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
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Means testing

  • 07-12-2010 7:37pm
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,786 ✭✭✭


    How expensive would it be if the Government introduced it for the Old Age Pensions, Children's Allowance and any other benefit that is paid out no matter what your income is?

    I mean would the benefits outweigh the costs and if so why aren't they doing it?


Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 11,299 ✭✭✭✭later12


    If they used many of the current solicitors, accountants, scientists, economists and other graduates currently on the dole, as a sort of work placement Dole programme?

    A small, nominal amount.

    But to do so would be way too unpopular, unfortunately.


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 10,088 Mod ✭✭✭✭marco_polo


    funnyname wrote: »
    How expensive would it be if the Government introduced it for the Old Age Pensions, Children's Allowance and any other benefit that is paid out no matter what your income is?

    I mean would the benefits outweigh the costs and if so why aren't they doing it?

    The state pension cannot be means tested as it is a contributory scheme, and there already exists a means tested non contributory pension.

    For child benefit given the large number of schemes the administration costs would be massive and surely outweigh any gains.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,339 ✭✭✭tenchi-fan


    People who paid contributions should NEVER be means tested. They paid their money, they are entitled to receive a pension.

    The reason? Some people who are now pensioners saved hard for their retirement, or they accumulated assets rather than blew all their money on cars, drink or the highlife. Why punish these people just because they have some money remaining in their old age?

    On the other hand, the non-contributory pension is already means tested. In my opinion there should be a larger difference between the contributory and non-contributory pension to reward people for a life-time's work.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,786 ✭✭✭funnyname


    fair enough re the contributory oap but why should two families (family A has an annual gross income of 100k, family B has an annual gross income of 35k) with 3 kids each both get the same amount of children's allowance?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,764 ✭✭✭mickstupp


    Means testing in this country is broken. Too many get what they shouldn't. And sadly a bunch fall through the cracks and get nothing when they really need it.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,588 ✭✭✭femur61


    I don't know how much it costs to means test but always said it outwieghs the cost of giving a blanket sum every week/month. But, now the IMF/EU are calling the shots will they demand a fair means test. We are broke as a country so they don't care about how many voters will be disgruntled or tradition, they will just will demand to get as much out of Ireland as possible.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,909 ✭✭✭sarumite


    later10 wrote: »
    If they used many of the current solicitors, accountants, scientists, economists and other graduates currently on the dole, as a sort of work placement Dole programme?

    A small, nominal amount.

    But to do so would be way too unpopular, unfortunately.

    how many hours a week would they have to work? Would there be people in the CS getting the CS salaries, pensions and entitlements doing the same work as those who merely get dole payments? What if they have a job interview, can they just up and leave? Time off?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 11,299 ✭✭✭✭later12


    sarumite wrote: »
    how many hours a week would they have to work? Would there be people in the CS getting the CS salaries, pensions and entitlements doing the same work as those who merely get dole payments? What if they have a job interview, can they just up and leave? Time off?
    I was thinking pretty much the same as a Fas Training Course actually. I had a thread about this before. There could be a limited number of CS staff merging into their department working as supervisors and welfare inspectors, but they would have a more supervisory role, as I said.

    It would benefit jobseekers who would continue to get paid as well as receiving ongoing exposure to administrative environments for the benefit of keeping their CVs updated, and also there would be the possibility of travel expenses and child care entitlement if that need were to arise as it does in the current Fas training programmes.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,700 ✭✭✭irishh_bob


    tenchi-fan wrote: »
    People who paid contributions should NEVER be means tested. They paid their money, they are entitled to receive a pension.

    The reason? Some people who are now pensioners saved hard for their retirement, or they accumulated assets rather than blew all their money on cars, drink or the highlife. Why punish these people just because they have some money remaining in their old age?

    On the other hand, the non-contributory pension is already means tested. In my opinion there should be a larger difference between the contributory and non-contributory pension to reward people for a life-time's work.

    considering the huge increase in the OAP this past decade , the prsi contributions made by todays recipients wouldnt come close to covering the cost

    as for means testing , that was tried with the medica card and the country went into a frenzy , some groups are off limits for debate in this childish little country


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,339 ✭✭✭tenchi-fan


    irishh_bob wrote: »
    considering the huge increase in the OAP this past decade , the prsi contributions made by todays recipients wouldnt come close to covering the cost

    I'm not sure if you are confusing the contributory and non-contributory pensions.

    Regarding the contributory state pensino: Forget about what people are paying in today.. how much did the OAPs pay in (in real terms) when they were working - and not just PRSI (which is simply earmarked for social insurance), but the entire amount of PAYE, PRSI, Health levy, etc.

    Like it or not, they are entitled to a pension which is more than can be said for many other segments of society drawing means tested benefits.

    I understand the level of that pension may vary for reasons including the cost of living, but ultimately they have paid into the pot, they made their contribution and in their old age are unable to contribute anymore, therefore they should be first in line to draw from it. Followed by people claiming jobseekers benefit, followed by state non-contrib, followed by jobseekers assistance.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,184 ✭✭✭KINGVictor


    marco_polo wrote: »
    The state pension cannot be means tested as it is a contributory scheme, and there already exists a means tested non contributory pension.

    For child benefit given the large number of schemes the administration costs would be massive and surely outweigh any gains
    .

    Firstly, I dont understand what you mean by the large number of schemes under Child benefit..really cant understand that part.

    Secondly, I agree with you that the administrative costs of means-testing will indeed be enormous in the short-run...but there would surely be gains in the long-run, and it only makes economic sense that folks that earn more with less children get a reduction in payments.

    I believe that the Irish govt has taken a lazy decision by cutting it across the board but it makes more sense that the abysmal child benefit framework being introduced in the UK...that is just unfair and a statistical anomaly.

    My suggestion to combat all the complexities of the child benefit payment is to scrap it and introduce a two-tier payment structure. i.e.

    • For workers- there should be an introduction of child tax credits and this should be paid in addition to salaries and these payments should be made putting into consideration the level of family income and the number of children in the household. They could introduce a cap of maybe €80,000 to avail of such credits.
    • For people on social welfare- Government should increase the weekly child allowances, so for instance from the current €29, they could make it €50.
    That will save the exchequer a lot of money and make it relatively equitable.


Advertisement