Cut children's allowance after 3 kids

end of the road

end of the road wrote: »

we actually need to grow our population and tax base.

One of the big issues is not just people having kids and claiming the benefit, it's WHO is having kids and claiming the benefits..


This is all anecdotal, but it seems like a lot more travellers, long term unemployable, scrotes and scummers are belting out kids, opposed to the amount that the grafting, income-earning people out there are.




Probably a lot to do with the amount of spare time they have, but in my area (a council estate) i see women with 3/4 kids a lot. In other areas I visit you rarely see more than 2, when the parents are working.


This will become more and more apparent over the next 2 decades, I feel.

dxhound2005

Deleted User wrote: »

One of the big issues is not just people having kids and claiming the benefit, it's WHO is having kids and claiming the benefits..


This is all anecdotal, but it seems like a lot more travellers, long term unemployable, scrotes and scummers are belting out kids, opposed to the amount that the grafting, income-earning people out there are.




Probably a lot to do with the amount of spare time they have, but in my area (a council estate) i see women with 3/4 kids a lot. In other areas I visit you rarely see more than 2, when the parents are working.


This will become more and more apparent over the next 2 decades, I feel.

Wherever you got the anecdotes from, they gave you wrong information about travellers. They are a tiny percentage of the population, and their population increase in the last census was not much higher than the 3.8% recorded for the general population.

https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-cp8iter/p8iter/p8itd/

The total number of usually resident Irish Travellers enumerated in April 2016 was 30,987 representing 0.7 per cent of the general population. This figure was an increase of 5.1 per cent on the 2011 figure of 29,495.

dxhound2005

dxhound2005 wrote: »

Wherever you got the anecdotes from, they gave you wrong information about travellers. They are a tiny percentage of the population, and their population increase in the last census was not much higher than the 3.8% recorded for the general population.

https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-cp8iter/p8iter/p8itd/

The total number of usually resident Irish Travellers enumerated in April 2016 was 30,987 representing 0.7 per cent of the general population. This figure was an increase of 5.1 per cent on the 2011 figure of 29,495.

Do 'settled' travellers count as travellers in that though?


I know a fair few traveller families from various areas (albeit, all in Louth/Meath/Dublin/Cavan/Monaghan) and they have no shortage of children.

dxhound2005

Deleted User wrote: »

Do 'settled' travellers count as travellers in that though?


I know a fair few traveller families from various areas (albeit, all in Louth/Meath/Dublin/Cavan/Monaghan) and they have no shortage of children.

It is those who self identified as Irish Traveller in the Census. You probably identified as White Irish. But your ancestry might be from economically deprived tenant farmers, who typically had ten children. I think that is my background as well, and we owe our presence here now to those forebears.

Jim Bob Scratcher

TOMs WIFE wrote: »

The very fact that Citizens information have to publish the below, is worrying enough.

Family sizeMonthly rate, €
One child 140
Two children280
Three children420
Four children560
Five children700
Six children840
Seven children 980

Eight children 1,120

Wow, that's crazy. It should be stopped after 2. If you're going to keep popping out kids then look after them yourselves.

Jack Moore

Wade Mango Tongue wrote: »

Do you really think people have kids for the sake of €35 a week ?

Do you really think that’s all you get
I was made redundant in May
I got a job in June
How much donyou think I got a week when I was out of work
I’m married with one kid

MadDog76

There seems to be some confusion on this thread...... EVERY child in this country is entitled to the Children's Allowance regardless of the parent(s) income.

up for anything

MadDog76 wrote: »

There seems to be some confusion on this thread...... EVERY child in this country is entitled to the Children's Allowance regardless of the parent(s) income.

Would you stop, MadDog. No point trying to infuse a bit of sense and knowledge into this shower. I tried telling them as much a few posts back but they only hear what they want to hear. What was it AH used to say... rabble rabble rabble.

So many of the AH threads in the last few years sound like poor relations escaped from Stormfront. Not even worth the clicking.

erica74

Cut it after 2 children. The reality is that the vast majority of people can't afford to raise one child, nevermind 2, without state help and the taxpayer shouldn't have to foot the bill for idiots who can't evaluate whether their income matches their family planning decisions.

TOMs WIFE

TOMs WIFE wrote: »

The very fact that Citizens information have to publish the below, is worrying enough.

Family sizeMonthly rate, €
Eight children 1,120

Yes, which is the cost of putting one of those eight kids in crèche for a single month. The idea of there being a Children's Allowance which incentivises people to have more children only exists in the minds of the morons here who utterly fail to see how the wealthiest in society have a myriad of ways to ensure they get much more from the state than somebody on welfare could ever get.

It's quite extraordinary how obsessive people here get about people on welfare, but never once start threads about the enormous rise in inequality in the western world since the early 1970s, a divide which has actually become significantly larger as a result of the last recession.

erica74

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Yes, which is the cost of putting one of those eight kids in crèche for a single month. The idea of there being a Children's Allowance which incentivises people to have more children only exists in the minds of the morons here who utterly fail to see how the wealthiest in society have a myriad of ways to ensure they get much more from the state than somebody on welfare could ever get.

It's quite extraordinary how obsessive people here get about people on welfare, but never once start threads about the enormous rise in inequality in the western world since the early 1970s, a divide which has actually become significantly larger as a result of the last recession.

Start a thread then:D

Wanderer78

Deleted User wrote: »

Yes, which is the cost of putting one of those eight kids in crèche for a single month. The idea of there being a Children's Allowance which incentivises people to have more children only exists in the minds of the morons here who utterly fail to see how the wealthiest in society have a myriad of ways to ensure they get much more from the state than somebody on welfare could ever get.

It's quite extraordinary how obsessive people here get about people on welfare, but never once start threads about the enormous rise in inequality in the western world since the early 1970s, a divide which has actually become significantly larger as a result of the last recession.

i completely agree with your above statements, but to some degree, its understandable why such debates occur, rising inequality isnt exactly tangible, its a thing, an entity, these debates involve peoples emotions, and we tend to be a little illogical when emotions get involved, its hard to see yourself effectively becoming poorer, while gaining access to more and more consumables., but thankfully, theres more and more evidence being presented to support your above opinions.

ED E

Deleted User wrote: »

I know a fair few traveller families from various areas (albeit, all in Louth/Meath/Dublin/Cavan/Monaghan) and they have no shortage of children.

Traveller birth rates are high but avg lifespan is also much lower thanks to rampant suicide, lack of education and in some cases criminal activity.

Deleted User wrote: »

I can understand the angle you're coming at it from, but personal responsibility has to play a part.

If this came into effect, in theory it shouldn't harm any kids, as people who aren't able to support a child wouldnt (or at least shouldn't) have one.

Totally theoretical. In practice there would be many instances of accidental pregnancies due to negligence. Harming a child will never fly so you could never cap it.

myshirt

I remember my teacher saying something to the effect of the below when I was about 12 and learning about history.

A large angry crowd were encroaching on King Richards castle, and he was panicking, saying oh sh't, what am I going to do. These people had torches, pitchforks, catapults, it looked like they were up for a right barney. They had grown sick of the absentee landlord in his high castle profiting on their backs, when they couldn't feed their families and house them.

What did his advisors tell him? Fight them head on? Deploy the archers?

No. They told him that all you need to do is convince the people with the torches that the people with the pitchforks are trying to take them, and convince the people with the pitchforks that the people with the torches are trying to take them, that they are sneaky, greedy, underhanded bastards who would take their pitchforks at the first opportunity.


So fight it out here on boards lads, but ask yourself who the real idiot is.

Roger Hassenforder

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Yes, which is the cost of putting one of those eight kids in crèche for a single month. The idea of there being a Children's Allowance which incentivises people to have more children only exists in the minds of the morons here who utterly fail to see how the wealthiest in society have a myriad of ways to ensure they get much more from the state than somebody on welfare could ever get.

As their parent(s) work...and in doing so, are providing the wherewiithall to support those who have no such need of such facilities.

[Deleted User] wrote: »

The idea of there being a Children's Allowance which incentivises people to have more children only exists in the minds of the morons here who utterly fail to see how the wealthiest in society have a myriad of ways to ensure they get much more from the state than somebody on welfare could ever get.

These being the same morons who see work, effort and reward as a virtue, rather than benifeting from the labour of others as an entitlement.
Yes, money makes money, and its worthy of a tread, theres a touch of whataboutery of it. But children shouldnt be seen/used as a way of making money. 8
The only morons are those that think this is sustainable. People need to be responsible.

kylith

Deleted User wrote: »

Yes, which is the cost of putting one of those eight kids in crèche for a single month. The idea of there being a Children's Allowance which incentivises people to have more children only exists in the minds of the morons here who utterly fail to see how the wealthiest in society have a myriad of ways to ensure they get much more from the state than somebody on welfare could ever get.

The cost of putting a child in crèche is not applicable if you don’t work. Either you stay home and don’t send them th childcare or with a medical card and a lone parent allowance you get €145 a week to put them into crèche until their free ECCE place comes due.

Now, why someone who is unemployed would get subsidised childcare at all I cannot fathom, but once again the onerous costs of childcare in this country effect only those who work for a living and struggle to make ends meet.

TOMs WIFE

TOMs WIFE wrote: »

The very fact that Citizens information have to publish the below, is worrying enough.

Family sizeMonthly rate, €
One child 140
Two children280
Three children420
Four children560
Five children700
Six children840
Seven children 980

Eight children 1,120

With 8 kids on the above allowances I'd say the parent(s) are at home with no child minding fees.

Danzy

TOMs WIFE wrote: »

Cut children's allowance after 3 kids.
Any more it's your choice, like Sky Sports.
It encourages people who shouldn't have more, and those who really can't afford more, to have more.

Allowance for 9th kid? Crazy. We'd see a little more restraint and more room in Garda Station waiting rooms if it was stopped.

This is like worrying about a scratch on the door while you have a chimney fire burning out of control.

The amount of thanks the OP got. I used to think boards had its head screwed on. Some of you are fcuking idiots.

TOMs WIFE

[Deleted User] wrote: »

The amount of thanks the OP got. I used to think boards had its head screwed on. Some of you are fcuking idiots.

Thanks!

Dakota Dan

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Fcuk the kids.

Steady up with the beastality.

suicide_circus

up for anything wrote: »

So many of the AH threads in the last few years sound like poor relations escaped from Stormfront. Not even worth the clicking.

questioning the way tax money is spent? that's neo nazi talk

fly_agaric

Deleted User wrote: »

The amount of thanks the OP got. I used to think boards had its head screwed on. Some of you are fcuking idiots.

For an Oirish forum there's a load of Daily Wail type rubbish about "scroungers" living the high life on benefits posted in it alright.

suicide_circus

dotsman wrote: »

Any adult not able to even independently look after themselves financially should not be bringing children into this world.

you are worse than Hitler

Peatys

puppieperson1 wrote: »

Make people apply for a license to have kids then do a pre kids course then be monitered and IQ tested also made to outline the path they intend to lay out for the child and what education they intend to provide..

Who'll be left to do the menial jobs like shelf stacking, I.T., road sweeping etc?

Dakota Dan

Pero_Bueno wrote: »

You do realise there is 7 Billion people in the world?

Totally unsustainable.

The worlds entire population can fit into the state of Texas and still have 10 m square for each person. BTW Europe’s population is falling and aging.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Peatys wrote: »

Who'll be left to do the menial jobs like shelf stacking, I.T., road sweeping etc?

??? wtf are you talking about?

TOMs WIFE

Helen Gigantic Karaoke wrote: »

??? wtf are you talking about?

I think he means QA. Always unnecessary.

Peatys

Helen Gigantic Karaoke wrote: »

??? wtf are you talking about?

What do you do for a living?

bnt

Dakota Dan wrote: »

The worlds entire population can fit into the state of Texas and still have 10 m square for each person. BTW Europe’s population is falling and aging.

Sure, if we didn't need such luxuries as fresh water or food. We all take up far more space, in terms of the resources we use, than the bit of ground we happen to be on.

We could use less, but not all that much less, not if we want to have the kind of quality of life that we've come to enjoy. So yes, more people could survive on this planet, but I'd like to think that the point of life is not just survival.

As for the point about Europe's population aging and shrinking - that is a natural intelligent reaction to the state of the world. We should be more concerned about those who don't see the problem and keep on expanding their populations.

TOMs WIFE

bnt wrote: »

We should be more concerned about those who don't see the problem and keep on expanding their populations.

As Garda stations will fill up quite quickly.

TOMs WIFE

[Deleted User] wrote: »

The idea of there being a Children's Allowance which incentivises people to have more children only exists in the minds of the morons here who utterly fail to see how.... .

At least you're open to hearing other opinions without name calling.

ct5amr2ig1nfhp

Child benefit should be allowed as a tax credit instead. Also link it to inflation. Reviewed every two years.

TOMs WIFE

Estelle Obnoxious Millionaire wrote: »

Child benefit should be allowed as a tax credit instead. Also link it to inflation. Reviewed every two years.

That makes some sense

Gunmonkey

Estelle Obnoxious Millionaire wrote: »

Child benefit should be allowed as a tax credit instead. Also link it to inflation. Reviewed every two years.

If ya made it a refundable tax credit, it might work. Either it reduces your overall tax take, thus giving more take home pay or it pushes past the €0 threshold of non-refundable credits and gives ya back a certain amount.

Only prolem with it would be those who got the cheque for a refund and splurged it all and then turn around and start crying they cant afford to feed de kids and need more....the one advantage of CB is its doled out quite sparingly.

TOMs WIFE

TOMs WIFE wrote: »

The very fact that Citizens information have to publish the below, is worrying enough.

Family sizeMonthly rate, €
One child 140
Two children280
Three children420
Four children560
Five children700
Six children840
Seven children 980

Eight children 1,120

Does anyone think you should really have 8 kids and take this much cash from the State?

puppieperson1

it was tongue in cheek - thanks party jungle some folks take themselves too seriously!! End of the road would make a good social worker methinks...... I on the other hand would not Cheers!!

TOMs WIFE

And more cash for the 10 kids now.

Working class heroes

Feck off to China the lot of ye.

thesimpsons

Cut the twins/multiple allowance. Maybe a once off at birth payment but to continue it indefinitely is grossly unfair on parents who have 2 kids pretty close together.

Eggs For Dinner

Dakota Dan wrote: »

Steady up with the beastality.

I don't think you've being doing it right

Wheeliebin30

myshirt wrote: »

All these threads laying into those on welfare is not consistent with the fact that the bulk of this country is actually sucking on the tit of the State whether you believe it or not. Is it just you guys don't know it?

1 in 2 is on some sort of welfare.

CruelCoin

Pero_Bueno wrote: »

You do realise there is 7 Billion people in the world?

Totally unsustainable.

Not in the least.

It's unsustainable in places like Africa or Asia where there is massive food/resource pressure, and where it's not reasonable to expect a desert to pump out extra food at the rate of population increase.

Elsewhere? Plenty of food to go around and the population can increase a good bit.

CruelCoin

Deleted User wrote: »

The idea of there being a Children's Allowance which incentivises people to have more children only exists in the minds of the morons here who utterly fail to see how the wealthiest in society have a myriad of ways to ensure they get much more from the state than somebody on welfare could ever get.

The top 10% in Ireland pay 90% of the income tax.

I have no problem with them getting a back some of this massively unfair imbalance.

Deebles McBeebles

CruelCoin wrote: »

Not in the least.

It's unsustainable in places like Africa or Asia where there is massive food/resource pressure, and where it's not reasonable to expect a desert to pump out extra food at the rate of population increase.

Elsewhere? Plenty of food to go around and the population can increase a good bit.

We could carpet bomb Africa, reseed and turn it into one big farm for our lovely rashers and steaks. Sorry, pigs and cows.

No need to worry about how the population effects climate change and loss of habitat/forest. We'll be dead before the last tiger goes down.

CruelCoin

Deebles McBeebles wrote: »

We could carpet bomb Africa, reseed and turn it into one big farm for our lovely rashers and steaks. Sorry, pigs and cows.

No need to worry about how the population effects climate change and loss of habitat/forest. We'll be dead before the last tiger goes down.

Loss of habitat? You see much in the way of slash and burn agriculture in the first world?

Point the finger where it needs to be pointed.

Deebles McBeebles

CruelCoin wrote: »

Loss of habitat? You see much in the way of slash and burn agriculture in the first world?

Point the finger where it needs to be pointed.

I see it where its needed to feed the ever growing population of the world. Where it happens doesn't matter.

FishOnABike

bnt wrote: »

As for the point about Europe's population aging and shrinking - that is a natural intelligent reaction to the state of the world. We should be more concerned about those who don't see the problem and keep on expanding their populations.

Who do you think will be paying tax towards your pension when you retire?

If the population keeps aging and shrinking there will be fewer and fewer people of working age paying into the tax kitty to pay your pension (and other publicly funded services.

This is already a looming problem causing the pensionable age to be gradually increased.

TOMs WIFE

FishOnABike wrote: »

Who do you think will be paying tax towards your pension when you retire? .

Probably, on balance, not the majority of families with 10 kids.

ELM327

Cut all child benefit.
People will procreate anyway.