experienced in the 80's then where exactly would we go from here. The idea that certain people should be treated differently now because of what happened in the past is ridiculous. But carry on telling people living/working in Ireland today to pucker up while you enjoy a well paid low taxed income .. its probably not the case but is certainly appears that you some kind of satisfaction from kicking people who are down

I believe the phrase she used was 'some people should be kicked in the head', if I remember correctly.

But, but...remember the 'insert pet group here'.

creedp

MMAGirl wrote: »

But what else is to be expected from you I suppose.

Silly of me but anyway .. 'right back at you'

Tea drinker

JimmyTee wrote: »

Anyway this is just my rant, I don't expect you to comment or reply on it, but just read my rant, and think about where we are going and what kind of slaves our great grand kids will be.

The kind Irish people want (and voted for) them to be. No one really minds when the wealthier and politicial class steal, because we are all a bunch of cap doffers, me feiners and ultimately WANT to be a FF politician. That's the Irish dream, rich and creaming it off your friends and neighbours. An enthroponoooooor donthca know.
They kept on voting for FF (who ignored all commonsense fiscal policy), kept on buying overpriced houses they couldn't afford, in fact they are still voting and voting MORE for those people. Don't worry about Ivor's fraud claiming mileage, don't worry the cops do nothing as they are an extension of the regime and instead haul people in for questioning over painting Brian PBUH Cowen as a fat xxxx

Pointless getting upset if people want to enslave their kids to themselves and others.

darkhorse

tayto lover wrote: »

There should be no tax whatsoever on your family home.

Agreed. Are we not already paying enough by way of mortgage, mortgage interest, home maintainence, home insurance, furnishings etc, all with borrowed money, that, for a large section of the population, will not even have these debts paid back within their lifetime, without also having to pay an annual rent on our homes. The best comment that I heard in relation to this was in one of the newspapers on thursday, which was "If a government can afford to take less than half the effective rate of tax from big corporations, then why does it need a property tax".

MMAGirl

It should be a tax similar to the uk council tax. Everyone should pay it and there should be no discrimination against home owners.
Of course I understand yhat those who dont own homes want the home owners to pay and not spread it to everyone, so they dont have to. Human nature, but unfair all the same.