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

Child benefit debate over use of the money

135678

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,704 ✭✭✭Speak Now


    Question away but kids are way more expensive than anyone would have you believe. The little bits a Mum would pick up/ pay out over the course of a month are necessities. If you have no trust with your partner over such things it's a tough relationship aheas. As much as we like to think its 50/50 it is nothing like a business.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,803 ✭✭✭Shoog


    Paying child benefit into a savings account for college is very much the exception rather than the norm. It gets spent on living expenses by most people.

    Frankly if you can afford the luxury of banking it - your not the target recipient and you never needed it in the first place.

    Also if you maintain seperate accounts - don't be surprised when a partner doesn't feel the need to discuss how they spend their money - it's part of that arrangement. If there isn't trust enough to pool what business is it of the partner to ask questions about a private account.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 692 ✭✭✭Kurooi


    And what makes you think a dad doesn't pay out? In this particular relationship. Seems wildly sexist to assume the mom has to be running the home and the dad couldn't possibly.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,099 ✭✭✭✭o1s1n
    Master of the Universe


    Bit of a moot point if you have a shared joint account for household/child related expenses.



  • Registered Users Posts: 841 ✭✭✭Norrie Rugger Head


    Jesus Christ 🙄

    Thread took a while for blatant misandry but this one is right up there

    ⛥ ̸̱̼̞͛̀̓̈́͘#C̶̼̭͕̎̿͝R̶̦̮̜̃̓͌O̶̬͙̓͝W̸̜̥͈̐̾͐Ṋ̵̲͔̫̽̎̚͠ͅT̸͓͒͐H̵͔͠È̶̖̳̘͍͓̂W̴̢̋̈͒͛̋I̶͕͑͠T̵̻͈̜͂̇Č̵̤̟̑̾̂̽H̸̰̺̏̓ ̴̜̗̝̱̹͛́̊̒͝⛥



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,803 ✭✭✭Shoog


    If you ask a government representative why it's paid to mothers - they will not materially disagree with my statement.



  • Registered Users Posts: 841 ✭✭✭Norrie Rugger Head


    ⛥ ̸̱̼̞͛̀̓̈́͘#C̶̼̭͕̎̿͝R̶̦̮̜̃̓͌O̶̬͙̓͝W̸̜̥͈̐̾͐Ṋ̵̲͔̫̽̎̚͠ͅT̸͓͒͐H̵͔͠È̶̖̳̘͍͓̂W̴̢̋̈͒͛̋I̶͕͑͠T̵̻͈̜͂̇Č̵̤̟̑̾̂̽H̸̰̺̏̓ ̴̜̗̝̱̹͛́̊̒͝⛥



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,704 ✭✭✭Speak Now




  • Registered Users Posts: 841 ✭✭✭Norrie Rugger Head


    It's not their money. It's paid into her account for expenses related to the child. It's family money

    ⛥ ̸̱̼̞͛̀̓̈́͘#C̶̼̭͕̎̿͝R̶̦̮̜̃̓͌O̶̬͙̓͝W̸̜̥͈̐̾͐Ṋ̵̲͔̫̽̎̚͠ͅT̸͓͒͐H̵͔͠È̶̖̳̘͍͓̂W̴̢̋̈͒͛̋I̶͕͑͠T̵̻͈̜͂̇Č̵̤̟̑̾̂̽H̸̰̺̏̓ ̴̜̗̝̱̹͛́̊̒͝⛥



  • Registered Users Posts: 841 ✭✭✭Norrie Rugger Head


    Hey, if you want to spout misandry that's on you

    ⛥ ̸̱̼̞͛̀̓̈́͘#C̶̼̭͕̎̿͝R̶̦̮̜̃̓͌O̶̬͙̓͝W̸̜̥͈̐̾͐Ṋ̵̲͔̫̽̎̚͠ͅT̸͓͒͐H̵͔͠È̶̖̳̘͍͓̂W̴̢̋̈͒͛̋I̶͕͑͠T̵̻͈̜͂̇Č̵̤̟̑̾̂̽H̸̰̺̏̓ ̴̜̗̝̱̹͛́̊̒͝⛥



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,803 ✭✭✭Shoog


    I am a man, a father and a husband but I am also realistic.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 692 ✭✭✭Kurooi


    If that guides your opinion then you're a sorry excuse for a man, father and husband , don't drag the rest of us with you.

    I know plenty of people where dad was the MVP you cannot make policy and wild statements around outdated, bullshit sexism. And it's sexism cutting both ways no way should women accept all responsibility for a child.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,206 ✭✭✭Ezeoul


    Historically, Shoog is correct.

    Child Benefit (as it is now called) was first introduced in the forties, and back then it was paid to fathers (and only to families with 3+ children). But then in the seventies it was changed so the payment was made directly to mothers for the exact reasons described above. Traditionally mothers at the time did not work outside the home and many had husbands who were neglectful or did not share their income adequately. Paying it to mothers ensured there was at least some money under her control for the care of the kids.

    Nowadays, child benefit is still paid to the mother. The reason for this is ease of administration, not misandry. However, in the case of separated / divorced parents it is paid to whichever parent has the greater share of day to day custody, which is usually the mother. It is also considered as income in the calculation of child maintenance payments.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,267 ✭✭✭Padre_Pio


    I think there are two arguments here.

    1. who the money should be paid to.
    2. how the money should be spent.

    I don't think the OP cares the money goes to his partner, I think we can all agree that historically it made sense and there was no good reasons to change it.

    However, I do think the mother should put the money into a joint account or at least not count it towards her own contributions. I guess she's treating it as an extra, personal income stream which is grating to the OP.

    Personally, our CB is transferred with a standing order into our joint account, which is our emergency fund and is also used to pay bills and the mortgage. So the balance of this account creeps up over time. We both pull money out of this for unforeseen expenses, never anything directly related to the day-to-day child expenses.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,206 ✭✭✭Ezeoul


    I think you're right. And I do think the OP is fully within his rights to ask about it.

    From the friends and family I've had conversations with about this, most seem to do as you describe - keep their own personal accounts they get paid into, but have a joint account they transfer into for things like bills, mortgage/rent, childcare, any joint savings and the CB goes into that pot.

    It sounds fair to me.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,271 ✭✭✭Widdensushi




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 362 ✭✭iniscealtra


    Talk to your wife. A savings account is a good idea if you can afford it. I am taking a year unpaid for childcare purposes so it goes towards the electricity bill. When I go back to work hopefully towards saving but maybe childcare. Is your wife taking time out off work for childcare?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,494 ✭✭✭✭Calahonda52


    “I can’t pay my staff or mortgage with instagram likes”.



  • Registered Users Posts: 841 ✭✭✭Norrie Rugger Head


    Ireland of 80 years ago has no relevance to today. Spouting nonsense that father's are feckless alcoholics is misandry

    ⛥ ̸̱̼̞͛̀̓̈́͘#C̶̼̭͕̎̿͝R̶̦̮̜̃̓͌O̶̬͙̓͝W̸̜̥͈̐̾͐Ṋ̵̲͔̫̽̎̚͠ͅT̸͓͒͐H̵͔͠È̶̖̳̘͍͓̂W̴̢̋̈͒͛̋I̶͕͑͠T̵̻͈̜͂̇Č̵̤̟̑̾̂̽H̸̰̺̏̓ ̴̜̗̝̱̹͛́̊̒͝⛥



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,702 ✭✭✭✭whelan2


    She's probably saving it up in a running away account...



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,803 ✭✭✭Shoog


    Just because most fathers are responsible doesn't invalidate the reasons why the state gives CB to women. You seem to have a mighty chip on your shoulder about people been honest about the fact that there are feckless fathers out there even if most are not.

    The reality is that most primary carers of children are still women and the state acknowledges this basic reality by paying CB to them.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,267 ✭✭✭Padre_Pio


    Why is this relevant to the thread, unless you think the OP is feckless and can't be trusted with the money



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,803 ✭✭✭Shoog


    I was pointing out the reason why CB was generally paid to the mother - which offended one contributor who then called me a misandrist. He obviously disagreed with the logic but it doesn't change the reason why it's paid to mothers rather than fathers.



  • Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 10,356 Mod ✭✭✭✭Jim2007


    Hmmm, not the case. In 30+ years of dealing with people's personal finances I'd say it the exception not to have some seperate accounts in cases where both individuals are working. In such cases people have some kind of understanding of how to split money between common and private. Either a certain amount is paid into a joint account used to cover their life together and the rest is theirs to do as they wish or all is paid in to a joint account and the partners take out "an allowance" each month to do as the wish no questions asked.

    In deed I remember once having a conversation with one of those individuals involved in pre marriage counselling and she said it was always a big red flag in a relationship if people can't come you with a mature way of dealing with money before the marriage.

    As for @huggy15 I'd say it's two separate conversations - financing the outgoings for your child and providing for there future. I say a seperate account where the allowance plus both your contributions are paid in each month to cover the child costs and then a conversation about how to save for the kids future.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,181 ✭✭✭downtheroad


    That poster didn't mention the 41% exit tax that will apply on such an investment



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 745 ✭✭✭tommythecat


    4kwp South East facing PV System. 5.3kwh Weco battery. South Dublin City.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,803 ✭✭✭Shoog


    Having just discussed this with my wife of over 35 years she is in complete agreement about the trust issues this points to.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,439 ✭✭✭✭noodler


    And if he earns 100k to her 50k the higher salary is all legally his.

    Thought it was clear that's not what the principle here was



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,439 ✭✭✭✭noodler


    I can't help but feel if a woman was on this thread complaining about the man keeping the higher salary he earns then you would be taking a very different tact.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,256 ✭✭✭combat14


    8% is a conservative return

    spending the child's benefit on ciggarettes, vapes, hairdos, wine and girlie nights out is not

    capital gains tax is 33%

    whats wrong with discussing investing the childs benefit

    im sure the man is expected to pay at least half any creche costs



Advertisement