Child benefit

not yet

Just heard on the news that Danny (I love me who do you love) mcCoy from IBEC Has asked the government to consider giving a kind of debit card with the allowance on it each month.

This would solve a couple of problems.......... 1: Anyone saving this for holidays etc would need to spend it in shops etc. 2: It would mean 2 billion extra being spent in local shops.

I believe this system could work, Firstly anyone claiming for non existent children would not get cash, secondly and here comes the racist bit!!!!!
any monies currently leaving the state would have to be spent here.

Oh, and don't start with the racist crap, at this stage I'm sick to death of all the PC bullsh1te doing the rounds.

AMCCORK

Would you not just still buy the things you were going to buy and then save the cash instead?

not yet

Easy on the: sure most people are waiting on this money to eat, pay bills etc
I'm talking mainly about the money being saved in accounts for millicent or Roger from Killiney ha ha.

OMD

not yet wrote: »

Easy on the: sure most people are waiting on this money to eat, pay bills etc
I'm talking mainly about the money being saved in accounts for millicent or Roger from Killiney ha ha.

But they could still save the money

not yet

AMCCORK wrote: »

Would you not just still buy the things you were going to buy and then save the cash instead?

True.......but Danny thinks it's a runner so who am I to disagree.

not yet

OMD wrote: »

But they could still save the money

True.

the groutch

even better, bring back the food stamps

flutered

where would one spend it, lidil/aldi only use laser, how many small shops across the country could take them very few, so more income for the big muntiples.

not yet

Good idea, and whilst we're at it free heating for all................

StudentDad

flutered wrote: »

where would one spend it, lidil/aldi only use laser, how many small shops across the country could take them very few, so more income for the big muntiples.

I'm with Jasper Carrott on this one.

SD

Godge

Probelm: Child benefit costs €2.2 billion per year. Some of it is saved, some of it is spent in Poland and Latvia, some of it is drunk, smoked and injected. Result is that a significant amount of it does not go to the purpose for which it was originally intended.

Solution: Abolish child benefit. Replace child benefit with free schoolbooks for all, free school uniform for all, free childcare for 3-4 year olds, a small allowance for under 1 year old to cover the cost of feeding and diapers. Also get rid of back-to-school allowance as these costs are now covered. Review the level of social welfare payment for dependent children, maybe making extra direct provision available for social welfare recipients - a second uniform, free school transport, school lunches, etc.

Result: The money spent on child benefit and other social welfare payments for children goes directly to the original intended purpose of helping families living in Ireland cope with the extra cost of having children. At the same time, the direct provision of these things should cost significantly less resulting in a saving of at least €1 billion.

Finnbar01

Apparently if people opt for cash, then they'll get 25% less than someone going with the card.

The whole notion behind this is to get people to spend and consume rather than save.

IBEC believes that savings are bad for an economy, when savings are a form of spending and investing.

Bannasidhe

not yet wrote: »

Easy on the: sure most people are waiting on this money to eat, pay bills etc
I'm talking mainly about the money being saved in accounts for millicent or Roger from Killiney ha ha.

Or it could just be means tested...

jimmycrackcorm

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Or it could just be means tested...

It would probably cost more than the actual benefit to administer means-tests.

IBECs idea is not bad but it just means that people would replace other cash payments with the card. For benefit that goes abroad it jjust means the parent earning that benefit here would do the same and send their own cash abroad.

Godges solution is the best.

StudentDad

Godge wrote: »

Probelm: Child benefit costs €2.2 billion per year. Some of it is saved, some of it is spent in Poland and Latvia, some of it is drunk, smoked and injected. Result is that a significant amount of it does not go to the purpose for which it was originally intended.

Solution: Abolish child benefit. Replace child benefit with free schoolbooks for all, free school uniform for all, free childcare for 3-4 year olds, a small allowance for under 1 year old to cover the cost of feeding and diapers. Also get rid of back-to-school allowance as these costs are now covered. Review the level of social welfare payment for dependent children, maybe making extra direct provision available for social welfare recipients - a second uniform, free school transport, school lunches, etc.

Result: The money spent on child benefit and other social welfare payments for children goes directly to the original intended purpose of helping families living in Ireland cope with the extra cost of having children. At the same time, the direct provision of these things should cost significantly less resulting in a saving of at least €1 billion.

Given the vested interests in schoolbooks alone, chances are it would turn into another bloody expensive mess.

SD

Pete_Cavan

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

It would probably cost more than the actual benefit to administer means-tests.

But would it cost more to means test? There are thousands of civil servants in administrative positions in the various government departments/agencies and local authorities who are not necessary. With Labour in the government none of these people will lose their jobs so imo the best thing to do is to move them into social welfare to administer means testing. This would be cost neutral but would save a fortune by ensuring benefits only go to those who actually need them.

And I wouldnt just stop at child benefit; medical cards, pensions, rent allowance and anything else the state pays out for should get the same treatment.

Bannasidhe

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

It would probably cost more than the actual benefit to administer means-tests.

IBECs idea is not bad but it just means that people would replace other cash payments with the card. For benefit that goes abroad it jjust means the parent earning that benefit here would do the same and send their own cash abroad.

Godges solution is the best.

It would if, as I have commented to Godge about this on another thread, we had a state agency capable of organising a p**s up in a brewery. I suspect the reality is this would become a bureaucratic nightmare of Kafkaesque levels of red tape with the HSE via the Community Welfare system responsible for some of the provisions, others via the dept of Social Protection and yet others from the Dept of Education via the schools.

Perhaps if we ever get the one-stop welfare shop we were promised by FG... not holding my breathe on that one....

wolfpawnat

Godge wrote: »

Probelm: Child benefit costs €2.2 billion per year. Some of it is saved, some of it is spent in Poland and Latvia, some of it is drunk, smoked and injected. Result is that a significant amount of it does not go to the purpose for which it was originally intended.

Solution: Abolish child benefit. Replace child benefit with free schoolbooks for all, free school uniform for all, free childcare for 3-4 year olds, a small allowance for under 1 year old to cover the cost of feeding and diapers. Also get rid of back-to-school allowance as these costs are now covered. Review the level of social welfare payment for dependent children, maybe making extra direct provision available for social welfare recipients - a second uniform, free school transport, school lunches, etc.

Result: The money spent on child benefit and other social welfare payments for children goes directly to the original intended purpose of helping families living in Ireland cope with the extra cost of having children. At the same time, the direct provision of these things should cost significantly less resulting in a saving of at least €1 billion.

Recently discussed this with an English family at a wedding, they get £70 a month for their child as well as free school books, heavily subsidised uniforms, school lunches and free healthcare until the age of 12! Sounds like the €2 billion a year is cheap as opposed to the cost of implementing that system.

I use the English system as usually boards insists on pitting their system against ours!!!

cavedave

not yet

Oh, and don't start with the racist crap, at this stage I'm sick to death of all the PC bullsh1te doing the rounds.

Who died and made you pope of what arguments people can make?

Bannasidhe

wolfpawnat wrote: »

Recently discussed this with an English family at a wedding, they get £70 a month for their child as well as free school books, heavily subsidised uniforms, school lunches and free healthcare until the age of 12! Sounds like the €2 billion a year is cheap as opposed to the cost of implementing that system.

I use the English system as usually boards insists on pitting their system against ours!!!

My son was in the English system - London and Sheffield -until he was 10 - he got a choice of dinner everyday, no uniform, school provided the books, free full dental and medical care, after school club.

When we returned to Ireland I had to immediately fork out for a uniform with school crest, provide packed lunches, buy a back breaking amount of books and make several 'contributions/donations' to the school for art supplies/ sports equipment etc etc.

I had to pay for his doctor/hospital visits and although technically he 'could' have benefited from dental work - it took 7 years for the appointment we applied for to come through and I had already paid to get the work done.

jodaw

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

It would probably cost more than the actual benefit to administer means-tests.

Oh Really?

A claimant should declare to means by way of filling out a form (ala car tax), if you do not file your means then you do not have a claim. Re-assign redundant member of public service to audit claimants...

Stiff penalties to those that make inaccurate means statements....

Simple really-- what is this cost you speak of??? Money would be saved since the only ones going to the hassle of this process would be the people that really need it...

So infact it would save money !!!

All that this IBEC tool is trying to achieve it to take more money for poor people, while all the while this bluffer gets a paycheck he does not deserve? What exactly is his job anyway and if he is not busy enough in his own job why does he feel he has to do the work of the department of social protection.

just another one of the many crooks in our country:mad:

jimmycrackcorm

jodaw wrote: »

Oh Really?

A claimant should declare to means by way of filling out a form (ala car tax), if you do not file your means then you do not have a claim. Re-assign redundant member of public service to audit claimants...

All that this IBEC tool is trying to achieve it to take more money for poor people, while all the while this bluffer gets a paycheck he does not deserve? What exactly is his job anyway and if he is not busy enough in his own job why does he feel he has to do the work of the department of social protection.

just another one of the many crooks in our country:mad:

You're confusing self-assessment with a means test.

The IBEC guy is validly pointing out that some child benefit is being saved instead of being spent when it could be a mechanism to increase consumer spending.

woodoo

Tax the hell out of it.

jodaw

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

You're confusing self-assessment with a means test.

The IBEC guy is validly pointing out that some child benefit is being saved instead of being spent when it could be a mechanism to increase consumer spending.

I am not confusing anything with anything.

I am proposing a way of implementing and means based child benefit claim with the onus on the claimant to file. And yes it would be similar to self assessment.

I am also asking the question what some IBEC muppet is poking his nose into social protection for and why his opinion has more weight than you or I? He is a nobody and he should be dismissed as that and his opinion not give media exposure on the operating of our country. After all this is what we have elected politicians for. :mad:

MeisterG

What about allowing people who are less in need of the benefit to opt for govt. Bonds maturing as their children reach the age of 18/21 or so. Reduces short term cash burden for the State and allows people to build up (somewhat) a cushion to pass onto their children. In fact put it in the children's name only so they are the only beneficiary. Even then you could make it domiciled in the state only so that the economy benefits from the cash.

jodaw

MeisterG wrote: »

What about allowing people who are less in need of the benefit to opt for govt. Bonds maturing as their children reach the age of 18/21 or so. Reduces short term cash burden for the State and allows people to build up (somewhat) a cushion to pass onto their children. In fact put it in the children's name only so they are the only beneficiary. Even then you could make it domiciled in the state only so that the economy benefits from the cash.

A very interesting suggestion. A lot better than most of the suggestions coming for so called experts. How about making these maturing bonds go directly toward education costs, because if the IMF have their say the cost of education in this country will go the American way.

Though your suggestion would help save now, it would not solve the problem that these people that take the bond do not really need the money. So why not just allocate the money where it is most needed.

not yet

cavedave wrote: »

Who died and made you pope of what arguments people can make?

My cousin...........

MeisterG

Jodaw get your point re allocation. However would be considering this running parallel with the (hopeful) means tested third level fees. Those who would then have to pay fees have access to some cash. What is important to me is that for example kids do not have to start their adult lives in debt.

MeisterG

To Bannasidhe, as a parent in England when you walk in the school doors, younger always amazed at the difference between what is provided versus Irish equivalents.
There are two drawbacks though, the facilities as they are, are paid through higher taxes levelled against everyone and secondly the fundamental quality of "free" education is very variable over here and driven by the so called postcode lottery. Many parents move house just to be near a good school which is a clear cost and inaccessible to most.
A more extreme example are two flats near where I used to live which were rented by families for postcode purposes get into a school. They did not live there but felt the cost worth it.

Gumbo

To be honest, it wouldnt make one bit of difference to me, every penny of my childs allowance gets spent in Dunnes Stores on Cow and Gate, Rusk (although i eat one or two of those ), but its a shame as Aldi dont accept credit cards, and thats where i get his nappies from

Welease

It's never quiet as easy and as simple as some people try to make out..

If you want to means test CB, then you need to set the threshold level.. How do you set it so you don't make it even more difficult for people to take work?.. Anecdotal evidence already suggests that many families are better of on the dole until they are almost earning the average industrial wage..If you take it off people who earn not much more than that... then you draw them into the "social welfare is better" net which ends up costing more..
Set the threshold too high and its not going to make much of a difference either way.. I would be interested to see those who demand this, actually put up some thresholds for discussion.

Handing out debit cards won't make any difference in real terms.. People will bank their social/pay etc instead.. and use the CB card to cover those expenses.. In my case, my children would still end up having the exact same amount in a bank account for them, it would just come initially from a different source..

Getting the state to intervene with warehouses of food would be a disaster.. It would cost considerably more than Tesco's, Lidl etc could do purchase, transport, display and retail the exact same goods for..

We could and should investigate a method similar to previously posted whereby uniforms, books etc. are provided instead of cash.. however, I sadly have little faith that once the monolith that is the PS, the unions and vested interests got a hold that it would be any less expensive or wasteful than the current cash for everyone scheme..

In the end, much like the way the PS and most schemes get treated in this country.. I feel they will go for a universal cut while keeping the benefit for all method.

gbee

AMCCORK wrote: »

Would you not just still buy the things you were going to buy and then save the cash instead?

Possibly, but the average family has €500 to €800 CA and some with a lot more and obviously the one child family much less.

You'll spend a portion of dole/wages per week, say €200 on groceries and commodities. The difference is you won't actually have the lump sum that the CA gives one.

You'll probably put away the first €200 in this example, but you'll also use up your CA coupons more rapidly as you'l tend to stockpile ~ it happens ~ so while theoretically, one could put away equal amounts of 'saved' cash ~ we know how well the Supermarkets milk 'savings'

As a cash flow, the few bob each and every week is the lifeline ~ you won't save anything ~ the most you have to put away is your €200 dole/wages and that's actually all you'll save.

It's part of high end economics that does not seem to make sense, like everything you buy cost you three or five times the face value and anything you sell is worth a fifth to a third of the selling prices, as is selling something for €1,000 but only getting €100 a week, the total value to you is just €100 and you NEVER get your €1,000.

It's the same principal.

Bannasidhe

MeisterG wrote: »

To Bannasidhe, as a parent in England when you walk in the school doors, younger always amazed at the difference between what is provided versus Irish equivalents.
There are two drawbacks though, the facilities as they are, are paid through higher taxes levelled against everyone and secondly the fundamental quality of "free" education is very variable over here and driven by the so called postcode lottery. Many parents move house just to be near a good school which is a clear cost and inaccessible to most.
A more extreme example are two flats near where I used to live which were rented by families for postcode purposes get into a school. They did not live there but felt the cost worth it.

MeisterG - that happens here as well. I know quite a few children in 'desirable' schools by using grandparents addresses. Back in the 60s my mother used this tactic for us as the local girls school was in a dilapidated old manor house. Ironically, having been 'newly' rebuilt this school is now considered the best girls primary school in the city so my mother now lives between two highly desirable primary schools and at getting out time the whole place is gridlocked with traffic.
My nephew went to the boys primary (he did live in the parish - one of 3 out of a class of 28) and my sister estimates she paid on average 1,000 a year in donations for his 'free' education. The final straw for her was when they asked for donations of 500 each for a swimming pool when there is a public pool a short distance away across a playing field! This a National School mind.

My own son was unable to get a place in the local CoI school (about 500 metres from house) as it was full of Catholics so he ended up in a Catholic school 2 miles away. I've always found that quite ironic...

OMD

gbee wrote: »

Possibly, but the average family has €500 to €800 CA and some with a lot more and obviously the one child family much less.

Does CA stand for children's allowance? If so you are very wrong. Average family gets €280 a month