Budget Day - The Official After Hours Thread - (Ireland's undisputed Voice of Reason)

Freddy Smelly

andrewdeerpark wrote: »

Pensioners loosing the phone allowance is pretty irrelevant as is scrapping the death allowance (I did not know one existed). Expect the usual moaners and whingers on Joe Duffy tomorrow while the hard pressed working and middle class is out earning a crust.

scrapping the funeral expense allowance will hit low income families hard if a loved one dies unexpectantly

Uriel.

Freddy Smelly wrote: »

not a good idea in the long run... with pension schemes being raped constantly by the government some people prefered to save money for their old age.

the rest of us have not enough to save anyways nor do we have enough to spend of frivalous things


just waiting for noonan to bring in manditory suicide for 65 and older next

I don't disagree, but we need to get things moving. The Government need to curtail public expenditure to balance the books, but must create an environment encouraging private consumption for the time being. if spending continues to be dampened, business' will continue to go to the wall the longer term impact of such a scenario is far worse

efb

Freddy Smelly wrote: »

not a good idea in the long run... with pension schemes being raped constantly by the government some people prefered to save money for their old age.

the rest of us have not enough to save anyways nor do we have enough to spend of frivalous things


just waiting for noonan to bring in manditory suicide for 65 and older next

Well they'll have to cover their own funeral costs...

seahorse61

I see they are increasing the private pension nice that these funds are used to help pay public worker pensions

tayto lover

Foxtrol wrote: »

So take from the person who actually is in negative equity on a low wage so you can give to the well off pensioner that 'might' be helping their children with their financial issues.

You are not making sense alright.
There are many people helping their children many of whom lost their jobs and are in danger of losing their homes. Many struggling to do so.
Do you object to that too?

bleg

andrewdeerpark wrote: »

Good to cut the dole on the 18-25 group should discourage it as a way of life.

If you want to discourage the dole as a way of life I would argue the best way is to reduce the amount you get the longer you stay on it... not increase it.

Freddy Smelly

anyone good a editing videos? make a spoof video about fg/labour

graft noonan, kenny and gilmore's faces and edit the the bit with text to say fg/labour promises more taxes.... putting their hand in your pocket report suspect politicians

Agricola

andrewdeerpark wrote: »

Not the worst budget Income Tax and PRSI left alone so no more TAX on wage earners. Good to cut the dole on the 18-25 group should discourage it as a way of life.

Pensioners loosing the phone allowance is pretty irrelevant as is scrapping the death allowance (I did not know one existed). Expect the usual moaners and whingers on Joe Duffy tomorrow while the hard pressed working and middle class is out earning a crust.

So in a nutshell your saying it wasnt the worst budget because issues which affect you have not worsened from your perspective, and issues which affect pensioners and those suddenly bereaved..... well you couldnt give a flying fúck so, yeah, all in all a good days work!

Oh I forgot, you managed to get in a bit of dole bashing as well!

Ireland's undisputed voice of reason indeed! :rolleyes:

andrewdeerpark

bleg wrote: »

If you want to discourage the dole as a way of life I would argue the best way is to reduce the amount you get the longer you stay on it... not increase it.

It should be just a start. I would agree that long term unemployed individuals who do no co-operate with welfare and FAS or engage in criminality should have payments reduced and eventually stopped altogether. Some social floors need to be removed after persistent non compliance or no effort to contribute to society.

dark crystal

Freddy Smelly wrote: »

not a good idea in the long run... with pension schemes being raped constantly by the government some people prefered to save money for their old age.

the rest of us have not enough to save anyways nor do we have enough to spend of frivalous things


just waiting for noonan to bring in manditory suicide for 65 and older next

Pensioners have been largely cocooned from the cuts the rest of us have had to take over the last few budgets. Low and middle income earners and families with children shouldn't be the only ones constantly taking the hit, when they have more outgoings than the average pensioner.

How many pensioners have to pay mortgages, college, school and creche fees, income tax, USC and large food bills?

The state pension hasn't been hit, they get free travel, tv licences and medical cards, as well as the household benefits package. All that happened in this budget was that the free line rental was cut and wealthier pensioners over 70 get free GP visits instead of the full medical card. I don't think that's unfair at all tbh.

brokenarms

good budget. Happy I never took a punch to the nuts this time.

Hulk Hands

What's really annoying is people in media (and politicians) keep repeating the line 'it's the same sectors of society who have been hit once again', while the rest of the population and people whinging say the same. This year the jobseekers and pensioners seem to have been screwed, along with those higher earners who can afford medical insurance and the savers who've had Dirt taxed. Every year bar this one the middle income workers have been hit with PAYE and USC. The pension levy has been increased for another year, while the child allowance is down again. Who exactly are these specific set of people being targeted or do they just mean the Irish population in general and expect us not to understand?

bleg

andrewdeerpark wrote: »

It should be just a start. I would agree that long term unemployed individuals who do no co-operate with welfare and FAS or engage in criminality should have payments reduced and eventually stopped altogether. Some social floors need to be removed after persistent non compliance or no effort to contribute to society.

But somebody who loses their job at the age of 24 (who may be completely cooperative with welfare policies) gets less than somebody 2 years older on the sole basis of their age.

doublej

tobacco prices are Govt controlled;same RRP the length and breadth of the country.no opportunity for a tobacco retailer to increase the price of the product to cover any specific levy,license or tax.Criminal offence to sell above or below stated RRP.To recoup additional expenditure,milk,bread,and other staples will be increased.Govt price policy protects a carcinogenic product.Lunatics DO run asylum!

andrewdeerpark

Agricola wrote: »

So in a nutshell your saying it wasnt the worst budget because issues which affect you have not worsened from your perspective, and issues which affect pensioners and those suddenly bereaved..... well you couldnt give a flying fúck so, yeah, all in all a good days work!

Oh I forgot, you managed to get in a bit of dole bashing as well!

Ireland's undisputed voice of reason indeed! :rolleyes:

Incorrect we are all effected; I am paying a lot of my income in tax, the property tax is doubling next year plus all other measures; DIRT, healthcare tax relief etc will all mean middle income earners will be paying more.

At least the take home pay will remain largely the same. I do not like it however it could have been worse.

In reality if the government collected the full low rate of corporation tax (12.5%) on companies like Apple, Google etc instead of letting them evade using schemes like the "double Irish" that would be the deficit sorted for this year. John McCain picked up on this in the US senate recently...

Ace2007

dark crystal wrote: »

Pensioners have been largely cocooned from the cuts the rest of us have had to take over the last few budgets. Low and middle income earners and families with children shouldn't be the only ones constantly taking the hit, when they have more outgoings than the average pensioner.

How many pensioners have to pay mortgages, college, school and creche fees, income tax, USC and large food bills?

The state pension hasn't been hit, they get free travel, tv licences and medical cards, as well as the household benefits package. All that happened in this budget was that the free line rental was cut and wealthier pensioners over 70 get free GP visits instead of the full medical card. I don't think that's unfair at all tbh.

The principle is good, but the idea that it's all pensioners in the one boat is unfair. You have wealthy pensioners and poor ones, why not do a means test for them?

There are old folk in this country that are living on 200 or less a week who may have little savings.

Then compare that with someone with 3/4 houses rented out and getting 1k a week in pension.

Are you saying it's then fair that those 2 are treated the same?

It's just like child benefit - no matter how rich you are you "child gets it".

heyjude

The budget increased the cost of going to college, cut unemployment payments to 18-25 year olds and announced the elimination of the travel tax.

So its harder to go to college, you get less if you're young and unemployed and they've made it cheaper to leave the country.

Why don't they just come out with it and tell the young to leave, rather than the subtle persuasion they are using now, if that's what they want. (Maybe they could get the new lottery licence holders to organise a draw(for the u25s with one way tickets to far flung places as prizes(and everyone wins))

Maudi

tayto lover wrote: »

No they should be allowed to see out their final years in peace.
They have paid already.
Realistic is in the eye of the beholder.
All this is to pay for the sins of rich bondholders anyway. Friends of the Govt.

The government ARE the bondholders..now it makes sense

YellowFeather

Minister Noonan still shaking badly on Prime Time. Also, he just gave Miriam the V sign while counting to two. Possible a Freudian Slip. :P

In seriousness, he said of the free GP care for under fives that every child should be treated equally in this State, regardless of their circumstances. Mealy-mouthedness at its finest. Aside from the fact that the current Constitutional definition of a "family" is undeniably out of touch with today's circumstances, I would love to see how the cutting of maternity benefits reconciles with Article 41:

1 1° The State recognises the Family as the natural primary and fundamental unit group of Society, and as a moral institution possessing inalienable and imprescriptible rights, antecedent and superior to all positive law.

2° The State, therefore, guarantees to protect the Family in its constitution and authority, as the necessary basis of social order and as indispensable to the welfare of the Nation and the State.

2 1° In particular, the State recognises that by her life within the home, woman gives to the State a support without which the common good cannot be achieved.

2° The State shall, therefore, endeavour to ensure that mothers shall not be obliged by economic necessity to engage in labour to the neglect of their duties in the home.

The language is somewhat outdated, making reference to "women" in particular, but the intent is clear; it wasn't referring to cooking dinners and sweeping the floors, but, rather, rearing children, which deserves recognition in and of itself and should be supported.

Now, I don't have children. I don't even like children! But to be making life more difficult for those who want to have them and not even acknowledging the fact that this is something we are fundamentally here to do is pretty abhorrent to me.

Maudi

tayto lover wrote: »

No they should be allowed to see out their final years in peace.
They have paid already.
Realistic is in the eye of the beholder.
All this is to pay for the sins of rich bondholders anyway. Friends of the Govt.

The government ARE the bondholders..now it makes sense

Maudi

tayto lover wrote: »

No they should be allowed to see out their final years in peace.
They have paid already.
Realistic is in the eye of the beholder.
All this is to pay for the sins of rich bondholders anyway. Friends of the Govt.

The government ARE the bondholders..now it makes sense

dark crystal

Ace2007 wrote: »

The principle is good, but the idea that it's all pensioners in the one boat is unfair. You have wealthy pensioners and poor ones, why not do a means test for them?

There are old folk in this country that are living on 200 or less a week who may have little savings.

Then compare that with someone with 3/4 houses rented out and getting 1k a week in pension.

Are you saying it's then fair that those 2 are treated the same?

It's just like child benefit - no matter how rich you are you "child gets it".

But the only thing less well off pensioners will lose is the telephone line rental scheme. They won't lose their medical cards, only wealthier over 70's will, so they're not being treated the same.

PaulKK

Ace2007 wrote: »

add 1c tax to text messages would bring in over 100million if my sums where right. (based on 3,049,241,000 texts me sent over a 3 month period in 2012

You do realise most messages are free these days? If people were getting charged per message they'd just completely switch to viber etc.

Stheno

Hulk Hands wrote: »

What's really annoying is people in media (and politicians) keep repeating the line 'it's the same sectors of society who have been hit once again', while the rest of the population and people whinging say the same. This year the jobseekers and pensioners seem to have been screwed, along with those higher earners who can afford medical insurance and the savers who've had Dirt taxed. Every year bar this one the middle income workers have been hit with PAYE and USC. The pension levy has been increased for another year, while the child allowance is down again. Who exactly are these specific set of people being targeted or do they just mean the Irish population in general and expect us not to understand?

I own a house (well I have a mortgage) have no children, pay tax at the higher rate, and the only real impact of the last two budgets including this one for me have been an increase in the price of fags, and the property tax.

Could I have afforded more? Yes and I budgeted for more, but it didn't happen

bleg wrote: »

But somebody who loses their job at the age of 24 (who may be completely cooperative with welfare policies) gets less than somebody 2 years older on the sole basis of their age.

I think this policy that has been put in place is fairly shocking tbh, I'd be all in favour of it being based on history rather than age

Ace2007 wrote: »

The principle is good, but the idea that it's all pensioners in the one boat is unfair. You have wealthy pensioners and poor ones, why not do a means test for them?

There are old folk in this country that are living on 200 or less a week who may have little savings.

Then compare that with someone with 3/4 houses rented out and getting 1k a week in pension.

Are you saying it's then fair that those 2 are treated the same?

It's just like child benefit - no matter how rich you are you "child gets it".

Cuts to pensioners have brought it down that those who as single people are on 500e per week will not have a medical card, and couples on 900 a week will not.

There are an awful lot of couples in this country who can only dream of living on 900e per week, let alone being retired and living off it.

Eight Ball

Cruel budget. Attacking those most in need and awarding those within the circle.

awec

Eight Ball wrote: »

Cruel budget. Attacking those most in need and awarding those within the circle.

Nice emotive soundbite, but a post completely lacking in substance.

Who was "awarded" then?

Who was "attacked" that is apparently "most in need" ?

Fighting Irish

tayto lover wrote: »

35,000 pensioners, some with serious illnesses, will lose their medical cards. Just like many special needs children did previously.

:pac:

Freddy Smelly

dark crystal wrote: »

Pensioners have been largely cocooned from the cuts the rest of us have had to take over the last few budgets. Low and middle income earners and families with children shouldn't be the only ones constantly taking the hit, when they have more outgoings than the average pensioner.

How many pensioners have to pay mortgages, college, school and creche fees, income tax, USC and large food bills?

The state pension hasn't been hit, they get free travel, tv licences and medical cards, as well as the household benefits package. All that happened in this budget was that the free line rental was cut and wealthier pensioners over 70 get free GP visits instead of the full medical card. I don't think that's unfair at all tbh.

lol my post was more about the 41% dirt tax... all this will encourage is people using other methods to save money... mostly abroad were tax rates are lower

Hulk Hands

Stheno wrote: »

I own a house (well I have a mortgage) have no children, pay tax at the higher rate, and the only real impact of the last two budgets including this one for me have been an increase in the price of fags, and the property tax.

Could I have afforded more? Yes and I budgeted for more, but it didn't happen

The middle incomes have been beaten pillar to post since the start of austerity. There couldn't possibly have been another increase in PAYE and USC in the last 2 budgets. Off the top of my head though, the increase in PRSI and Motor Tax (possibly not) affected you last year, along with possibly DIRT and of course the property tax in future?

Hulk Hands

Eight Ball wrote: »

Cruel budget. Attacking those most in need and awarding those within the circle.

How were those in the circle 'awarded'?