Pensioners and Intelligence

McCruiskeen

The reaction of a lot of people to this tax that some pensioners now owe seems to be:

"ah the poor pensioners, how would they have known they had to pay tax on their income, they are being screwed over by the government"

This worries me!!!

I am still youngish and have been lucky enough so far that every year I learn a little bit more and get a little bit wiser (despite occasional alcohol fueled teenage like **** ups)

So at what age will I start to lose my marbles and think that I don't have to pay tax on my income anymore?

Or is the "poor pensioner" attitude just a bit condescending to the many intelligent and sharp older people out there.

Enda Kenny will be 65 in 4 years so if he doesn't declare his income then, would the attitude be "ah sure how could he have known he had to pay tax on his income, he is so old and thick"

gigino

The old age pension is double here what it is north of the border. If pensioners here are lucky enough to a have an additional source of income you would think they would know they have to pay tax.

amacachi

Isn't there tax relief for private pensions to prevent people getting doubled-taxed? Cheeky of the government to expect tax to be paid once! :pac:

pickarooney

gigino wrote: »

The old age pension is double here what it is north of the border. If pensioners here are lucky enough to a have an additional source of income you would think they would know they have to pay tax.

Can you not at least try and make some sort of sense? This reads like it was generated by a robot with its begrudgery levels set to 11.

policarp

If pensioners spent all their money during their working years or before they turned 65, they wouldn't have to worry about tax.
They would be a burden on the state though.

tigger123

Whatever about paying the tax from here on in, I think it's pretty horrible expecting them to pay back tax to be honest, it's not like they can switch careers and make more money in order to adjust for it. Seems to have been the governments error as Departments were not sharing info with each other?

It's hardly relevant to the thread that pension is double in the Republic what it is up North, even if it is true.

Beruthiel

McCruiskeen wrote: »

So at what age will I start to lose my marbles and think that I don't have to pay tax on my income anymore?

They were paying tax on it. They were paying the tax which the Revenue asked for.
Apparently the Revenue miscalculated the amount and are now trying to adjust the error.
Revenue = idiots.

As for your marbles, I'm afraid you can loose them anytime.

Chuck Stone

tigger123 wrote: »

Whatever about paying the tax from here on in, I think it's pretty horrible expecting them to pay back tax to be honest,

Seriously?

McCruiskeen

The point I was sort of trying to make is is the attitude of a lot of people "if you are old, how could you be expected to have your tax affairs in order"

I just find this attitude very condescending. You don't suddenly get thick and stupid when you reach a certain age. Sure, there are some people who lose their senses, but the majority of people over 65 have all of their mental faculties.

ciarafem

McCruiskeen wrote: »

So at what age will I start to lose my marbles and think that I don't have to pay tax on my income anymore?

Accorning to an article in the Indo it will start happening to you at 45!

http://www.independent.ie/health/health-news/life-ends-at-45-study-reveals-when-our-mental-powers-start-to-diminish-2981630.html

Absurdum

its turrble Joe, I worked all me life and now dey are takin me pension off me wah wah wah wah *stroke*

Einhard

tigger123 wrote: »

Whatever about paying the tax from here on in, I think it's pretty horrible expecting them to pay back tax to be honest, it's not like they can switch careers and make more money in order to adjust for it. Seems to have been the governments error as Departments were not sharing info with each other?

It's hardly relevant to the thread that pension is double in the Republic what it is up North, even if it is true.

I'd be of the same opinion if it were a case of the government sending around some heavies one morn to collect the whole amount in one go. That's not likely to happen though. More likely, arrangements will be made whereby they pay a small amount of their weekly income over a number of years until the debt is paid. What's wrong with that?

On a side note, why can't Irish people have a rational conversation about pensioners? As soon as a proposal is made that even slightly impacts on them, we have otherwise sane people screaming blue murder. Why shouldn't they share some of the huge burden that's been placed on society these past years? How is it equitable that kids with special needs are disadvantaged for life because of withdrawal of their assistants, and yet means tested medical cards for OAPs, and small cuts in penisions, are considered beyond the pale? Last month the government cut fuel allowances for the months of Spring, and straight away, we had people in hysterics about old people freezing to death on their c. €220 pw in March! It's ridiculous.

Chuck Stone

Einhard wrote: »

Last month the government cut fuel allowances for the months of Spring, and straight away, we had people in hysterics about old people freezing to death on their c. €220 pw in March! It's ridiculous.

Yes and many Seniors are/were entitled to have their houses insulated at hugely reduced costs due to grants which offsets what they might have spent on fuel.

In fact Seniors are perhaps the most insulated section of society when it comes to burden sharing.

Fear Uladh

Maybe they could apply to Dixons for work placement. :pac:

Cú Giobach

Chuck Stone wrote: »

In fact Seniors are perhaps the most insulated section of society when it comes to burden sharing.

Something we as a nation should be proud of.

ThePower11

Cú Giobach wrote: »

Something we as a nation should be proud of.

Can we be proud of the cuts that have been made to children with special needs or cutting disability benefit by €88 for those under 16, all the while OAP's live happily ever after on there €220 per week, free electricity units, free travel, medical card and a lot more perks.

Einhard

Cú Giobach wrote: »

Something we as a nation should be proud of.

Ummm no. Not when it means that pensioners who can well afford some small cut are being protected at the expense of kids with special educational needs and the like. I really don't think it should be a source of pride that kids with autism receive no support in order to entirely insulate pensioners from economic reality.

The sentimental attitude that so many Irish people have to OAPs is bizarre. It's really not too much that they pay some of the cost of righting the public finances.

Cú Giobach

Einhard wrote: »

The sentimental attitude that so many Irish people have to OAPs is bizarre.

The only thing that is bizarre, is that statement.

Cú Giobach

Einhard wrote: »

Ummm no. Not when it means that pensioners who can well afford some small cut are being protected at the expense of kids with special educational needs and the like. I really don't think it should be a source of pride that kids with autism receive no support in order to entirely insulate pensioners from economic reality..

Oh so instead of just complaining (and rightly so) about the cuts to the disabled, your attitude is, lets do it to the elderly as well, pathetic.

Carawaystick

Perhaps the real issue is why the welfare don't withold the tax, like a pension co. or employer would do, solve the issue at source.

same craic with the dole, have to pay tax on that if it's benefit, but not allowance

Curly Judge

A very articulate lady on the Joe Duffy show maintained that because she and her husband's income came from two old age pensions and two HSE pensions they reached the 40% tax band sooner than they would if they were both working.
If this is true it hardly seems fair.

amacachi

Cú Giobach wrote: »

Oh so instead of just complaining (and rightly so) about the cuts to the disabled, your attitude is, lets do it to the elderly as well, pathetic.

Nah you're right, let's run our economy on dreams.

Cú Giobach

amacachi wrote: »

Nah you're right, let's run our economy on dreams.

The dream of a fair and equitable society where the rich pay to help the disadvantaged. Not the disadvantaged paying to bail out the rich, I will dream that till the day I die.

Sand Wedge

Curly Judge wrote: »

A very articulate lady on the Joe Duffy show maintained that because she and her husband's income came from two old age pensions and two HSE pensions they reached the 40% tax band sooner than they would if they were both working.
If this is true it hardly seems fair.

No, it is not true.

mickydoomsux

Cú Giobach wrote: »

amacachi wrote: »

Nah you're right, let's run our economy on dreams.

The dream of a fair and equitable society where the rich pay to help the disadvantaged. Not the disadvantaged paying to bail out the rich, I will dream that till the day I die.

You do realise that a lot of pensioners end up with more money every week that people on the average industrial wage. The difference is that pensioners don't have to pay for childcare, their travel, they get a fuel allowance, they can avail of myriad grants to improve their houses, etc

The system is more than fair to them at the moment compared to others and this needs to be rebalanced. They are part of society for the negative things like tax too.

fastrac

Its one way to claw back some of the gold plated pensions gifted to themselves by the top civil servants. The majority of pensioners have nothing to worry about. Just another loophole that should have been dealt with years ago.

amacachi

Cú Giobach wrote: »

The dream of a fair and equitable society where the rich pay to help the disadvantaged. Not the disadvantaged paying to bail out the rich, I will dream that till the day I die.

Cool, I have some magic beans if you want them.

Cú Giobach

mickydoomsux wrote: »

You do realise that a lot of pensioners end up with more money every week that people on the average industrial wage. The difference is that pensioners don't have to pay for childcare, their travel, they get a fuel allowance, they can avail of myriad grants to improve their houses, etc

The system is more than fair to them at the moment compared to others and this needs to be rebalanced. They are part of society for the negative things like tax too.

Tax the fucking rich more.
Leave the disabled, elderly, etc alone.

amacachi

Cú Giobach wrote: »

Tax the fucking rich more.
Leave the disabled, elderly, etc alone.

What about rich elderly people?

Einhard

Cú Giobach wrote: »

The only thing that is bizarre, is that statement.

Cú Giobach wrote: »

Oh so instead of just complaining (and rightly so) about the cuts to the disabled, your attitude is, lets do it to the elderly as well, pathetic.

No, I think it's pathetic that people look at pensioners as one homogenous mass of uniquely vulnerable people. Not only is it pathetic, but it's incredibly condescending as well. We run campaigns to encourage the notion of active livving post retirement, and rightly seek to treat pensioners and the elderly as valuable, controbuting members of society, and yet, when any for of cuts to their entitlements are mentioned, people react as if, once one hits 65, one loses one's faculties ability to forge on with one's life.

My aunt has just turned 65. She's on a state pension and a private one. She has few bills that she has to pay, and thus has a very comfortable lifestyle. Far better than most people my age anyway. My granny lives with us. She's 91. She gets €220 pw in pension, and more when assorted benefits are included. She pays about €40 to us for food and bills, and after that, her spending is entirely discretionary. She has far more money than she needs. It's all going into her account, and when she passes away (hopefully not for a very long time), it'll go to her children.

And you think it's pathetic that such people, people with hugely generous entitlements relative to their needs, should share some of the financial burden of rectifying the public finances? That the burden should rest entirely on those under 65 years of age? That children, the disabledd, the unemployed, students, the sick, the mentally ill should all have to suffer cuts, but people with comfortable lifestyles should be completely insulated? Just because of their age? That's exactly the kind of sentimentality I'm talking about. If pensioners were on €500 pw we'd have people protesting about cuts to them. All logic and rational thinking goes out the window when it comes to pensioners.

It boils down to this: we have to cut the national deficit. It's going to be tough all around, but if one large section of society is excluded altogether it means the burden rests all the more heavily on the truly disadvantaged in society. And OAPS and the elderly are not, in general, disadvantaged.

Cú Giobach

amacachi wrote: »

Cool, I have some magic beans if you want them.

If it wasn't for people dreaming and wishing for such things then we would have never witnessed the end of apartheid in SA the fall of communism, civil rights for Afro-Americans etc etc..... The list goes on and on.

Einhard

Cú Giobach wrote: »

The dream of a fair and equitable society where the rich pay to help the disadvantaged. Not the disadvantaged paying to bail out the rich, I will dream that till the day I die.

But the elderly are not disadvantaged as a group! They generally have comfortable lifestyles, with hugely generous entitlements. Indeed, many elderly people are rich. And yet, people (perhaps like you) group all elderly together in one mass who can't be targeted. The more I think of the protests against means tested medical cards a few years back, the more obscene I realise it was.

later12

From what I gather (haven't read the papers in huge detail; correct me if I'm wrong) the issue here is not the fact that tax is owed, but that the Department of Social Protection has suddenly decided to share information with Revenue.

The pensioners might be a little peeved that they thought this was already being shared, but if the pensioners do not dispute this tax, surely the issue can be resolved amicably by giving them the appropriate time and facility in which to pay the money that they should have paid to begin with.

In cases where sums of money owed to revenue are really significant, surely the pensioners should have known something was amiss anyway.

Ignorance of the law, as ever, cannot be an excuse.

Cú Giobach

Einhard wrote: »

But the elderly are not disadvantaged as a group!

Something we as a nation should be proud of.

later12

Cú Giobach wrote: »

Something we as a nation should be proud of.

We cannot be proud of the hamfisted way in which we rectify disadvantage in this country.

It isn't actually that difficult to afford old people in particular a certain minimum level of care and comfort. You can do it by enabling the less well off with welfare transfers; you do not do it by affording old people universal benefits whether or not they may have other means with which to support themselves. That is wasteful and irrational.

The medical card fiasco is a perfect example.

Einhard

Cú Giobach wrote: »

Something we as a nation should be proud of.

So you agree that the elderly are not disadvantaged as a group? And yet you claim alleged disadvantage to insulate them from all cutbacks?

Look, I've love to give the elderly €1000 a week, have the dole at the same, and have SNAs for every single kid with special needs. But we cannot afford it. The country had a deficit of €24 billion last year. If you exclude monies related to the bank bailout, the figure is still close to €20 billion. I have no problem with taxing the wealthy more, but even if we did, it wouldn't come close to eliminating that deficit. There have to be cut backs. And pensioners and the elderly are in a good position, in general, to take some cuts. I'm not talking about swinging cuts, but even modest reducations are met with exaggerated outrage. Even if we cut €5 pw, OAPs would be better off in absolute terms than they were at the height of the boom. Relatively speaking, when deflation is taken into account, they would be even more well off. Yet, try explaining that in a calm, logical, and rational manner, and all you get is hysterical protests about how disadvantaged the elderly are as a group. And that is not true.

Chuck Stone

Cú Giobach wrote: »

Something we as a nation should be proud of.

Do you think it's fair that Seniors on €36,000+ P.A. not pay their fair share of tax*?




*Is that what was happening can anyone tell me?

ejmaztec

OAPs should be comfortable because they've put up with decades of sh1t from one fuckwit government to the next.

It's a miracle that anyone actually reaches retirement age with what the dickwads have squeezed out of them over the years.

amacachi

Chuck Stone wrote: »

Do you think it's fair that Seniors on €36,000+ P.A. not pay their fair share of tax*?




*Is that what was happening can anyone tell me?

More or less. What's worth remembering is that there's tax relief while one pays into a pension so that one isn't charged income tax twice on the same(ish) income, what's ended up happening is that many people have ended up not paying even once.

Curly Judge

Sand Wedge wrote: »

No, it is not true.

There you go again, darn'it.
Overloading me with information!

amacachi

ejmaztec wrote: »

OAPs should be comfortable because they've put up with decades of sh1t from one fuckwit government to the next.

It's a miracle that anyone actually reaches retirement age with what the dickwads have squeezed out of them over the years.

When something happens more than half the time it should be obvious that it's not a miracle.

conor1979

Chuck Stone wrote: »

Do you think it's fair that Seniors on €36,000+ P.A. not pay their fair share of tax*?




*Is that what was happening can anyone tell me?

Up to last year a couple who were both over the age of 65 could earn/receive up to €40,000 a year before having to pay any tax.

If you complain about having to pay tax when you are receiving that much money, no matter how old you are then there is something wrong with society!!!

On top of that you get a free medical card, free travel, a free TV licence and free ESB units(not sure if this is means tested).

I know all pensioners aren't as well off as that but the ones that are cant complain.

In Ireland the resposibility is on the tax payer to declare all income. If you received a state pension and a private pension it is not up to the revenue to chase you. You must declare it and if you dont the revenue are perfectly entitled to come looking for back tax.

Cú Giobach

Chuck Stone wrote: »

Do you think it's fair that Seniors on €36,000+ P.A. not pay their fair share of tax*?




*Is that what was happening can anyone tell me?

I just said we should be proud or elderly aren't disadvantaged, and the rich should shoulder the burden (I mentioned the phrase "bail out" for a reason).
I'm ignoring all the replies that have nothing to do with what I actually said.

Einhard

Cú Giobach wrote: »

I just said we should be proud or elderly aren't disadvantaged, and the rich should shoulder the burden (I mentioned the phrase "bail out" for a reason).
I'm ignoring all the replies that have nothing to do with what I actually said.

Pretty certain I addressed your points but ignore away all the same.

In terms of bearing the burden of extra taxes and cutbacks I have a simple maxim: each according to their means.

That means that the wealthy have a significant role to play in bridging the gap between expenditure and income, but it also means that people generally contribute what they can afford to contribute. I think that's rational and, most importantly, reasonable. Yet your argument, and those of many others, seems to eb that the elderly should not be asked to pay more, even if they can well afford to do so. How is that reasonable? How is it reasonable for the elderly to be better off now than they were in 2008, while practically every other sector of society is taking a hit? It's not reasonable, and anyone who supports such a system cannot, in fairness, call themselves socialist, or speak of a social conscience.

Cú Giobach

Einhard wrote: »

Pretty certain I addressed your points but ignore away all the same.

No you're not, you are making up an argument I am not giving.

In terms of bearing the burden of extra taxes and cutbacks I have a simple maxim: each according to their means.

Exactly, tax the rich.
Therefore people like your auntie will pay more and people like my mother wont.
If you cut the OAP then all, rich and poor will be affected.

Curly Judge

Perhaps we should go over to the British system, where thousands of their old age pensioners live in "fuel poverty".
Perhaps we should penalize frugal, wise people who work all their lives and put something away for the rainy day so as not to become a burden on the state.
What an excellent way to encourage the present working population to provide for themselves in the future.

later12

Cú Giobach wrote: »

No you're not, you are making up an argument I am not giving.

How can you be 'proud' of the end result (general improvement in overall welfare of elderly) when the equality brought about could have been far greater were the resources spread less thinly, and not allocated where they weren't needed?

You're approving of the end, but ignoring the means. That's short sighted at best.

Chuck Stone

Curly Judge wrote: »

Perhaps we should go over to the British system, where thousands of their old age pensioners live in "fuel poverty".
Perhaps we should penalize frugal, wise people who work all their lives and put something away for the rainy day so as not to become a burden on the state.
What an excellent way to encourage the present working population to provide for themselves in the future.

Hmmm....

amacachi

Cú Giobach wrote: »

Exactly, tax the rich.

That's what's happening.

Freddie59

Einhard wrote: »

Ummm no. Not when it means that pensioners who can well afford some small cut are being protected at the expense of kids with special educational needs and the like. I really don't think it should be a source of pride that kids with autism receive no support in order to entirely insulate pensioners from economic reality.

The sentimental attitude that so many Irish people have to OAPs is bizarre. It's really not too much that they pay some of the cost of righting the public finances.

Firstly, NONE of us should be paying ANY of the cost. It's been done to death, but suffice to say that is the fact of the matter.

kids with autism would receive that support if the Government stopped honouring the ridiculous PS wage increments (some €300m this year alone). I would rather the pensioners were looked after than that mob. If ANYONE is insulated it is the Government and their PS cronies and unions.

It is not a sentimental attitude. It is a recognition of the most vulnerable members of society. If there are ones who can afford to pay tax then so be it. But what about the ones on the breadline?

It's very easy to berate them when you're in the prime of your health - but don't forget: this will be YOU someday.

Freddie59

Einhard wrote: »

They generally have comfortable lifestyles, with hugely generous entitlements.

By what standards? I'm sure many pensioners would disagree with you.